Overdraft Debit Fees Treat Consumer to $300 Charge for a Taco Supreme Meal

[marmar]

Overdraft Fees Land Customer $300 Fast-Food Charge (Update1)
By Alexis Leondis


July 29 (Bloomberg) -- Tracy Hickman’s dinner for three at Taco Bell cost $11.99. She ended up paying $300 for overdraft charges triggered by the meal and other debit purchases.

Hickman says the expense resulted from delays in processing her child-support check at the Zanesville, Ohio, branch of Cleveland-based National City Bank. The 45-year-old customer- service representative said she uses a debit card more these days after canceling her credit cards because of high fees.

“I stopped using credit cards to keep me out of trouble and then got hit with overdraft fees,” Hickman said. “It’s not fair.”

Customers are shifting to debit transactions from charge cards as credit lines have been lowered and banks have closed inactive accounts. Debit cards will be used in 60.2 percent of card transactions in 2010, or about $40 billion, up from 58.2 percent in 2008, according to the Nilson Report, an industry newsletter in Carpinteria, California.

“Fee abuse hasn’t disappeared in banking with the credit- card legislation,” said Tony Plath, a finance professor at the University of North Carolina Charlotte. “It’s just migrated to checking accounts,” he said, referring to the legislation signed in May to protect cardholders from excessive fees and last-minute contract changes. ..............(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20603037&sid=afVDSna75xkg

[flvegan]

1. That's a very misleading headline.

Good story, good material, poor headline. But, it'll get folks to read it. Score it 50/50.

[marmar]

2. Take it up with Bloomberg.

It was the headline for this story on their homepage.

[flvegan]

4. I didn't mean to imply that was your fault.

Jesus.

[DCKit]

164. I don't want to score the headline....

but people need to know the banks require an "opt-out" call for overdrafts.

Wachovia (my bank) called it "Security" for my account while they charged $39.95 for every overdraft until I asked them for no more "security".

[county worker]

3. If you are going to use a debit card most of the time you need to reconcile your account daily.

I do that. I know everyday what my balance is and it isn't what the bank says it is. It is the bank balance plus any deposits not in the back balance less any payments not in the bank balance. You have to do that math daily or get hit with overdraft fees if you are like most people and never have enough money left over at the end of the week.



I remember people always reconciled their check books when they got a bank statement and then it was easy and could be done monthly because people used cash mainly. They had few if any outstanding items.

Today people use a debit card like it was a credit card with no limit.

You can't expect the bank to be your bookkeeper.

The amounts charged are unfair but the fact that a person doesn't know how to reconcile their account is not the banks fault.

[kimmylavin]

29. No, its not the bank's fault.

But the bank COULD just reject the transaction, instead of letting it run through and then charging you.

[slampoet]

91. That is exactly the abuse that this article is talking about.

[Lance_Boyle]

92. the bank would do that, if the customer did not agree to "overdraft protection"

it's on the contract you sign when you open the account - accept or reject "overdraft protection." If you want checks to bounce, or the debit card to simply be refused at the point of purchase, decline the OPTIONAL "protection." No more worries about the fees.

[Gormy Cuss]

94. None of my accounts were opened after this odious "protection" became the norm,

yet all of them automatically enrolled me in the option and sent a chirpy letter announcing the new feature and the information on opting out. Had I not already had overdraft line of credit on one account I may not have called the bank to find out why I needed this "overdraft protection" in addition to the line of credit. I was fortunate enough to get a candid reply from customer service rep that I was better off with the line of credit and she cancelled the overdraft protection.

I then called each of my other banks to opt out.

[kimmylavin]

161. Maybe in your bank.

I don't have overdraft "protection."
And I've been hit with this racket plenty of times - happens when you have a joint account.

And when I've called to contest a fee, I was told it wouldn't happen if I DID have overdraft protection.

[petronius]

38. There is room for abuse on the part of the bank, however - it's not uncommon for them

to delay posting or processing a deposit in order to catch you with an overdraft. Even if you walk in and hand over a check in person, the deposit may not 'clear' for days.

Also, I've had experiences with banks processing withdrawals on a given day before deposits, regardless of the actual order in which the transactions occurred, as well as doing big withdrawals first in order to make subsequent smaller withdrawals into overdrafts.

I don't know the situation of the person in the OP, but it's not quite as simple as 'balance your checkbook'...

[alarimer]

43. Why do debits clear immediately and checks take 5 days to clear?

THAT is clearly abuse by the bank.

[petronius]

50. Exactly. If banks were required to process transactions in the order received,

and weren't permitted to hold deposits back for unspecified and varying periods of time, it would go a long way towards making debit cards a safe and fair method of payment...

[ColbertWatcher]

54. Only certain checks take 5 days to clear. If you recall ... (CORRECTIONS ADDED)

... the banks just recently got the law to change the way banks treat individuals.

I think they called it "Banking 21" (or some crap like that) "Check 21"*. Basically, the law was changed so that checks written by people had to have the funds available immediately, whereas checks written by corporations (non-people) could be delayed for a certain time period.

Now, I'm writing this from memory, so if I get the details a little muddled I'd appreciate a correction from anyone who knows it inside and out.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* (1) EXPECT THE CHECKS YOU WRITE TO CLEAR FASTER: Don't write a check unless the funds are already in your account. The checks you write will clear faster, but banks aren't required to speed up the time when they make funds available from the checks that you deposit.

(2) "You may not get access to the funds from checks you deposit any sooner, because the new law does not shorten check hold times. After 30 months, there must be a study on whether banks are making funds available to consumers earlier than the allowable hold periods.^{link:www.consumersunion.org/finance/ckclear1002.htm|ConsumersUnion.org]}

[ColbertWatcher]

56. And here is the link to the FAQ from the Fed ...

... http://www.federalreserve.gov/paymentsystems/truncation/faqs2.htm#ques1

[dmr]

49. That happened to me

Back in the early 90s: I deposited my municipal payroll check before 11am on a Friday, but it didn't clear until the following Wednesday.

Meantime, I had written checks for utilities, grocery store, etc, ...

Checks were bouncing like rubber balls, and each one cost me with fees from all sides, not to mention the cost to my credibility.

My payroll checks always cleared the moment I deposited them. When I went to the bank to complain, they wouldn't budge. I was told that I could go to jail for writing bad checks! WTF! They ended up telling me my deposits were at the discretion of the bookkeeper! The discretion of the freakin' bookkeeper.

I found out the next month that my bank was bought out by another bank. Co-workers who used this same bank also experienced the same shitty treatment.

I closed my account.

[county worker]

142. If the bank is processing your withdrawals before a deposit you are obviously trying to use float.

It use to be called kiting a check I think. You are making debit transactions before you know the deposit is in your account. If you would have reconciled your account you would have known that. You gave the bank the opportunity to make money off of you.

