US Bank Overdraft charges, no reporting balance in account after withdrawling 1-800-872-2657 ripoff (head Office) Minnesota

Quick Update

I did the math (rough estimate, but good enough). Also, keep in mind that my time involved is "free time" or wasted time I don't care about. Considering that I've been doing this now for six months, that the average time I spend with a teller (and their supervisors) is about ten minutes [sometimes longer], and assuming the average teller makes $10.00 per hour {probably less, considering it IS US bank}, and that I make two trips each month to US Bank, I figure it like this:

Teller time: $2.00 per month
Supervisor time: $3.00 per month
Postage: $0.28 per month
Total cost to US Bank: $5.28 per month

My average monthly balance: $1.26 per month

So, US bank spends approximately $5.28 per month to keep my approximate $1.25 per month.

Over six months, they've spent $31.68 for the honor of being able to lend my $1.26 each month. If I do this for five more months, I figure we're even (as such, except I don't get my money back, but I wrote that off long ago). If I do it for another year, that means the bank will lose another $63.36. Now, does this mean that US Bank will go bankrupt? Of course not. On the other hand, losing a single penny is anathema to US Bank [which would explain their repulsive need to steal from their own customers], so I feel better.

By the way, the President of US Bank downtown St. Paul is Robert Hoke, and he told me he didn't care that I felt ripped off or that I desperately needed the money he and his bank stole from me. Well, I'm going to continue to cost you money to maintain my account and I hope other people follow suit.

Consider if 500 people did what I'm doing. It would cost US Bank $2,640.00 per month to maintain a bunch of nuisance accounts. Consider if 5,000 people did this. That would come to $316,800.00 per year (give or take) that US Bank would lose.

US Bank are thieves

I sympathize completely with your situation. US Bank ripped me off for over $190.00 (Originally, almost double that, but they graciously gave back half along with a lecture).

I deposited my paycheck into an ATM on a Friday. I set my electronic billpay to send money to my creditors, etc., the following Monday, because I knew it took one day for an ATM deposit to be acknowledged. Suddenly, I was hit for hundreds of dollars of "bad check" fees and fees from US Bank.

When I complained, they said the policy was that "funds available" wouldn't be in an account for one full "business day" and that didn't happen until Tuesday. The bank actually hid behind a federal law meant to protect consumers to make money.

Recap: Check in ATM on Friday. Transaction logged next business day (Monday), BUT, funds "
not available" until Tuesday.

The kicker to all this was that the paycheck I deposited on Friday night was on a US Bank account from the same bank. So, if I had walked into the bank on Monday and deposited the check, the funds would not have been "available" until Tuesday. However, if I had walked into the bank on Monday and CASHED the check, US Bank would have been obligated by law to hand me the currency. I could have, then, immediately deposited the currency, and the funds would have been available right away.

Unable to comment on the logic, and determined to keep as much of my hard earned money as possible, US Bank just fell back on "its the policy and you were educated" and stole $190.00 from me.

I now use US Bank for one purpose. I keep a very small account (less than $20.00 balance, and usually about $1.00) active so I can cash my paychecks there for free, then I take the currency and deposit it all in my real bank. I always use a human teller, I often deposit change so it takes longer (for the tiny account), and when they need to have a supervisor confirm that cashing my paycheck is OK, I happily tell them to take their time. Heck, ask two supervisors! I also refuse their generous offers to switch to paperless monthly account statements. I want them to pay postage each and every month.

I recommend that all US Bank customers do something similar. Don't rage against them, don't send letters, don't sue in small claims (conciliation) court. It won't do any good. Just keep tiny little accounts (make sure they stay active), and cost the bank money each and every day.

Oops.

Bad math. Sorry. I have to do this for approximately thirty more months before I'm "even."

hahah

John thats great! LOL even though it dont seem like much to them i got a kick out of that!

Funds Availability -- You take a check to the bank and deposit it...

I just want to comment about how Funds Availability works. You take a check to the bank and deposit it. That night it goes to a processing center where it is encoded (printed) with the dollar amount, and then run through a sorter that reads the amount, account number, etc. and then sorts the check depending on what bank it comes from. The same thing happens to your deposit slip.

The entire process takes at least a couple of hours from the time the checks arrive at the processing center until a clerk has verified that everything matches up and balances. Then everything is compiled into computer files that are used for updating customer accounts with the checks and deposits that have cleared the account that day. The update actually takes place the morning of the following business day (no other way to do it, as files are not available until around 5 AM).

But that's not all. The bank needs to be able to collect the money from the check you have deposited. If the check is from US Bank, or another local bank, credit is usually given the next day. If the check is from a bank further away, it takes longer to collect so you may not receive credit as quickly. The check that is processed by US Bank tonight is sent on to the bank it originated from and usually processed the next night. It depends on how long it takes to drive or fly the checks to that bank.

A check from US Bank that is processed by US Bank may still take a while to be collected on. That is because of the distance between the states in which US Bank does business. If a check from US Bank in Minnesota is deposited in Portland on Monday, the deposit will be credited to the depositor on Tuesday, but it wan't be taken from the account the check is against until Wednesday. That check is physically sent to Minnesota for processing before it is charged against the account it is written on. Because of the time it takes to transport checks, many branches have a 3 PM cut-off for whether you get your funds tomorrow or the next day.

Bottom line, they do not want to give you money before they can collect it. Since US Bank processes millions of checks every day (up to 4,000,000 items in Portland on a Monday, for example), it would be too difficult to analyze each and every deposit individually for funds availability. That is why for most depositors there is a one business day rule. Some checks take more time than that to collect, and some may take less, but on the whole it balances out.

