Home > Identity Theft > Wells Fargo Execs to Give Back Some of Their Millions Following Fake Account Scandal

Comments 0 Comments

The Wells Fargo sales scandal will cost chairman and chief executive John Stumpf $41 million and former community banking supervisor Carrie Tolstedt $19 million, as per a decision made by the bank’s board that was announced on Tuesday. The money will come from the executives’ unvested equity awards through a clawback process.

For Stumpf, the $41 million is about 25% of the compensation he received during his 35 years at the bank, the Wall Street Journal said; he earned a total compensation of $19.3 million in 2015, according to an Equilar data analysis. Stumpf will also forego his salary during an independent internal investigation mandated by the bank’s board. He will not receive a bonus for 2016.


Carrie Tolstedt, who was head of community banking, has left the company ahead of her planned December retirement and will forfeit all of her outstanding unvested equity awards, valued at approximately $19 million, based on Tuesday’s closing share price. She also won’t receive a bonus for 2016 or be paid severance or receive any retirement enhancements in connection with her separation from the company, according to a statement from Wells Fargo. “She has also agreed that she will not exercise her outstanding options during the pendency of the investigation,” according to the statement.

Wells Fargo faced a $185 million penalty fine by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and a thrashing by the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking earlier this month over some two million accounts that were opened using fictitious or unauthorized information without customers’ consent. The actions were the result of a cross-selling incentive that gave employees bonuses if they met quotas. Former employees have claimed they were fired or demoted for not meeting the impossible quotas set by the bank, and have filed a $2.6 billion class action lawsuit. The bank fired 5,300 employees over the fraud but took no action against the supervising executives, which drew further criticism from the Senate Committee last week.

In Stumpf’s prepared testimony to the Senate, he said he was “deeply sorry” and takes full responsibility for “all unethical sales practices in our retail banking business, and I am fully committed to doing everything possible to fix this issue.” He said the fraudulent accounts were not done through an orchestrated effort by the company and employees were never directed to provide products and services that customers did not want or need.

The Independent Directors of the Board of Directors of Wells Fargo & Company have launched an independent investigation into the company’s retail banking sales practices and related matters, and a special committee of independent directors will lead the investigation, working with the board’s Human Resources committee and independent counsel. Stumpf has recused himself from all matters related to the Independent Directors’ investigation and deliberations.

“We are deeply concerned by these matters, and we are committed to ensuring that all aspects of the Company’s business are conducted with integrity, transparency, and oversight,” Stephen Sanger, lead independent director, said in a press release. He noted, the bank may take other employee related actions “so there can be no repetition of similar conduct.”

This moment in history may produce repercussions: earlier this month, regulators proposed tighter restrictions on how Wall Street bankers are paid.

Wells Fargo had not responded to requests for follow-up comment by press time.

Remember, it’s always a good idea in general to monitor your credit report for any unauthorized accounts in your name. You can pull your credit reports for free each year at AnnualCreditReport.com and get a free snapshot of your credit report, updated every 14 days, at Credit.com.

Image: tupungato

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

Credit.com receives compensation for the financial products and services advertised on this site if our users apply for and sign up for any of them.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team