[haele]

160. My brother in law is a "local bank" manager -

Three years ago, when we asked about this due to shit WAMU was pulling, he informed us that at that time, according to the Feds, banks were supposed to process deposits before they processed withdrawls when they did their reconciliation at night.
The only exception was ATM deposits that were after what was supposed to be a clearly marked on the machine time (i.e., after noon or 3pm will be processed the next business day).
Also, any funds made to a teller was supposed to be counted on that business day unless a clearly marked cut-off time was indicated, and even then, the teller was supposed to inform you when your deposit would be available, or how much is being held back. And cash is never supposed to have a hold on it - but two weeks ago, when I deposited $300 cash from an account at another bank at the teller to cover a online purchase that would be made that evening, $200 was not credited to my account until two days later. Apparently,according to the new rules Chase uses at it's WAMU accounts, if you don't already have a pre-determined "sufficient amount" in your account, they will put a one-day hold on any amount over $100 that is deposited in your account at the teller, even if it's cash.
Sigh. And I love it when people who have not yet had a catastrophic emergency in their household tell people who used to have a good savings set up that they haven't been smart enough with their money when they run into bill paying emergencies. I had half a year's salary in savings when I got injured on the job and had to go on disability the same time my husband could no longer work and was fighting to get on SSDI. $15K does not last very long when you're making minimum wage and trying to cover the medical expenses that aren't being compensated by insurance, no matter how quickly you try to budget down.

"Kiting" a check is something that people who don't have a couple payday's worth of cushion are often forced to consider if they want have bills due just before the next payday that would otherwise bounce an account sky-high. If the choice is getting food, medicine, paying rent, or keeping the water and lights on and chance the bank actually following the rules so that you won't have to pay any fees, or holding onto a check until you know for sure your deposit is credited to your account and knowing you'll have to pay even more exorbitant fees for an overdue payment or end up being evicted because you couldn't pay last week when the bill came in, but your paycheck will be in the next day or two - what are you're choices? I've faced that choice and been lucky. So far. The one you answered to wasn't.

BTW, rule of thumb for recovery from an unemployment or emergency situation that I've experienced living in a high cost of living area -
For every month you are unemployed, it takes four months to recover economically. For every $1K of an emergency bill, it takes two months to recover economically. If you want to live without considering kiting checks, you need to plan to save that amount of income; four months wages saved for every month you might possibly be unemployed, and two months wages for every thousand you may need to spend on an emergency bill. I spent $15K to pay rent, copays, prescriptions, food and staple sundries, basic utilities, gas for travel and auto insurance in three months. No "eating out", no movies, no toys or entertainments, no treats for the kidlet. After three months, I had nothing but my short-term disability, which was 1/2 my paycheck when it came in at the end of the month, and when I finally went back to work, I went back at only 1/3 of my previous salary because I had to take an Admin Assistant position instead of returning to my previous position as a Project Manager if I wanted to stay in the company with a possibility of picking up a desk job that paid the same as my old job did (I had to wait a year for that position to open up) and still keep my benefits.

Corporate Banks don't do favors for people that have bad luck. In fact, they're more likely to screw you for fees you can't afford rather than allow a line of credit for consolidation to cover a dry spell - they only look at the quarterly sheets, and if they can get more quick money from you by playing games with your account and financial naivete until you are on the streets than they can if they work with you and keep you as a financially secure long term customer, they'll do it.

I only keep my WAMU/Chase account open for online purchases and electronic debts - and they still look for ways of screwing up deposits (like imposing a $200 2-day hold on $300 cash deposit to a teller). Everything else goes through our credit union account. Less fees, clear, consistent deposit and debt reconciliation policy, and easier to get a line of signature credit if you're going to be feeling a pinch due to, oh, an upcoming surgery, and might need a cushion.

Haele

[WeDidIt]

40. Fuck that noise!

I reconcile every time I sit down at a computer. I keep my checkbook register in an Excel spreadsheet and if I made any purchases at all since the last time I was in front of a computer, I reconcile.

Furthermore, I know every autmatic payment that's going to hit my account and when.

I haven't had any fees in a long long time, and I've had the bank think my balance was as low as 19 cents before.

[county worker]

143. I do the same. I don't get hit with fees either.

The idea is called taking personal responsibility. You know your balance and you don't make debit transactions if your balance can't cover it. If your debit transactions never go over your reconciled balance you never get hit with a fee.

If you are playing the float you are setting your self up by giving the bank the opportunity to hit you with fees. It's in your control.

If you have a payroll check drawn on a local bank, you can go to that bank and cash the check and deposit cash in your account which is counted immediately. You could have direct deposit if your employer offers it and you deposit is posted the same day every month.

[pipi_k]

57. I don't reconcile daily but I do keep an extra amount that

I pretend isn't even there.

Whenever I do a transfer from savings to checking I always record in my checkbook that I deposited anywhere from $25 to $50 less than I actually did, so there's always a surplus in there.

The running total in my checkbook, after a few months of doing this, is usually at least $200 less than what's really there in my account. Just a little cushion to make me feel comfortable.

[unapatriciated]

100. keeping an extra amount is hard for those who are unemployed or on disability.

and those are the ones that the banks target.

[sofa king]

123. Yep. That's what got me.

Underemployed and hungry.

The "reconciliation" thing is total crap. New Zealand has a realtime banking system and it uses the same hardware and software that we use, so there must be some other reason why we stick to this chicanery. The IRS and NSA know instantly when you make a large cash deposit or a series of small ones. If our banks are so screwed up that they tell us we've got money when we don't, why in the hell is that my fault? Why do I have to pay a fine for the bank giving me money that they think I have and I think I have?

[county worker]

145. It's your fault because you didn't take the personal responsibility to know your real balance.

You can complain till the cows come home but it won't change a thing. If you don't know your actual balance and you make debit transactions you are giving the bank the opportunity to charge you. It is in your control. Know your actual balance and don't go over that with debit transactions.


You can say that what I'm saying is total crap and most likely you will pay more and more extra fees. It's no skin off my nose.

[sofa king]

163. That's bullshit.

If I can look it up on the goddamned Internet, as you claim, so can the bank, and so can the ATM machine. Explain, please, why they don't.

Edit: I should add that the personal responsibility I exercise is never, ever putting my account number into a Windows-based computer or on a web page. I know people who have been burned that way, too.

And I have no qualms about letting that deficit ride until my account is closed and my credit is ruined... again. I have no doubt that the banks will roll what they think I owe into a triple-A bond, and make a mint off of it, so screw them.