While I tend to agree that fees -- particularly overdraft fees -- are pretty outrageous, the business practice of crediting you the next business day is sound because of what is involved in processing your deposit and collecting funds. The terms are clearly spelled out in print and given to you when you open your account. They are also posted clearly and prominently in the branch and on the ATM machine. Banks make a lot of money on fees. The best way to avoid them is to pay attention and be informed. As much as you may feel that you were ripped off, you can't say you weren't informed.

Falling Back on "Policy" in the Absence of Logic

Everything you said, Allison, makes logical "machine" sense. So, I can see why the overdrafts initially and automatically happened to me. The real problem arose when I went to the bank the next day to discuss it, to point out that the funds were, in fact, available in reality no matter what the computer said, and to politely request the money back. I asked US Bank to use human judgment to override the computer's decision. I was treated like dirt and the weasels simply fell back on policy to keep money they didn't deserve.

Remember, in my case, the check I deposited was drawn on an account at THE SAME BANK, not just another US Bank in Minnesota. They can instantly check to see if the funds are available without having to go through the process you described. I prove that now twice every month when I walk up to a teller to demand and receive cash on the very day I am paid.

The proper response from US Bank would have been to admit that the funds were, in fact, available despite what policy or their computers said, and refund the overdrafts. While your response is right in line with the technical, pedantic reasoning of US Bank, it falls short of simple human reasoning in place of robotic (both machine and human) thievery.

PS ..refuse to back away from the simple fact that US Bank charged me overdrafts on funds that were physically available on the day I paid my bills

You were right on another point, Allison. The policy is clearly stated on the ATM. The sign says that deposits made after 4:00 p.m. may not be available until the next business day. I deposited on a Friday and my payments went out the next Monday. The next business day. US Bank's explanation was that REALLY means a "full business day" and because a full 24 business hours after my deposit lands after the deadline the next business day, it REALLY means that the deposit isn't acknowledged until one full day after that.

I cannot view that as other than a deliberate obfuscation. The average person accepts the plain meaning of words, and I (like most people I would wager) looked at that sign and said, "Well, today is Friday and the next business day is Monday, so I should be OK."

The standard response would be to say that I was also handed a detailed description when I opened the account. Untrue. I opened my account with FirStar Bank years before and I didn't review my initial documentation every two weeks to keep it fresh in my mind. US Bank bought FirStar Bank and sent me no documentation of it's policies (though I would agree they were probably quite similar). I also read the sign on the machine SUBSEQUENT to receiving those initial policy documents, so I took the plain meaning of the sign to be current policy.

I refuse to back away from the simple fact that US Bank charged me overdrafts on funds that were physically available on the day I paid my bills no matter what the "policy" or the computers say.

Something funny about what she said in a rebuttal

Has anyone noticed that Allison stated that US bank owns the accounts. This is basicaly true,
but it is in my opinion it is also owned by you , due to the fact that it took you to start the acc., and your money.

It seems to me that the money you place in the acc. (In thier opinion) is THEIRS to do with what they please you are just a minor inconvienance. It is this kind of thought that has led to the all around lack of customer service that we see in most banks today.

And the poor attitudes you see when you inconvienace them with your presence at one of their high $ branches (fancy) No one seems to know what good customer service is anymore may it rest in peace

Bottom Line ..US Bank is dishonest.

Sorry, I can't accept "You should have educated yourself on policy" (not Allison's direct quote).

Bottom Line: The funds they say weren't available with sleight of hand were available in reality. The ATM said funds available the next business day, not the next 24 business hours. The bank knows that the funds were from an account with the same bank. And maybe other banks are the same, but that is not an acceptable excuse for stealing.

US Bank is dishonest. Robert Hoke (President of US Bank Saint Paul) is a thief, a liar, an arrogant *****, and probably a pedophile (he must have made the comparison between screwing small accounts and screwing small children, and acted on it). I will continue to maintain a nuisance account with US Bank that costs them money for as long as the game holds my interest.

Account Disclosures Don't think that it couldn't happen again with another bank.

I sympathize with your overdraft situation, and the fact that your branch was unwilling to help you out with the mess. The bank has a lot of policies I don't agree with, and they do make some policies based on generating as much fee income as possible -- meaning overdraft fees and returned item fees, in addition to other things. I don't like it any more than you do.

While it's no excuse, I would say that all of the major banking companies in the country do the same thing. How do you think that they can offer products such as free checking? If you want a company that really cares about the individual, you are better off with a small local bank.

I did want to comment on account disclosures and mergers. First of all, Firstar bought US Bank, not the other way around. US Bank was originally based in Portland, Oregon and it was one of the good companies that really cared about the customer. US Bank had been around since 1898 in Portland.

It was a great company to work for and to do business with. In 1997 it was bought by First Bank Systems, who had a completely different philosophy regarding "customer service". Basically they only offerred superior service to corporate customers, and the heck with the individual.

They decided to retain the name of US Bank because it was more unique than First-anything, since there are so many banks with First-something in the name in this country. The former US Bank region started losing customers in droves because of the loss of the customer service.

A few years ago the bank was bought again, this time by Firstar. Coincidentally (or not) run by the brother of the former First Bank Systems and the new CEO of the merged US Bank. Since then there has been more of a focus on customer service, but not enough, in my opinion. I doubt they will ever regain what was lost from the original US bank.

