The viral TikTok phenomenon called the “infinite money glitch” led to a massive legal cleanup instituted by JPMorgan Chase, the largest American bank, as it exceeded several boundaries. The trend consisted of depositing fake checks through an ATM, and then withdrawing the funds before the checking mechanism could clear the transaction, thus causing huge losses to the bank. However, by April of 2025, JPMorgan was suing dozens of people across the country for millions of dollars taken through this scheme.
Genesis of the “Infinite Money Glitch”
This method was gaining traction on TikTok in late August 2024, with its users posting videos on how to exploit a loophole in JPMorgan’s ATM deposit system. The others would go in and deposit a large amount of often counterfeit checks into their accounts and would then immediately withdraw funds under the assumption that the bank would not take time to verify the validity of the checks. The exploitation of the float period, that is, the time between deposit and clearance, allowed one to freely access these funds that in reality were not yet available in their accounts. The trend went viral very quickly, with some videos being viewed by millions. People began forming queues at Chase ATMs in several cities attempting to benefit from the glitch. The bank, however, very soon became aware of the fraud and was quick to sort out the matter.
JPMorgan’s Legal Response:
JPMorgan Chase adopted measures of freezing the affected accounts, charging negative balances, and taking legal action against those involved. The bank brought suits in federal courts in October 2024 against certain individuals who had withdrawn, or attempted to withdraw, large amounts of money ranging from $80,000 to $300,000 from their accounts. By April 2025, it had extended its legal actions against some of these persons withdrawing amounts under $75,000, this time bringing suits in state courts in Georgia, Florida, New York, and Texas. One noteworthy case involved a defendant in Gwinnett County, Georgia, who deposited a check for $73,000 and withdrew $82,500 before the check bounced six days later. The defendant is alleged to owe the bank nearly $58,000 and has not responded to requests for repayment.
The Scope of the Fraud:
An immense statute came about with the total amount of funds withdrawn through the “infinite money glitch” in fraudulent manners. For example, in Houston, a man was alleged to have deposited a forged $335,000 check and withdrew most of the money before the check was returned. He currently owes the bank about $291,000. In another instance, an owner of a music company in Miami had deposited a check for $149,000 and made many large withdrawals, with one being a transfer of $110,000 to a third party. The bank claims that the individual owes more than $141,000. In general, JPMorgan Chase has sent notices to more than a thousand customers requesting that the funds withdrawn through this scheme be refunded. There is full cooperation by the bank with the law enforcement agencies to bring the perpetrators to justice so that similar incidents can be prevented in the future.
Legal and Ethical Implications:
The “infinite money glitch” cases thus demonstrate the legal and ethical issues raised by viral trends on social media platforms. Whilst a few participants might have seen the glitch as a harmless loophole, the acts, on the other hand, are check fraud, a federal offence with serious penal consequences. JPMorgan Chase stated that the exploitation of such glitches undermined people’s faith in the banking system and touched every one of its customers. The case also raised questions concerning whether it is the responsibility of social media platforms to try to stop the spread of fraudulent schemes. The overnight spread of the “infinite money glitch” on TikTok illustrates the ability of misinformation to rapidly promote illegal mass behaviour.
Conclusion
The “infinite money glitch” is a warning against all manner of fraudulent deeds matter how popular they may become on social media. JPMorgan Chase’s aggressive response underscores how seriously the banking sector considers such occurrences. In the days to come, with the advent of technology, both banks and consumers will have to remain ever-watchful to address newer forms of financial fraud.
Related Articles :
- Jewel, Kroger Face Wellness Festival Lawsuit
- Sixt Rent a Car Agrees to $11 Million Settlement Over Damage Charges
- Paypal Reaches Settlement in Account Freeze Lawsuit
- UT Austin chat apps lawsuit
Read related cases in our Other Major Lawsuits & Disputes section.