[sofa king]

167. I'm still waiting for an answer.

[AwakeAtLast]

86. I bank with National City

They have wonderful habit of showing a debit as 'pending' for a few days. Then, it disappears entirely. It returns and is taken out of your account the minute you make a lot of other purchases. They are hoping to set off a NSF chain reaction. I could be very careful about reconciling and still miss something. That is what they want.

[PVnRT]

113. National City is a bunch of fucking con artists

I regret that I ever banked with them. They pulled that shit on me constantly, to the point where I just either used cash or credit cards to buy things instead of wondering how much they were going to let me have in my account.

[TheKentuckian]

136. That got bought by my shysters-PNC

I probably should have closed out the 1st month.

They sent me a bad debit card so I told the branch manager who then offered to have one expedited to me as a favor to a new account holder. What she failed to advise is that they were going to charge me $25 to do so, which made me overdraft by like 35 cents.

[county worker]

148. I don't agree.

If you know your actual balance that means you are putting down on paper what you spent and what you deposited. You compare that with the bank and reconcile to it.

Like this. You have $100 in your account. Your check book and the bank both agree because every prior transaction has cleared. You deposit another $100. You can't make any more debit transactions until your balance per the bank is $200. If you do you are giving the bank the opportunity to hit you with charges. It's as that.

[rucky]

162. Yep

US Bank does it, too.

[SOS]

109. When reconciling account, first learn the bank's clearance policy

It took me three trips to the bank and a 20 minute wait to get a copy of the policy.
It's pages of micro-printed legalese, all designed to increase their billions in overdraft fees.
You could deposit $1,000 and 4 days later still get hammered with $35 fees due to "uncollected funds".

[KDFW]

5. Yes, the fees are exhorbitant but the solution is simple.

Don't overdraw the account.

[msongs]

6. yeah but then these people can't pretend to be innocent victims lol nt

[Wednesdays]

99. Yeah, really.

Banks need to raise the fee to $50 per overdraft, until some people finally get their shit together. Even 100 bucks, if that's what it takes.

[unapatriciated]

101. maybe banks need to post deposit immediately instead of waiting,

then those on disability like my son can get their medications and pay their rent on time.
Please do not suggest it is only the fault of "some people finally get their shit together".
" Even 100 bucks, if that's what it takes" Yeah I guess it is the American way to punish those who not as well of as others.

[Wednesdays]

105. I'll bet a $200 fee would change their behavior

(And the banks deserve that money, too, don't they?)

[unapatriciated]

116. I hope you are being sarcastic.

because BofA was caught using this tactic to generate fees on those who could afford it the least. They purposely waited until the end of business on the first of the month (when most on fixed incomes like the elderly and the disabled receive their checks) to credit direct deposits while processing any debits that day first. Yes the fees change their behaviors by making them go without food or medication for a day. All so the banks can make even more money. But hey that's capitalism at it's best.


on edit: this happened to my son which caused him to go without his medications and very little to eat for two weeks when he finally called me and asked for help. He didn't come to me because he didn't want to be a burden. His fees snowballed to $200 in one day (the 1st of the month).

[Wednesdays]

140. Me, sarcastic?

Hey, I built an 8-year long career here at DU cheerleading the bankers and obscenely rich!

[unapatriciated]

168. that's what I thought

I married a guy who half the time makes me laugh and the rest of the time I'm so pissed I'm throwing things at him.
I tend to be a little too serious at times and he pushes me to lighten up.

haven't decided whether to laugh or throw my coffee cup at you;)

[Ignis]

121. Rubbish! That comes dangerously close to Customer Service!

We can't have THAT!

:sarcasm:

[Thegonagle]

134. My credit union does post the deposit immediately during business hours.

I stopped doing business with Wells Fargo because they artificially delay transactions, and at the time I used them, their website only updated my register once a day (between about 7-9 AM). At my credit union, I can make a deposit at 5:59 PM (they close at 6), get home 10 minutes later, login to the website, and download it all into Quicken.

[unapatriciated]

135. I'm not sure if you are on SSI you can join one.

Credit Unions seem to treat their customers better than the corporate banks.

[Hello_Kitty]

146. Meanwhile when the people at the top of the banks squander billions, they get a bailout.

But don't you dare be 32 cents overdrawn.

[county worker]

151. If you deposit something other than cash it will not be posted until the following day.

You could tell an ATM machine that you are depositing a check when you are only putting in a piece of blank paper in an envelope.

The bank does not know that what you are depositing is good as cash until it clears the federal reserve in your area. That is the check clearing house. It takes a bit of time.

I'm sure the bank or credit union has told you somehow that a deposit is not posted to your account immediately. It is on every ATM with a deposit slot and on every counter in the bank.


I'm sorry but the problem is yours to control.

[unapatriciated]

169. I'm not talking about ATM deposits.

These are direct deposits, usually SS, SSI or Child Support checks, all done by a government agency, electronically.. B of A got caught red handed holding onto these deposits until end of day business for the sole purpose of generating fees. They were making money off of those who could lest afford it. They also knew that they were the least likely to complain.

Funny how my private corporation direct deposit payroll posted immediately yet my son's SSI direct deposit took a day. Now do you get it. They targeted the least among us who had little are no power to speak up.



"I'm sorry but the problem is yours to control."
sorry this problem should be everyone's if we want a healthy, caring society.

[Hello_Kitty]

144. Yeah!

And give the money to those deserving and morally virtuous CEOs. :eyes:

[rfranklin]

11. You did not read the article.

Geez, these banks are out to generate fees by scamming people. If you support them by tarring the vistims, you are part of the problem.

[KDFW]

17. No, idiots who can't keep track of their bank balance are the problem.

I have not paid one cent to my bank in fees of ANY KIND in over 12 years. Where is the scam? They tell you right on the account agreement what they charge.
:wtf:

[sendero]

66. Did you READ..

... asshole? The bank sits on deposits for DAYS so you will overdraft.

Fucking morons.

[KDFW]

72. They certainly would be fucking morons if they did that.

You are going down the wrong sendero here, amigo.

[Subdivisions]

96. Did you read the article? n/t

[county worker]

150. I've been trying to point that out here but it isn't sinking in.

Most here think that they put in a deposit and start spending the money before they deposit is posted to their account. They think the balance they get at the ATM is their actual balance. They could go on line and get a history of the account to see if the deposit is posted.

[sandnsea]

7. Delays in processing a deposit. Bank's Fault.

Just sayin'.

[Matariki]

12. The article merely says "resulted from delays in processing her child-support check"

not whether it was the bank's fault or not.

[sandnsea]

15. at the bank. n/t

[KDFW]

18. Why so? Are the banks required to notify a customer of every transaction?

I never assume I have money in my account, I check it before I spend it. Evidently some people think they should get special treatment.
:eyes:

[sandnsea]

21. They are required to process it when they get it n/t

[Doremus]

33. You have no idea what you're talking about.

I have an account with National City, in fact several accounts.