Anyway, throughout all of the mergers, there were many letters and disclosures sent to all customers. Any time there is a substantial change in the policies or procedures of the company, they are required by law to notify you. A lot of time changes will be printed on the first page of your account statement. Otherwise letters and other disclosures are sent separately. Frequently people simply fail to read all of the fine print.

I can say for sure that this is true because I am a customer in addition to being an employee. I have received all of the same disclosures in the mail that every customer receives. And since I work in a back office, not in a branch, that is often the only way I know something has changed.

Bottom line, I am sorry about what happened to you. Don't think that it couldn't happen again with another bank. The best way to prevent unpleasant surprises is to make sure you read everything you are sent from the bank. Educate yourself. As unfair as it may seem, it is perfectly legal for banks to generate fee income by the methods that you have come up against.

Same bank, different state?

You wrote, "Remember, in my case, the check I deposited was drawn on an account at THE SAME BANK, not just another US Bank in Minnesota." I just wanted to mention that US Bank of Minnesota and US Bank of Oregon, and of Washington, Wisconsin, Illinois, Idaho, California, Nevada, and about 16 other states are in fact the same company. Often you can't tell just by looking at a check which state it is from. Many US Bank checks simply have the bank name and the toll free phone number printed on the check. You also can't tell by the address of the person writing the check. We have people living in Oregon who have their accounts with US Bank of Iowa, and so on. You need to be able to read the routing number on the check and know what state that routing number is from. I keep a list because I can't memorize all of the different routings and the states they go with.

The check you deposited may or may not have come from the same state your account is in. And while you are correct that the branch could look at the account the check is drawn on to see if the funds are there, they can't transfer the funds into your account. The check still must go through the physical sorting and posting process I described. If the ATM deposit went to processing that same night and the check was from the same state, the funds would have come out of that account on Monday. If the ATM deposit went for processing on Monday (probable since it was after 4 PM), the funds would have come out of that account on Tuesday. If the check was from another state, the funds wouldn't come out until Wednesday or later. Just because US Bank owns both accounts, the money doesn't come out of the other guy's account until the check is physically processed. One other thing to keep in mind is that even though the branch can inquire about the funds that are in the account, they can't tell how many checks are outstanding against it. While you are depositing the check that was given to you, 40 other people could be doing exactly the same thing at other branches. The other customer could have written many more checks than he has funds in his account to cover. The tellr has no way of knowing. This is another reason that the bank does not want to give you credit for uncollected funds.

Banking capabilities

Allison - Banking technology is at a point in which they can draw from any account at any bank within 24 business hours. It's called an Automated Clearing House (ACH) transaction. It's actually how they get the money from other banks anyways, it's essentially a bank-to-bank wire transaction.

When you go to a gas station and write them a check and they run it through a scanner/printer that prints void on it, they are initiating an Electronic Funds Transaction (EFT) like a debit card that uses and then they receive an ACH from your bank the morning of the next business day (Monday if initiated on Friday, Tuesday if Monday, etc.)

So in actuality (unless deposited in an ATM) they can in fact credit your account for the check within 24 hours no matter where the check is from. If in an ATM, they can do it within 48. They took 96 for John.

They also can credit your account immediately and then debit your account for the check if it turns out the check is under-funded. In short, they are doing their best to not utilize 2 decade old technology in order to screw everybody they can out of as many fees as possible.

Check Collections

James states that the bank can exchange funds by way of ACH transactions. It is true that you can go to a merchant and at that point of sale, your check can be converted into an ACH transaction, similar to a Debit card transaction. This is not, however, the way that most check clearing takes place. There are a lot of technical reasons why all check exchange between banks is not the only way funds get from one bank to another. The fact remains that most checks go to a processing center and go through the process I described in order to be credited to your account and collected from the account of the person who wrote you the check.

When a bank processes a check from a different bank, it is sent to that other bank for collection. Some banks participate in an electronic exchange, where the account information from the checks is exchanged and funds are tranferred right then for the items. The paper checks are then sent later to that bank in order for them to process for statements and so on. This is the exception in check exchanges, not the rule.

When you deposit a check from Chase Manhattan Bank, for example, into your US Bank account, that check goes through processing at US Bank. Then it is sent to Chase for processing and collection. The checks sent to Chase are part of what is called a Cash Letter. All a Cash Letter really is, is a bunch of checks along with a deposit slip. US Bank has an account at Chase, and when the Cash Letter is processed at Chase, US Bank's account with them is credited.

The smaller the bank and the further away geographically, the longer it takes to collect funds on a check. Banks can't exchange items directly with every little bank and credit union in the country, so they also use the Federal Reserve Banks as collection and exchange points. A check may go through more than one bank and Regional Check Processing facility before it gets back to the bank where the account is held.

Some check collection exchanges are electronic, but most are just plain paper. The technology is headed in the direction of being 100% electronic, but that is still a ways off.

Regardless, the bank sets the policy for when funds are credited to an account. Whether they collect the funds today, tomorrow, or next week, you still receive credit in your account according to terms you agreed to. If you don't like the terms, you are free to bank elsewhere.

Yeah, yeah, yeah

The policy is . . .
The check has to go from here to there . . .
You have to realize how hard it is being a bank . . .
You should have read page three, paragraph two, sub-paragraph d(3). . .
All the other banks are doing it . . .

The checks I deposit pay me my money from an account at the VERY SAME BANK.