They do not process a debit card purchase when it is made. They wait, sometimes several days or a week until the vendor completes the transaction, to place the debit on the account. Unless you're anal about manually keeping track of your balance, it's quite easy to become overdrawn.

I have other debit accounts and they don't do it this way. The amount is deducted from the account as soon as the purchase is made. If there isn't enough in the account the purchase is declined before it's made.

NCB chooses to administer their debit cards in this fashion because I'm sure it contributes handsomely to their bottom line and management bonuses. You could "check it before you spend it" to your heart's content but the balance you would be looking at wouldn't reflect anything remotely resembling reality.

[KDFW]

36. Here's a surprise for you: different banks operate differently.

Hell, you just admitted it yourself. What is involved in "completing" a sale of 3 burritos?
:wtf:

[Occulus]

59. "What is involved in "completing" a sale of 3 burritos?" Apparently, several days of "processing."

You would not believe the number of merchants in this area thatdo not keep their books in a timely fashion. Some of my debit purchases take days to clear. Add in the fees for taking out my own cash, and well... keeping my checkbook currecnt very quickly becomes an exercise in futility.

I can't even trust the dollar value on my own bank's website. Checks are one thing- I can easily tell when they clear- but debit purchases? Forget it.

And don't get me started on the $50 hold on my account for the $5 gas purchase. Yes, some merchants place a hold on accounts in multiples of the actual purchase price in order to 'guarantee' that the money is there. Since debit purchases after that take the hold into account, I might get overdrawn that way, and never even know that that's the merchant's practice.

This has nothing to do with irresponsibility and everything to do with unethical business practices.

[Kansas Wyatt]

62. You don't run a checkbook balance at the point of processing.

You run your checkbook balance from the point of transactions. Spend $15 with debit card, then you deduct it, just like a check. The merchant's processing time has NOTHING to do with your balance. If you do not know what your balance is before you make purchases, then you are just begging for trouble.

Very simple... Whatever you spend, you deduct that from your balance, then you will NEVER get an overdraft. By the way, banks also notice how many problems you have, which helps when a disagreement arises.

[Gormy Cuss]

95. That works for checks, but not so well for debits.

Where debit card transactions differ from checks is that merchant holds are often more than the amount of purchase for items with variable cost (e.g. gas purchases, hotel and car rentals.) Unless the vendor processes the transaction immediately and clears the hold amount you have no idea how much available cash you have in your account. You may have $200 in the account and only $50 in pending transactions but the holds mean that you only have a few dollars available for that next transaction.

[Doremus]

120. Thanks for stating the obvious.

Apparently you missed the less obvious point I was making, which is if someone banks electronically, pays bills online, views statements online, etc. there is very little if any need for paper checks, statements and registers.

Further, if a bank processes debit transactions promptly there is *no* need for redundant bookkeeping.

NCB delays debit processing because it is profitable for them to do so.

[KDFW]

67. The OP was discussing a debit card not a paper check.

They are processed virtually instantaneously. I can use my dc to buy a case of beer and by the time I get home from the store it has already been debited to my account. It's a matter of less than 5 minutes.

Although many merchants now have the ability to process a paper check instantly too...they just digitize it and give it back to you.

[1monster]

75. Yeah, isn't it amazing that merchants have 24 hour access to my bank accounts and I don't?

I used to get instant credit for our payroll checks. I'd deposit the money on Friday afternoon and go grocery shopping.

Then the bank merged with another bank and suddenly that no longer applied. I'd deposit my check on Friday afternoon and I couldn't touch it until Tuesday or Wednesday.

And even cash deposited on Friday afternoon wasn't available until Tuesday or Wednesday. I complained about that and told the tellers that after 24 years of banking there, I was going to a bank that did give me instant credit.

Oh, they replied, but we do give instant credit on cash deposits. You didn't know that?

Yeah? Since when?

(In a small voice) Umm, for two weeks now.

I hate banks. I paid $5.00 a month to have my checks returned to me (I used them for IRS tax receipts) and I would get two or three back out of fifteen to twenty checks written. For the ones they didn't give back, I didn't get a photocopy or even an itemized statement which stated who the check was written out to. Just a statment that said check # X for X amount of dollars and cents was paid on X date.

[KDFW]

76. I guess I'm giving the impression that I'm defending the banks...only partly.

I abhor their predatory practices, I'm just pointing out that we have to either live with their practices or do without. What they do is legal and that's their out - congress (R or D either) isn't much inclined to legislate relief because they are lawyers who operate much the same way.

However I have been completely satisfied with my online bank (JP Morgan Chase and I feel pretty sure THAT will get me some hatemail :D )

They give me instant credit on deposits and I have yet to pay them one cent in fees of ANY kind in 11 years.

[Doremus]

114. You still have no idea what you're talking about.

Again, I have several debit accounts with National City Bank, the same bank as in the OP.

They do NOT process debit card transactions in real time.

They hold them, often for days, sometimes for up to a week or more.


Your bank may process debits instantly, but National City Bank, the bank that l-o-v-e-s overdrafts so much that it does everything in its power to get more of them, does not.

[county worker]

152. You can go on line an get every transaction in your account.

You can see a copy of the check you wrote.

[county worker]

149. Writing checks on a deposit that isn't posted is the customer's fault

Just saying.

[dsc]

8. I am amazed at how many didn't read the article

The bank held up her child support check so she thought she had the money, she did have the money, the bank refused to let her have her money and then charged her.

[datasuspect]

9. people will waste no time if they even smell the possibility of beating up someone with a "personal

responsibility" stick.

it's the punishment ethic, baby!

[KDFW]

23. You're right let's just abandon any semblance of personal responsibility.

Then we will be just parasites. What a great idea.

[PA Democrat]

55. I'll spell it out since you seem to be a little SLOOOOW on the uptake.

Banks take your deposit. Under a bill called Check 21, banks can now process checks completely electronically so that checks clear the same day they are deposited, or overnight at the latest in most cases.

So the bank according to the article "delayed processing" her deposit when they could have cleared that deposit the same day (I happen to know that National City DOES have this capability).

But you seem to think that the bank has no responsibility in handling their customers' deposits in a timely fashion, and instead choose to call the woman a "parasite." If that individual woman were a large corporate customer and their deposits were mishandled, I can assure you that heads would roll at the bank.

[KDFW]

63. The story is incomplete, though. We have no evidence of exactly when the instrument

(or the electronic equivalent thereof) was actually presented except for her claim. We don't know who made the payment either. Is it your position that this particular bank is uninterested in keeping customers? I suppose that's possible but it's hard to imagine.

My bank credits my account instantaneously on electronic deposits and within hours on paper ones.
I am not defending the fees (which after all are the subject of the complaint) but I maintain they have the right to charge them with proper disclosure. I'm pretty sure they don't just make them up on a whim every Monday morning.

[PA Democrat]

74. The bank declined comment. I wonder why.

I know something about that bank. It is local, it has been acquired by another local bank, and the mergers of 2 major banks are very complicated undertakings and problems with daily operations are not uncommon. Two separate entities are forced to combine operations, downsize staff, and merge computer systems, etc. I worked in banking operations for many years and was involved in a number of mergers. It's a complicated and messy process and problems do occur. The acquired bank may change policies and fees, and customers are not always inclined to read the 10 page size 1 font disclosures they get in the mail.

As far as the bank's interest in keeping this customer, I've come to the conclusion that the attitude of most banks toward retail customers is that they know that all of their competitors are doing the exact same thing.

[KDFW]

78. I absolutely agree about the microscopic print in those disclosures.

I'm nearsighted and STILL have a hell of a time reading that stuff.

[SOS]

112. The parasites in this nation are the filthy banks, not the working people

Too bad we can't be "parasites" on the host bank.
That would be refreshing change, but somehow the deck is 100% stacked in their favor.

[Ignis]

122. Ah, "personal responsibility." Your slip is showing.

But enjoy your stay, nonetheless! :hi:

[county worker]

157. Let them all abandon personal responsibility. Their life will continue to suck

and they will continue to blame the bank or Congress or something else. There is no talking to them because the very words personal responsibility means something negative to them.

[PassingFair]

81. If I give you the bootstraps, will you beat me?

:evilgrin:

[The Magistrate]

10. Exactly, Sir: The Bank Is Simply Running A Scam To Generate The Fees

"Some men rob you with a six-gun, and some with a fountain pen."

[KDFW]

24. Where is the scam? They tell customers exactly what the fees are.

The charges are excessive, yes, but they aren't a surprise to anyone who can read.

[Jazzgirl]

28. Do you have your fingers in your ears??!!??

The woman deposited her child support check. The money was in the bank. The bank held it. What is it about the money being in the bank don't you understand??

[KDFW]

30. But it was NOT in the bank. She ASSUMED it was.

Child support payments are notoriously undependable. She apparently did not personally deposit it and therefore didn't know whether it was in the account and there is nothing in that article that verifies the claim that the bank 'held it.' You are reading into the story things you want to believe.

[The Magistrate]

39. Child Support Checks, Sir, Are Generally State Government Checks Nowadays

Not treating such an instrument as cash from the instant it is registered is nonesense.

[KDFW]

44. If that is the case, it should be on direct deposit. It is after all, 2009

:shrug:

[unapatriciated]

107. my son has direct deposit for his ssi check and they post it last every time...

he has to wait until the second to buy food, medication and pay his rent. To those on a fixed income it means they go without for a day.
So direct deposit isn't the cure, the cure is holding banks "accountable" for predatory practices.

[The Magistrate]

35. They Delay Posting Deposits Of Checks, Sir, To Generate The Fees

People have a reasonable expectation money is in their account, but the bank has in fact held it out, 'delaying' the transaction in some manner. It happens too often to be ignored; any person with a rapacious turn of mind would quickly see the possibilities....

[KDFW]

42. Well, Sir, my bank does not do that and I would not patronize one that did.

Perhaps there is only one bank in Cleveland. That, said, the claim that they 'held' the check is the woman's and was not, according to that article, verified in any way, shape or form. She says it happened 3 other times, one would think she might be just a little bit cautious. Maybe the ex-husband is not quite as punctual as she imagines.

[The Magistrate]

45. It Is A Very Widespread Practice, Sir

Your faith in the probity of men in suits is touching. Evidently, your number has simply not come in this regard; it will eventually. This sort of thing is a major profit center, and a banker's attitude towards depositors is about that of a rancher to beeves....

[KDFW]

47. It has nothing to do with faith...except in my own ability to keep track of my finances.

But you may be right, the animosity with which beeves are regarded by ranchers is legendary.

[dsc]

48. It isn't the ex husband it is the state

In Ohio pretty much all child support is deducted from paychecks by the state which makes the banks behavior even worse.

[PA Democrat]

61. Check 21 is a federal law passed several years ago that enables

banks to clear deposited checks the same day or overnight at the latest. The delays were at least partially justified in the past, but there's no excuse for it in today's banking environment.

[Thothmes]

13. of course, she "assumed" the deposit had cleared.

normally something that can be verified by a 60 second phone call to the bank.

[Fumesucker]

19. Sixty second phone call?

It takes longer than that to get through the automated log in on my banks phone line, assuming they haven't screwed up my password yet again.

I still have to go to the bank to straighten out both my online and my phone banking options because the bank changed hands the other day and I still don't have my new debit card I was supposed to get over a month ago. I'm not alone either, there are three other people I know that have not yet received their new debit cards.

[WeDidIt]

70. Which is why I bank online

As long as you change your password regularly, you're safe.

I know my account balance instantaneously.

[Fumesucker]

83. I guess I didn't make it clear..

The bank has my online account fouled up too..

Which is why I have to take the time to go in person to the bank to get it straightened out.

In my experience this happens far more often than it should.

And not everyone has internet on their cellphone.

[WeDidIt]

88. You need to change banks

I use Chase. In twelve years they've never screwed anything up.

[Wednesdays]

139. Heh, change banks. So, instead of going to Vito...

...go to Vinnie.

[SOS]

110. Capital One manager told me to NEVER trust online balances

The bank manager said the online accounting was an inaccurate customer convenience.
She suggested I carry a pen and paper and write it all down to get an accurate balance.

[WeDidIt]

126. Funny, Chase online balances are 100% accurate

for doing a reconciliation.

It's like an up to the minute bank statement, Not all transactions are there, but I know about the ones that are missing and can reconcile.

Biggest day of reconciliation yet I reconciled on six separate occasions in the same day.

[dsc]

22. child support is a monthly payment

it cleared every previous month and the bank knew it would clear this month too. Bottom line she had the money, the bank, on purpose held her money up just to collect fees.

[KDFW]

25. You are wasting your psychic powers here!

:D

[Thothmes]

53. She also assumed it would clear, wrongly as it turned out.

What evidence can you offer that the bank intentinally held up her money on purpose to collect the fee.

[KDFW]

71. There is no such evidence. No bank that did that could stay in business.

But then they wouldn't be around so corporation haters could bash them.
(funny how so many corporation haters earn their livelihood from one or the other)

[dsc]

77. Oh really

Bank of America got busted for exactly this less than a year ago. Last I checked they are still in business.