Scenario #1. I deposit my check. The check is physically carried by passenger pigeon to Guatemala where it is lovingly read by the simple illiterate peasants there who, then, send it to the regional check delaying center in Biloxi, Mississippi by Pony Express, where the blind employees wait until the autumnal equinox to put it on the last steam train in the United States to the corporate time wasting center in East Saint Louis, Illinois where it is lost, found, and lost again, until it is sent back via dogsled to the same original bank where some snotty, self-important asshole finally admits that the money was there all the time and clicks ten buttons to change my account balance. Three days (24 business hours) later, the bank actually acknowledges I have money in my account after deducting 20% because I maliciously stole from the poor, abused bank by writing bad checks despite having been informed of the policy as stated on page three, paragraph two, sub-paragraph d(3).

Scenario #2. I physically walk the check down 21 floors from my office to the bank where my employer and I both have an account. I tell the teller, "Give me currency in the same amount written on this check forthwith." The teller quickly verifies there is enough money in my employer's account and puts the cash in my hand.

Scenario #2 happens twice per month now. Allison, each and every one of your long explanations are just excuses for unethical behavior. The funds, in my case, were always "available." US Bank just hid behind policy to steal from me.

Yeah, I know

I know the Passenger Pigeon is extinct. However, it states quite clearly on page five, paragraph 11, subparagraph m13 of US Bank policy that the extinction of any species used by US Bank for check routing is solely the fault of the account holder, and that any overdrafts which are the result of a delay in check routing and subsequent funds availability are solely the responsibility of the account holder for causing the extinction in the first place.

At the very last, Allison succinctly summarized US Bank's policy: "We're the bank, jerk. If you don't like our thieving policies, take your account somewhere else."

No need to be rude

I already said that I sympathize with the couple of people who have lost money to high fees. I also mentioned that I don't agree with the fees that the big banks, not just US Bank, charge for overdrafts and such.

Banks used to make money from investing your money while they keep it for you. Now they mostly make money from fees. It's big business.

I don't really have a specific point in my explanation of how check processing works. I thought that folks might like to understand the process. There is actually some rhyme and reason to funds availability on deposits.

However. . . You can take the information however you wish, but there is no need for rudeness and name-calling.

Oops, again

You're not the "snotty, self-important asshole," Allison. I meant the jerk I dealt with at US Bank Saint Paul.

I also know you're not the architect of US Bank policy. You were simply explaining US Bank's justification and you did succinctly summarize their corporate attitude. They as much told me the same thing. If I didn't like it, I could take my business elsewhere.

I didn't, so I did and I'm much happier with my new bank. TCF Bank recently made a mistake, admitted the error, and corrected it that day. Why? Because the computer said I was wrong, but the human looked at the situation and realized I was right. That's all I asked of US Bank.

I also thought my version of the check routing process was funnier.

TCF/USBank friendliness

TCF got me once by the fact that when state law didn't require them to carry any form of liability protection on their cash and check card and somebody used my card for online pornography they wouldn't reverse the charges or allow me to dispute it. The only thing in their TOS that said anything close to this being the policy was that "As an online user you are responsible for the security of your account information" which said to me "Use the card online, get ripped off, and it's your fault" not "Never use your card online, but have somebody steal your number from a receipt at a store or resteraunt, and get f*cked."

USBank has generally been good to me until 3 months ago, I won't go into details but they charged me 1200 dollars in overdraft fees because they gave me a debit card different from the one I requested and never updated my address (whereas if I'd been given what I requested and/or had an address update I would've only suffered 30-150 dollars in fees) and they were slightly helpful, and are very helpful about my fraud dispute.

On the other hand . . .

. . . why is it that checks we US Bank customers write are processed within 24 hours (or less)?

Three and one-half years ago, I was hit for two over-draft charges by US Bank because two checks I wrote and MAILED one afternoon were delivered, routed through the creditors, and cashed with US Bank in less than twenty hours. I kid you not. I was shocked stupid.

I might point out that I was rightfully charged the over-draft fees because I was just hoping the process would take longer. In that case, the funds really were not "available" and I was wrong. I made an incorrect assumption as to how long the process would take.

Still, the whole process, from my dropping the envelopes with the checks in the mailbox to being lightning screwed took less that twenty hours.

Why is it that checks we write zip through the system like crap through a goose, yet checks we deposit (even if they are both drawn on accounts at the same bank) need to go through the Screw-The-Customer-Service-Center in Little America, Antarctica and aren't acknowledged for twenty-four business hours (three days) or more?

Rational

John,

With all due respect I do understand your frustration, but consider the following:

1. Your characterization of the Manager as a pedophile is WAY out of line – however you might have meant it. It belies an attitude and perspective that will settle for nothing else but what you want. Even if you felt you were treated with disrespect it does no good to return the favor in kind. I don't know how your conversation with this manager went, but if there was any hint of the rancor you've displayed here it's no wonder he didn't go out of his way for you. You know that whole saying about catching more flies with honey than vinegar? It's true.

2. Banks in the United States are among the most regulated. One of the most important facets of how they must operate is to treat customers and customer situations with consistency. If you come to my branch to get a loan, if you otherwise qualify, I can not deny it to you if I can't stand you personally. Conversely, if you don't qualify but I really like you and believe you have a good heart I can not, unfortunately, choose to give the loan to you. We maintain some degree of autonomy (and authority) so that we may include the “human element” in almost all that we do. At the end of the day however, we must strive to treat each customer situation with a measure of consistency or those bodies that provide oversight to our industry (internal and external) may choose to intervene.

3. The ATM doesn't know what it is you are depositing until that deposit is pulled and sent for processing.

4. If you really feel that the manager treated you THAT poorly – find out who his manager is and tell them!

I would agree that bank overdraft charges are egregious but they are the one fee that banks charge that is 100% avoidable. Know the rules and play by them and you'll never have to pay another one. Good luck!