[PA Democrat]

80. You must be one of those parasitic corporation haters.

Apparently, calling out bad behavior by the very corporations that we taxpayers are bailing out makes you a corporation hater. :spank:

[Cetacea]

104. Bingo. n/t

[unapatriciated]

108. exactly.

and they did it to the least of us. People on fixed incomes, the poor, elderly and the disabled.

[sandnsea]

16. Thank you

See, we don't always disagree.

[KDFW]

20. That is not what the article says. She claimed they didn't credit her account,

and that it happened THREE times. She was an idiot, if that was the case, for not checking before buying fast food.

[ret5hd]

26. Yeah, because when somebody with power over you screws you yet again it's YOUR fault!!!

god, the hoops some people will jump thru to speak falsehoods for power. ( an admittedly weak turn of the phrase "speaking truth to power")

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KDFW]

73. No, it actually is nothing at all like that.

But I'm beginning to get the message here...anybody who doesn't vilify corporations and excuse stupid behavior by individuals is going to be peed on.

[PA Democrat]

79. And victims of corporate greed are " parasites" in your own words.

Do you have your own team of lobbyists on Capitol Hill to push for legislation that enables you to gouge consumers and take risks that put the entire country's economic security at risk? Did you get a personal bailout for engaging in such risky financial transactions?

Not all consumers are as well-informed and as savvy as you are. Should they be fair game for banks to prey upon? Those silly uninformed consumers, they should have their own team of personal lobbyists to craft legislation to protect THEM, since too many of our representatives have forgotten who they represent.

Who is the parasite here?

[KDFW]

82. If you're referring to post #23, you are either mistaken or lying.

The 'parasite' comment was in response to a specific post and was not directed at the woman in the OP although "if the shoe fits", as they say.

My position is this, if I may attempt to simplify it sufficiently that even you can comprehend:

I consider the banks' practices WRT fees to be unreasonable.
I admit they have the LEGAL right to levy them as they see fit, with appropriate disclosures.
If they are doing something ILLEGAL, any aggrieved customer or law enforcement agency can pursue legal
and/or civil remedies against them.
Anyone who cannot keep track of his or her own finances probably has no business maintaining bank accounts. What is it you think should be done?...just forgive consumer bungles because they lack financial acumen? And is eliminating the concept of personal responsibility a Democratic platform plank that nobody has bothered to tell me about? I sure don't see anything progressive about that dumbass notion.

[PA Democrat]

84. "Lying" for quoting your own words?

I never claimed the bank did anything illegal. And a belief that the fees are excessive does not translate into "just forgiving consumer bungles," as you imply. And regulating the banks WRT availability of funds, overdraft fees, and the way debit card transactions are processed does not translate into " eliminating the concept of personal responsibility."

Any more straw man arguments? Or have you just reached the point where you will call people dumb-asses for believing in corporate responsibility?

[Lance_Boyle]

93. I'm sure that child support check was intended

for this "victim" to wallow in the grease at taco bell. :eyes: Were the other two meals even for the kids?

[dsc]

115. a woman with two kids gets a meal for three

Seems likely to me the other two were the kids.

[Lorien]

127. My credit union now holds non corporate checks for 13 business days

I racked up over $400 in overdraft fees when they changed their policy. Obviously I moved my money to a new bank.

We bail them out, they screw us in return. It's the American way.

[SOS]

129. Same here, I was shafted by Crapital One for $350

The money had been deposited days earlier, but the pigs held it for days.
I filed a complaint in April with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.
Needless to say, they did nothing and never even bothered to respond, since they work for the banks and not us.

[lame54]

14. now, that's what I call super-sizing

[The Straight Story]

27. It is the banks' fault and here is why

They don't have to allow a charge to clear, try going to buy a new mercedes when you only have $1 in there, won't let you.

They could have denied the transaction, they let it go through to make money.

It was their responsibility to relay to merchant that there were not enough funds, they did not.

[kimmylavin]

32. Exactly.

Yes, personal responsibility is an issue.
But this practice is just predatory.
They can immediately pull the money out for a transaction, so why can't they immediately say there's not enough there?

[KDFW]

34. But that is legal and they are under no obligation to do what you suggest.

I think it sucks but it's how they do business. If this woman can't keep track of her money, she probably should get a mattress.

[The Straight Story]

37. It is wasy to track your money - banks have made it hard though

without using their system and being tied to it. Go deposit $100, then go buy $100 worth of something, and they may say 'well, you should have checked first'.

You know it is there, you put it there, they did not give you access to it.

[unapatriciated]

111. are you so obtuse that you don't get it?

The bank knows the money is there but process the debit first than the deposit. In order to generate fees. You say it is not done yet BofA was caught doing it, they could care less if they were taking needed funds from the poor, sick or disabled.
You are letting the fast food purchase influence your thinking on this issue.

[Ewellian]

64. I agree.

I was hit with an overdraft fee for an atm transaction at my bank. My atm card has access to 2 of my accounts and I accidentally chose the wrong one...it overdrew the account by $6.00 and hit me with a $25.00 overdraft fee instead of telling me "insufficient funds". Luckily I use a small local savings bank. I transferred the money to cover the overdraft and called the bank the next morning. I was angry, but my goal was to get my $25.00 back so I was very polite. They removed the $25.00 charge.

[AwakeAtLast]

87. And they never do!

That's what I never understood about them. :shrug:

[SOS]

130. And they will not allow you to opt out of this scam

I'd gladly suffer the "embarrassment" of a declined debit if it avoids the $35 fee.
But when I requested to opt out of this "service" they refused.
btw - they bribed Congress to allow this robbery in 2005.

[Balbus]

41. Call your bank and "opt-out" of overdraft protection.

It's better to be a little bit embarrassed at the cash register than to pay $300 for a $11.99 meal.

[KDFW]

46. It appears she did not HAVE o/d protection.

Or are you saying something I don't grasp??

[Balbus]

60. No, you're not grasping it.

OD protection is exactly what happened to her. The bank allowed the charge to go through even though she didn't have the funds to cover it. This "protects" her from the inconvenience of having her card refused at the merchant. The bank charges you a fee of $35 for this "protection" for each instance. Whenever you open a checking account, you're automatically enrolled in this "protection" unless you specifically state you do not want it, or, in bank lingo, "opt-out" of this service.

Now, there are other forms of over-draft protection that will take the funds from your credit card if it's with the same bank, savings account, or even line-of-credit. But, usually, there's a $10 fee for each instance this is used unless you happen to be with a program that includes this service for no charge. Usually, the no-charge service is reserved for people the bank has several different relationships (or accounts).

[Riley18]

51. Same thing happened to my son. BofA charged him $230 for going over by $11.00.

One $1.00 soda cost $40.00. He went to our local branch twice, online once, and on the phone with several people. They all said there was nothing they could do about the fees. The banks have written their own license to steal. We used to know loan sharks in the neighborhoods, but at least they were never officially sanctioned by our government. It sucks.

[Riley18]

52. People who whine about personal responsibility are brainwashed by the rich.

Every single time we are ripped off by corporations it is supposed to be our own fault. How come Madoff is in prison for ripping off rich people. Why didn't they exercise personal responsibility? Why does the bank allow the charge if there is no money left in the account. It is bullshit.

[sendero]

68. These people..

... walk around with a permanent K-Y drip on their backsides, they like being ripped off, abused and treated like a crack ho.

They are half-ass persons.

[unapatriciated]

98. thank you for calling my disabled son a "half-ass persons"among other insults

this happened to him, he was filling his prescription as he usually does on the first of the month. Something that should have cost him ten dollars and wound up costing him 200 dollars. He thought the money was there since he has direct deposit. He found out later that the bank post debits first and then the credits. Within minuets he lost two hundred dollars of his disability check. What you don't grasp is some are on such tight budgets that all that is left at the end of the month is a few dollars and believe me the banks take advantage of it.

[jayfish]

128. He Wasn't Saying That At All.

He was saying that about the people who believe these practices are a-ok.

Jay

[unapatriciated]

131. sorry if I misunderstood his post, I apologize

so many in this thread seem to think it is just a matter of personal responsibility.

[jayfish]

132. It's a Hot Thread. Shite Happens.

Not that I would ever presume to accept your apology on behalf of Sendero.

Jay

[unapatriciated]

133. sendero I apologize for my reply to you.

I was confused to who you were replying to and misunderstood you comment. Thank you jayfish for letting me know about my mistake.

[sendero]

158. It's ok...

.. perhaps I should have made it more clear. JayFish had it right, I'm fed up with the fact that most Americans just put up with this nonsense.

Eventaully, we are going to have to do something about it.

[Kansas Wyatt]

69. My bank started holding deposits over the weekend if it wasn't in by 2:30 on Friday.

They nailed me with an overdraft, so I called them up and told them they were full of shit. They explained that it was their new policy, but noticed that I didn't ever get overdrafts and didn't want to lose me, so they removed the overdraft charges.

Since they implemented their new policy, I will not spend against a deposit, until I see that it has cleared.

[Cetacea]

106. But I'd bet that they have no problem debiting your account over same period.

[jmondine]

65. "Yo Quiero Taco B... Aye Caramba!"

[Greyhound]

85. I see the authoritarians are thick on this thread tonight.

Gee, I wonder why things just seem to go from bad to worse...
:sarcasm:

"You can't fix stupid". - Ron White

[pinniped]

89. Purchasing shit without checking your balance is like playing with fire.

The banks will not miss an opportunity when they smell blood.

[jayfish]

90. My Credit Union Pulled This BS On Me Yesterday.

I made a debit card purchase (run as a credit card)for $13.05 but only had $7.38 in my checking account. My CU transferred $5.67 from my savings to my checking account to cover the transaction. That's pretty cool right? WRONG! See, they charged me a $4.00 transfer fee so that my balance was $9.05. The $13.05 charge then overdrafted the account and I was hit with another $25 fee. Just fucking great. $42.05 for $13.05 worth or merchandise.

Jay

[Wednesdays]

103. Remember, it's all about personal responsibility...

:spank:

Just think...if the bank fee were $200 per overdraft, you would REALLY have learned your lesson then. :eyes:

[PA Democrat]

119. Or debtor's prison, or water boarding!

How sad that so many people on this thread don't grasp the real issue. Banks typically restrict the use of funds deposited to your account which have been cleared (so the check or the electronic debit is known to be "good"), encourage customers to then "overdraw" their accounts and then charge exorbitant fees.

No one is saying that people should be allowed to repetitively overdraw their accounts, but instead we are saying that the decks shouldn't be stacked against the consumer in the first place.

Once the bank made an error in posting an electronic debit to my account twice. It was a large payment and resulted in 6 overdraft fees, since they hit your account for the largest transactions first so they can reap the maximum in fees. If I had lobbyists working for me, I should have been able to charge the bank a fee for their error. It took me more than an hour of my time to get the problem resolved. It's all about personal responsibility after all, isn't it?

[unapatriciated]

124. That happened to me with a 260 dollar vet bill it took two weeks and three trips

to my bank and my vet with copies of my bank statement to clear it up. My bank would put it back in my account and the vet's bank would take it back out

[Ignis]

125. Yup. "Are there no poorhouses?"

Lots of empathy going on here today. :eyes:

[county worker]

156. I don't agree with what you said.

"Banks typically restrict the use of funds deposited to your account which have been cleared."

If there is a hold on your deposit it does not show up on your online statement. You can tell when it is good and when it isn't.

"encourage customers to then "overdraw" their accounts and then charge exorbitant fees"

I've never had a bank encourage me to spend my money. I make that decision so do you.

[PA Democrat]

159. When congress passed an act called Check 21 it enabled banks to clear checks deposited into your

account overnight.

Consumers fought to have the banks provide them with the use of those funds the same day the bank clears those funds electronically, but banking lobbyists made sure that that did not occur. Banks still prevent customers from accessing funds when the banks themselves have use of them. The banks make money on your deposits which they do not allow you to use.

Then the banks started automatically providing something called a "courtesy overdraft" whether you want it or not, and then charge a steep fee for each transaction they pay as a "courtesy". When you make a debit card transaction, the merchant goes through an approval system that would allow banks to decline transactions when customers do not have sufficient funds in their accounts, but banks have found that there are huge fees to be made on extending customers that "courtesy". Banks then process transactions from highest dollar amount to lowest thus assessing the maximum number of individual O/D fees. It's quite lucrative for the bank if you sit down and calculate what the APR would be on a couple of those fees for the privilege of a "courtesy overdraft".

Do you really think that banks want to discourage such a profitable practice?

From USA Today:

Eric Halperin of the Center for Responsible Lending says regulators should examine bank overdraft rules because they "parallel" much-criticized card policies. Banks are raising fees and imposing similar policies on checking accounts and credit cards, such as charging more for multiple transgressions. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. says if banks cover a $20 purchase and charge a $27 fee, the loan has a 3,520% annual percentage rate (APR) if paid back in two weeks.

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd, D-Conn., said if the Fed doesn't curb overdraft abuses, he'll "pursue legislative action." Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., has sponsored legislation requiring banks to get consumers' permission to cover overdrafts, disclose APRs and pay transactions in a way that doesn't increase fees.