Ok, here's how it works…

First of all, you need to understand that items are processed to/from checking accounts in blocks of one “business day”. While the specific times of that business day has changed over time, for US Banks here in the Minneapolis/St. Paul markets, the cut-off time it 6:00pm )as recent as a year ago, that time was 3:00pm). As an aside, each bank has a “cut-off/cut-over” time. The banks do this so that they can ensure that they can complete the processing for all the items (debits and credits – note to everyone here, credits are always posted first – for EVERY bank) that are posted to all of their checking accounts.

Now, this 6:00pm cut-off time is for transactions that occur at a branch office or at an ATM. Remember, with regard to funds availability (which I'll address in a moment) that the ATM has no idea what you've just deposited. Because we have so many banks in our market here in the Twin Cities and because they all face the same challenge of getting every item “posted” as appropriate, they often have mutual agreements to accept these “same day” transactions much later (i.e. US Bank and Wells Fargo go all the way to midnight). In addition, many of the bills you pay (and the merchants you do business with (i.e. Wal-Mart, Target, CUB, Rainbow) actually have your payment sent directly to a bank processing center. In the case of bills, you're not really sending the check to Xcel Energy but to the bank where your item will be deposited! For places like Wal-Mart and Target, the check that you write there could be included in a deposit that get taken directly to the bank – sometimes within hours of you writing it!

Now, with regard to the whole funds availability thing. There are specific regulations that govern how a bank may/may not make deposited funds available to use. Generally, there are three transactions that are generally exempt from any kind of delayed availability and those are cash deposits made at a teller window, wire transfers and direct deposits. These are cases where the bank actually has the money in hand and has no reason to delay its availability to you. In the case of deposited checks however the bank doesn't actually have the money that it represents until the item is ultimately paid by the bank upon which it is drawn. So, in a sense, if banks made deposits available immediately (some still do, but it is becoming less common), they would actually be letting you use money that they don't even have yet. There's an inherent risk there because if an item you deposited is returned and you've spent the money, the bank really has no recourse but to let your account become overdrawn and to hope that you would pay it back.

Sadly, there are instances where the customer can't pay the bank back and, more often, there are instances where the customer WON'T pay the bank back. This is one key place where check fraud occurs and costs banks billions of dollars each year. So, banks have moved *some* of the risk on the customer who deposits the check (and who legally takes responsibility for the item) while they, for the most part, retained most of the risk. In the case of US Bank, except for the types of deposits I've mentioned above, generally makes the first $100 of each day's total deposits available immediately with the remainder available the next business day.

Of course, banks are in the business to make money and they want to retain their customers, so they must continuously adjust their operations to strike a balance between risk and customer service. Most often, though it isn't always apparent to the customer, the benefits to the customer are far greater. Unfortunately, when it does it the customer it's not always pretty. Couple that with my earlier post about banks being required to be consistent and it's a tough balancing act.

Finally, coming later this year, most banks are participating in “Check 21” – a new way in which items will be put through the system. In these cases, a deposited check will be imaged and converted to an electronic file that will instantly be “sent” to the bank upon which it is drawn for payment. Remember that bill that you write a check for where the company is located in, say, California? It used to take about 4 – 6 days to hit your account but now it will take just 2!

I hope that helped to make things a little more clear to you. If it makes you feel better, bank employees are held to an even higher standard and we rarely, if ever, get cut slack on fees!

Excuses, excuses... I'm still out money I desperately need.

Eric:

1. With all due respect, I really don't care about the bank president's feelings. It was "way out of line" for his bank to steal $190.00 from me. In the end, he has to suffer an insult he can easily ignore, and I'm still out money I desperately need. On the balance, I lose far more. When I went to the bank I was courteous and reasonable. I appealed to their logic and showed how, although the system said I didn't have any money in the account, the money was, in fact, there. I asked them to apply a standard consistent with information they had on hand at that moment to make the right decision. Eventually, I was almost begging them. In return, they kept my money and treated me like dirt. The little weasel I dealt with originally was rude, condescending, and insulting right from the start. So, although my attitude is now less than courteous, don't confuse my current cavalier use of language and description with my attitude on the day I asked the bank to do the right thing.

2. In my case the bank had the ability and the ethical obligation to make things right. I don't think the intent of federal regulators is to make sure all customers are consistently screwed. The twenty-four hour, funds availability law was intended to protect consumers, not to be used as a means to steal from them. Just because there may be a legal justification for doing the wrong thing, it doesn't mean doing the wrong thing is OK. It isn't.

3. True, the ATM and the connected computer system are just machines that require human oversight. The ATM doesn't know that the accounts were drawn from the same bank, but the bank employees and the bank president do. They could have easily corrected the problem.

4. Tell on the bank president to his boss? By standing firm, he made $190.00 for his employers without having to actually earn it. He is an instrument of his employer's policy. I'm supposed to complain to them that he followed policy? What on earth would that accomplish? Besides, I'm done talking to those thieving, pedantic monkeys. Their only function now is to cash my paychecks.

A consistent response theme is that if I would just remain educated on policy, I could avoid this. I knew the policy (the ATM sign said funds were available the next business day) and I thought I followed it. The bank used a semantic trick (we really meant 24 business hours) to technically obey the law, but still steal my money. This is my response to anyone who uses that argument: I will not accept it as justification for unethical behavior. Bottom line, the money was always "available" no matter what the policy or the computer says, and the people who are supposedly in control should have done the right thing and returned my money.

I have one apology to make. To all pedophiles out there, I am truly sorry I compared you in any way to the President of US Bank Saint Paul. I was way out of line to imply that.

The Bottom Line...

John writes:

"{sigh}. How many times do I have to say it? In my particular case, the funds to cover my paycheck were drawn from the very same bank branch. Whenever I read these long, drawn-out justifications for stealing from me, that little fact is always omitted."

I'll make it short and to the point...

The ATM doesn't know what's being deposited inside it. Unless you can come up with a way to tell the difference(in which case you'd become a VERY rich man and could probably own a bank) I'm afraid you're stuck.

Since there simply isn't enough time for a bank to go back, check ALL ATM deposits and adjust those that were US Bank check deposits and still stay within the processing "rules" THEY have to follow.

You never mentioned whether or not the bank bounced any of your items. I'll bet they gave you the benefit of a doubt and paid them anyhow. Yea... what a baaaad bank. This world would sure be a nicer place if we could ony pick the rules we wanted to play with...

We're never going to see eye to eye on this one and while you seem to understand the rules and it's been explained to you why the rules are the way they are. You just don't like 'em and don't think they should apply to you.

Take care (and I mean that sincerely) and I hope you find a financial institution that better meets you needs.

Sigh . . . .How many times do I have to say it? {sigh}.

Eric says:

"These are cases where the bank actually has the money in hand and has no reason to delay its availability to you. In the case of deposited checks however the bank doesn't actually have the money that it represents until the item is ultimately paid by the bank upon which it is drawn."

{sigh}. How many times do I have to say it? In my particular case, the funds to cover my paycheck were drawn from the very same bank branch. Whenever I read these long, drawn-out justifications for stealing from me, that little fact is always omitted.

The funds were ALWAYS available in reality no matter what the computer said, and doing the right thing merely required the human employees of the bank to override the computer's decision. I was asking for human oversight of an automatic process with a flaw. Stop explaining how the check has to go from here to there until the bank is assured the funds are really available.

Ok...ok...

John,

1. Ok, very well then, I believe that you were courteous and perhaps were not treated as well as you believed you should have been. You said yourself though that they refunded ½ of your fees. They could just have well said no to even that. The fees were not a bank error. Whether you agree or not with how available funds are determined does not change this.

2. So tell me just what ethical obligation the bank has here to refund all of the legitimate charges? The funds availability rule changes were intended to protect both the consumer and the bank. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You rationale implies that just because I believe the speed limits are high enough and I get pulled over for speeding that a cop is doing the “wrong thing” by giving me a ticket. Maybe I'm doing 85 in a 55 but my kid's in the hospital. He cuts me slack and gives me a ticket for a lesser speed. Some would say that he was nice to do that, others would say that under the circumstances he shouldn't do it at all, yet others would say I should have gotten the whole fine – I broke the law. Regardless, that doesn't make the whole police department bad.

3. Yea… but they already cut you some slack by refunding ½ of the fees. If they took into consideration that it was a US Bank check and refunded all of the fees then they would have to do it for every customer that it happens to. Well now, then the policy is pretty much a waste of time. Now, they have to come up with a way to determine the difference at the ATM. They probably went through this thought process and decided that the cost to do so was not justified.

4. Yea.. If you REALLY think you were so wronged… report it. It might come as a surprise to you, but your little analysis of the cost of your account is off base. Actually, managers at US Bank receive incentive not only on how much business they bring into the bank but on how much they retain as well. A manager could be bringing in millions of dollars per quarter, but if those customers are getting ticked off and leaving, that manager won't receive as large of a bonus (or perhaps none at all). This is tracked down to every single checking account each branch has. By keeping your account open, you might be, at some level, be costing the bank a miniscule amount of money, but you're actually helping the manager.

I'm sorry that you don't feel that the rule shouldn't apply to you. Maybe you think it's a stupid rule and it shouldn't apply to anyone. That's entirely your prerogative. But the bank did act in good faith by attempting to find some compromise with you. They went half way and you wouldn't budge at all. In this scenario, who looks worse?

Baaaaad Bank - acting like giving back half the money was "a gift."

Actually, no. The total fees were a combination of individual illegitimate overdraft fees and illegitimate returned check fees for each electronic transaction. My payments were completed by the system the next day after the bank branch's left hand informed the branch's right hand that the money was right there all along (after deducting hundreds of dollars, of course). Furthermore, I was charged penalties that showed up on subsequent billings for supposedly writing bad checks by most of the payees.

I don't thank a thief for giving back half of the stolen money. I demand the return of the rest.

But, that was a good imitation of the guy I dealt with at US Bank that day. Especially acting like giving back half the money was "a gift."

The traffic stop analogy was good, but analogies are almost always a weak argument. Imagine the analogy that could be made from "the policy comes from above and I was only following orders."

As to who comes off looking better, that was never really my concern by logging on here. Initially, it was just to support the thread starter and relate my story. I guess it is up to the people who read these exchanges to decide whether or not US Bank is the bank for them. I'm not trying to convince anyone that entrusting ME with their hard earned pay is a good thing. Have you convinced them? How many people reading this say to themselves, "Y'know, I should bank at US Bank because I'll have the security of knowing that even if my actual circumstances don't match policy, the hundreds or thousands of dollars that will be taken from me will fall within a legal technicality."

The dogged insistence that an act that causes great damage was legal, and is therefore OK, is indicative of a concern with an appearance of propriety in the face bad behavior. Criminals commonly have a rationalization for their actions.