Banks are lobbying heavily against restrictions. Why? "Overdraft fees are the mother lode of (deposit) fees," says Michael Moebs of Moebs Services, an economic research firm. "If it weren't for overdraft fees, 45% of banks and credit unions wouldn't have made money in 2008."

http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/credit/2009-07-08-banks-overdraft-fees_N.htm

It's sad that so many people focus on the personal responsibility aspect, rather than the corporate abuse of consumers angle. Good for you for never overdrawing your account. How much should people who may make an occasional honest mistake be soaked by the banks? 3,000% interest?

I once got charged $150.00 in overdraft fees. My "personal responsibility" crime? I did nothing wrong. The bank made an error and charged my account twice for an automatic payment which overdrew my account. I got all of the fees refunded but it meant a trip to the bank and time out of my busy day. So even banks make mistakes. They refunded the fees apologized and I left it at that. I didn't look at their error as an opportunity to gouge them financially. If the bank had a history of such mistakes, I would have severed my relationship with them and gone elsewhere.

The dirty little secret is that banks LOVE customers who regularly overdraw their account. Read the article. They make a huge profits from those fees. How much is too much? And should they be allowed to process transactions from highest to lowest to ensure that they maximize fees? Should they be allowed to gouge consumers and charge overdraft fees when they are in fact sitting on collected funds which they do not allow the customer to access?

[county worker]

165. If my bank held my deposits and used the money before I could I would close the account right now.

You still can know when the money was posted to your account. I don't have a kind word to say about the banks, but you can control getting hit with the fees. Banks are counting on the fact that you will not reconcile your balance. Until the laws are changed we have to be conscientious with these accounts.

I belong to a credit union and they do not hold the checks. I think that since they are non profit they do not have the incentive banks do to rip people off. I use to belong to a credit union that did what banks do and I closed the account and moved to a better credit union. I do reconcile by bank account daily on a spreadsheet and do not get hit with the fees.

[PA Democrat]

166. If you deposit a check and your bank does not allow you to draw against

those funds the NEXT BUSINESS DAY, then they are using your money. This is standard practice BTW, because the law allows them to do this.

Banks are clearing the vast majority of checks same day or overnight but the laws permit them to "hold" those funds for two business days if it is a local check and for up to six business days if the check is drawn on an out-of-town bank. This used to make sense because banks used to physically present the actual checks to other banks to clear, and there was manual processing and transportation time.. That's no longer the case. It's paperless and completely automated

Consumer groups have pushed for regulatory changes to force banks to give consumers quicker availability of funds, since the banks DO have those funds, but the banking lobby has fought it tooth and nail.


http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/6500-3240.html

(1) AVAILABILITY OF LOCAL CHECKS.--
(A) IN GENERAL.--Subject to subparagraph (B) of this paragraph, subsections (a)(2), (d), and (e) of this section, and section 604, not more than 2 business days shall intervene between the business day on which funds are deposited in an account at a depository institution by a check drawn on a local originating depository institution and the business day on which such funds are available for withdrawal.
(B) Time period adjustment for cash withdrawal of certain checks.--
(i) IN GENERAL.--Except as provided in clause (ii), funds deposited in an account in a depository institution by check drawn on a local depository institution that is not a participant in the same check clearinghouse association as the receiving depository institution (other than a check described in subsection (a)(2)) shall be available for cash withdrawal not later than the business day after the business day on which such funds otherwise are available under subparagraph (A).
(ii) 5 p.m. CASH AVAILABILITY.--Not more than $400 (or the maximum amount allowable in the case of a withdrawal from an automated teller machine but not more than $400) of funds deposited by one or more checks to which this subparagraph applies shall be available for cash withdrawal not later than 5 o'clock post meridian of the business day on which such funds are available under subparagraph (A).
(iii) $100 AVAILABILITY.--Any amount available for withdrawal under this subparagraph shall be in addition to the amount available under subsection (a)(2)(D).
(2) AVAILABILITY OF NONLOCAL CHECKS.--Subject to subsections (a)(2), (d), and (e) of this section and section 604, not more than 6 business days shall intervene between the business day on which funds are deposited in an account at a depository institution by a check drawn on a nonlocal originating depository institution and the business day on which such funds are available for withdrawal.
(3) APPLICABILITY.--This subsection shall apply with respect to funds deposited by check in an account at a depository institution after August 31, 1988, and before September 1, 1990, except as may be otherwise provided under subsection (b)(4).

[county worker]

154. I made a debit card purchase (run as a credit card)for $13.05 but only had $7.38 in my checking acco

That's your first mistake. The second one was not knowing that there would be a charge for transferring money. I would close that account and find a better credit union.

[Wednesdays]

97. K&R

:kick:

[greguganus]

102. The first mistake she made was eating at Taco Hell. n/t

:puke:

[LynneSin]

117. Consumers have the ability to prevent this from happening

I know I do

I've called my credit card company and debit company and said that my card is to NOT be used over the limits. I would rather be embarassed with a rejection at the register than to deal with all the pending fees of an overdraft.

[Wednesdays]

141. Is that true for every credit card company? Every debit company?

Every bank? :shrug:

[sofa king]

118. Suntrust just got the last of my money that way.

I had eleven dollars in one account and fourteen in another. I moved ten from one to the other in order to take out twenty.

Thanks to hidden fees and the imaginary delay in account updating, I was assessed seventy dollars in overdraft fees, soon to be followed by another thirty when they close my account. I visited the bank three times to try to get the fees waived. They would not do it. So I'm not going to pay it, because I can't.

Now, I'm thinking of starting up a campaign to encourage others who hear my story to close their accounts at SunTrust Bank. I think a little later I'm going to write up a statement which others can print and turn in when they close their accounts.

[G_j]

137. the challenge is,

finding a bank that doesn't pull this crap.
Do they even exist?

[TheKentuckian]

138. It amazes me how easy it is for some to hammer the individual and cover up

for corporations and institutions. No matter how odious the actions of the "authority" the blame always rolls to the little guy.

[county worker]

153. It amazes me how easy it is for people to not take personal responsibility for there spending habits

You can avoid the extra fees by not going over your actual balance. You can get your actual balance by reconciling your account. It isn't hard with excel. You start with a reconciled balance. Go on line to get your transactions that have been posted to your account. Add or subtract what has cleared the bank. That is your true balance. If it is is something like $24, don't go out and buy gas for $35. Simple.

You can blame the banks all you want and it is true their tactics suck but you have control over it. If you want to say I am full of shit and keep paying extra fees go right ahead. It is no skin off my nose.

[intheflow]

147. True this!

I currently have $162 in overdraft fees for four purchases that were under $10 a piece. :grr:

[anonymous171]

155. Same thing happened to me when I was 17. 5 years later I still hate bankers with a passion

Fucking parasites.