And, yes, the rules apply to me when I actually break them. If I really wrote a bunch of checks knowing that there was no money behind them, that would have been a bad thing and I should have suffered the consequences. When I take the statement "funds may not be available until the next business day" in good faith and schedule payments that are supported by money that is available in reality, except throught he magic of policy manipulation, that is not breaking the rules.

I don't need heartfelt best wishes, I need my money. they refuse to listen to the specifics of the situation

Standard US Bank response. Refuse to listen to the specifics of the situation that make it unique and show a flaw in policy, fall back on that policy, blame the customer, and tell him if he doesn't like it he can go to another bank (but, have a nice day).

Excuses, excuses, excuses.

Ok.....try this...

John, [contact] me [Place your comments below and be sure to include your FULL contact information so Rip-off Report can contact you.]

I'll look into your situation and see what I can do.

-Eric

OK... you may contact me

Um . . . . not certain as the host site seems to be an intermediary. Do I just type e-mail contact information and the site deletes it, but sends it on? Not sure. Anyway:

[Place your comments below and be sure to include your FULL contact information so Rip-off Report can contact you.] you may contact me. Is that enough?

Thank You

I appreciate the offer, but do you have the authority to make things right?

John, try this...

I asked the site to forward to you my contact information but apparently they don't want to do so. I can see however that that could get a little too busy for them.

Find me at the Northtown Office. Ask for me by first name. I can't commit to refunding the remiander of your fees without more information. What I will commit to you however is a second-look, without lecture of quotes or policy.

You have nothing to loose.

-Eric

Again, thanks - I would prefer some assurance that you

I appreciate the offer. However, before I take a 1/2 day or so off work to travel all the way up to Northtown (Blaine? Spring Lake Park area?)and back, I would prefer some assurance that you, as an employee of another branch across town, have the authority and ability to overrule the decision of the downtown Saint Paul branch management and return my money.

I'm just trying not to waste time and effort (other than the down time I spend here). If you have the authority to assist me, it may be worth looking into.

Hmmm... Do I also have the authority to refund? Yes

John,

The best answer I can give is this:

Do I have the authority to refund service charges? Yes.

Do I also have the authority to refund the remainder of your fees? Yes.

Can I commit to doing so? Nope. There's a lot more information that I need first (all of which is FAR to confidential for a forum such as this and probably not appropriate fro other than a face to face conversation)- and it bears a longer conversation/explanation. Don't misunderstand, I believe that you have been honest and forthright here in your posts here but as simple as it seems to you it is a little more complicated.

Come one! 1/2 day? No way! 20 - 30 min out, 20 - 30 min back and hour or so meeting... in by 9, home in tie for brunch! Besides, you get all the fantastic scenery en route! ;-D

A Few More Thoughts...I wish John hadn't hadn't incurred the fees

After a lot of consideration I have decided to post one more time regarding John's situation. I will preface my remarks by saying that I wish John hadn't hadn't incurred the fees, and if I had the authority to make it better for him I would. I believe that basic customer service is much more important than a few fees. It is also costly to lose a customer, so weighing the fees against the loss, there could actually be a more negative impact to the bank for not refunding the money.

Anyway, my thoughts here are triggered by John's insistance that nobody is listening to or caring about the specifics of his situation.

First, I would say that John is also not understanding some specifics of check processing that pertain even to his "unique" situation. This being: the deposits are taken from the ATM and delivered to an check processing facility. The branch employees have nothing to do with reviewing the deposits, checking on funds availablity, or posting items.

The deposits and checks do not clear any accounts until the morning after the items are taken to the processing facility. Depending on what time of day the items arrive for processing, they may not post until an additional day has passed. It doesn't matter if the check that is in the deposit is from the very same branch, one across the street, or across the state. It still posts the next day or the day after. That is when the funds are withdrawn from the account the check is drawn against.

John wants the branch to agree with him that since the check was drawn on the same bank and/or branch, that he should have received immediate credit and not be subject to the normal processing time. Even if the branch were to open up the ATM deposit and look at it, they wouldn't just give credit based on the fact that the check being deposited is drawn on their own branch. They have no way of knowing, for instance, that there aren't 10 or 100 other checks written against that same account that will also post on the same day as the check you are depositing.

When the bank processes millions of deposits per day, there is no way to special handle them. That is why every customer is subject to the same rules and guidelines.

John feels that if the bank would just listen to the specifics of his situation they would realize that his case is unique, and they would fix the problem. I agree that the branch should listen, and probably should give John what he asks for, in the interest of customer service. On the other hand, how many people do you think go into their respective branches each day, each with their own "unique" situation? And every one of them also feels that for some special reason, the policy shouldn't apply to them and their fees and charges should be reversed.

John, don't believe for a second that you are the only one asking for special treatment. I'm not saying you don't have a good argument, but you are in fact asking for special treatment. Your situation did not result from an error on the part of the bank. You misunderstood a stated policy that was perhaps ambiguously worded. I think the bank should take some responsibility for that. I am just asking you to understand the the branches see many, many people that have fees charged against their accounts and many, if not most, want to fight it. And they are not all polite and reasonable when doing so, additionally, in most cases the fees are unabiguously justified. The bank simply can't reverse fees for everybody who asks.

As much as you want the bank to see your side of things, you also need to be able to see their side as well. Good luck getting your money back (and I mean that sincerely).

Cashing Checks

I have one more thought regarding cashing checks at the teller. It has been mentioned that if you take a U.S. Bank check to a U.S. Bank teller, you can get cash for it right then and there. How does this differ from the processing time if you deposit the check? Simply this: the teller can place a hold against the funds from the cashed check.

That prevents a bunch of other checks from being cashed at multiple branches and overdrawing the account. The funds are no longer available. This does not happen with deposits, even when handed to a teller as opposed to being placed in an ATM. The teller does not even review the items being deposited to see where they come from.

As a matter of fact, people frequently deposit things that are not even checks, and the tellers don't notice -- items such as coupons, check stubs, gift certificates, etc. The teller does not spend much time looking at your deposit. That is why cashing a check is different than depositing it, and different funds availability rules apply.

-the difference between "we didn't make an error" and "let's make this right."

I'm not a US Bank employee. I'm not a bank employee. I'm just a guy who wants to keep his money.

It seems to me the tellers check things pretty thoroughly. They stamp the back of the check, write down my driver license info (in fact, they do that even if you put the information on for them). They check to see that the funds are "available" in the account from which the money comes. I'd say they're pretty careful.

All I'm saying is that despite what the computer says, despite the match-up of one's and zero's, despite the policy, human employees can look in retrospect and determine that the reality of the situation doesn't match the computer's conclusion.

Consider a bank vault in a bank branch (I realize it isn't this simple, yet, it is). There is a shelf, a small portion of which represents my account. Across the room is another shelf which represents my employer's account. We have accounts at the same bank branch. My shelf is technically empty and my employer's shelf is technically full of cash.

To the computer, doing as it is told, the problem is simple. Empty shelf means no available funds. A human, who can supposedly globally envision things beyond the pedantically sequential "order" of things, can imaginatively look at the situation as a whole and say "oh, yeah, he wasn't trying to write bad checks, the money was there all the time. All we had to do was admit the money was there. It just had to be moved from one shelf to the other. But, it was there all the time."

That is the difference between "we didn't make an error" and "let's make this right."

Eric, I'm looking at my schedule for a morning off.

check kiting

I am not going to go into a big speal about fees or any such thing. All I am going to say is that there is a reason that all larger banks hold check deposits for funds verifications. This reason is called check kiting. What is check kiting? It is having more then one checking account with different banks. It is when someone writes a check from one bank to the other bank when funds are not available.

Due to the old system, she would see the credit in her other account rather quickly. Then she would write a check from her second account to the first account to cover it before a check bonced. Basically playing on the principle of staying ahead of the sytems. This is not only a loss for the bank but a loss for everyone.

Most banks have come up with this new system to stop these types of check kiting from happening. Bottom line basically comes down to this.......never write a check until funds are actually available in your account.

You take a gamble on credits being deposited prior to checks and sometimes you win/sometimes you loose. Also if you look past the "wo is me attitude" you will see that the reason you are charged fees is because the bank is being charged fees from the other banks when your checks were wrote out to.

No bank is going to keep taking a $29.00 hit everyday you have no money in your account and not charge you a fee to recoup some of the money lost. Grow up and get over it.

I'm in the same boat John was

I'm in just about the exact same situation John was. I also have a checking account with US Bank, and I've been with the bank ever since it was the local First National. My mom and dad have been using that bank since they were children.

I work in a place that's half an hour from the nearest US Bank branch. I deposited my paycheck in an area credit union ATM, as the credit union and US Bank are both in the same city, I assumed that the funds would be available pretty quickly. I've done the same thing in the past and my funds would get deposited without much of a delay. Unfortunately one of the tires on my car went bad that same day, and I had to get it replaced. I decided to get all four tires replaced because I had that set for so long that they were in poor condition. I used my check card to pay the $387 it cost. If I had known I would've just replaced the one tire. But I had no idea that this would happen. It was not something that could've waited. What was I supposed to do? Drive on a compact spare that's worn down to nothing until it blew out and causes an accident?

So I had compounding overdraft charges since last week Friday. And US Bank will only refund half the charges if I open an overdraft protection account. That won't even cover the overdraft they now caused in my account.

I have already filed a complaint with the OCC. I am going to try one last time and have my dad see if he can talk to someone at the bank as my dad's done a good amount of business with the bank over the years. And maybe if whoever he talks to does a sufficent job of apologizing I will stay with US Bank.

Yes, I have accidently overdrawn the account in the past. So I took the $30 dollar hit without complaint. But now it's being used as an excuse to steal from me when I was not overdrawn in the first place. Steal might sound harsh, but that's what I feel it is.

And if some moralizing US Bank employee or anyone else thinks that I can be talked into backing down or thinking that it's ok for US Bank to nickle and dime me out of all my money, you had best think again. I will not be satisfied until every single penny that was stolen from me is refunded. And if I have to end my relationship with the bank, then that is what I will do.

I would like to thank Eric for saying that managers are rated on customer retention. Because the manager will lose my business, and I'll do my best to ask my mom and dad to switch their personal accounts, and for dad to switch his business accounts to someplace else. And I'll be doing the same with all my relatives, friends, the local chamber of commerece - in short anyone who'll listen to me.

But there is a way to avoid that. Give me back my money. Maybe I'll stay, maybe I won't. But I'll not mount a one man campaign to have people leave US Bank.

Many Thanks

I decided not to grow up.
I decided not to get over it.

My complaint has been satisfactorily resolved and I can no longer recommend against banking with US Bank.

Thanks to Eric for showing me that there are people in US Bank management who do listen to customer concerns and act on them. It is reasonable to assume that there are other management figures within the US Bank system who are also willing to help solve problems. I appreciate his help in resolving my particular complaint.

My issue with US Bank involved specific circumstances that are not present in most cases.