FIFTH THIRD BANK charged over $800 in overdraft fees and then took my social security check; posted largest check first in order to collect additional fees Charlotte, North Carolina

The bank has placed their people inside of the BBB and the Attorney General's office. Going to them won't help because their spies will simply delete your report.

The only way to win this one is for you to start a class action lawsuit. You must speak for those who cannot speak and stand for those who cannot stand. It's time to let these banks know that we are not animals to be used for their pleasure but that they are the animals who shall pleasure us.

Lead us, OP. Lead us to victory.

p.s. Some people may post some nonsense about check registers and that you shouldn't overdraft your account. Ignore them. They are a group of fat, sweaty guys sitting in smoke filled bank basements waiting in front of glowing computer monitors for people to overdraft their account.

Edgeman,

My hat's off to you. That post of yours is the best rebuttal ever on ROR. I can't even come close to topping that sarcasm.

1. Don't buy anything you don't need.

2. Don't use online banking to rely on your balance.

3. Balance your checkbook

It is your fault you committed an overdraft.  Read your banks policy on overdraft charges.  If you do not pay them back in 4 days they can start charging you per day for over draft charges.  You did this yourself.  The banks will win. 

You must always go to the branched you opened the account at.  Try calling them, being calm and polite.  Be very patient and explain to them your current situation. They will then ask their manager if they can reverse the charges, if not all of them some of them.  Being polite with them can get you very far.   

So, the bank takes someones social security check and it's a big joke.

Anyhow..by the bank re sequencing and manipulating your transactions..it apparently caused you to have overdrafts fees for transactions that did have the funds at the time of the transaction. If you read through the ripoff reports you will see this is a practice done by many banks...Bank of America..Wachovia to name a couple.

Now that you are aware the bank will do this..it goes without saying that you have got to be very careful..with you being on SS makes you a prime target for this scam.

I can assume you are not a child so I will not talk to you like one, I think you are aware that you overdrafted and are going to get a fee so no need to dwell on that.

If this is the first time this has happened to you..most likely you can get at least a 50% reimbursement of the fees..you need to be polite to whomever you are dealing with since anyone at the bank is able to return any or all fees..but for me it took going to the branch manager..I was fully reimbursed. But I have the time and patience to deal with them..you may not. There is a chance you will get none of it back.

It seems this practice of re sequencing and manipulating transactions is legal..be it unethical and a rip off. I was upset when it happened to me and some people did respond to my report in condescending sarcastic ways..even as far as getting very personal with insults. I don't know why some get their jollies kicking others when they are down on a forum..perhaps they were bullied around a lot when they were younger so they can bully people here hiding like cowards behind a monitor completly anonomous. But what they say here gives no soulution to the problem..they just enjoy salting the wounds.

I do know a law firm that is launching an investigation into the banks that are doing the re-sequencing scam. I can't post any phone numbers or websites here,,but I will paste the following info and you can choose if you want to participate. I know that if i was caught speeding and pulled over, I would understand I will be given a speeding ticket and have to accept it..the punishment fit the crime. But..if the officer gave me 10 speeding tickets..I would certainly be a fool not to try to fight the 9 extras ones. Best of luck to you..I hope the hardship is not too rough on you this month.

If you google "Finkelstein Thompson LLP" you can find contact info there to help with the "investigation"...

It is alleged that some banks, are in violation of 12 U.S.C. 4303(b)(1) for their failure to disclose that the condition precedent of a pre-existing overdraft could cause the assessment of additional overdraft fees.  Instead, the banks have been lying to consumers that the condition precedent was insufficient funds.

[The true reason why you were assessed the additional overdraft fees that you did NOT cause is because you actually had a pre-existing overdraft in your account that the bank used to manipulate your account to create additional overdraft fees by a creative accounting practice].

[The bank then falsely accused you of being at fault for the additional overdrafts you didn’t cause by lying to you about having insufficient funds in your account.  In fact, without the pre-existing overdraft(s) in your account (condition precedent), it would have been IMPOSSIBLE for the bank’s creative accounting practice to have assessed additional overdraft fees against you that you did not create].

[That is why the bank engages in tactics to make you overdraft your account. For example, the bank will not immediately post your correct available balance or the bank will drop a hold on your account to only apply it later to make you believe you have more available funds in your account then you do. The bank will also split two pre-existing overdrafts created on the same date so it can create additional overdraft fees on two different posting dates instead of one].

I see you still jump at the chance to mount a soapbox to anyone who comes up with the same misconceptions and wrong thinking that you do regarding the banking system while  waxing the victim stance, Ronny... Worse, you then proceed to misinform these people and lead them down the path of your ideals and mistaken perceptions.

The reason people are/were using you as a net.punching.bag, is because of your unbelievable arrogance in the face of the facts. Your "I'm always right, and you are all wrong, always, as well as being bank defenders and/or bank employees" is the height of pomposity and smacks of a kind of persecution complex. Put a little hypocrisy into the mix, and we have how you come off to people. You say one thing and do another, or better yet, you claim you're going to conduct yourself in a certain way, and although you may not exactly go back on your word per se, you find sneaky ways to just skirt your word, attacking on the oblique via making insinuations about those you perceive as your "enemies".

You're so see through...

Worse, you fuel, encourage and support mistaken perceptions to people who are already obviously confused about bank fees and overdrafts, giving them a false sense of entitlement and empowerment, enticing them to act in a manner contra-indicative to their financial well being. In one thread you agreed with Robert that actually keeping an accurate register was, in fact, a good idea that you agreed with, but you make no mention of it, for example, in this thread, instead running the very concept down, using the idea only as a springboard to gripe about your butthurt at being pwned. I mean, hey... why bother saying anything that will actually help people, when you can get your rocks off about your "mistreatment" that you yourself enabled?

In a way, the real employee of the banks, helping them make money... is you, Ronny. Do you get kickbacks for that?

Say hello to the Captain for me, will ya?

I have no idea what you are talking about...and neither can anyone else I would imagine.

If you please could respond or rebut regarding anything I stated...or back up what your point is other then try to insult me..which is not cutting it.

Thanks..

However, there may be some issue with your English comprehension skills.

Don't presume to speak for others, just because you have a marked lack of understanding of the language, either. That doesn't cut it.

Maybe instead of hanging around ROR, keening about your erroneous theorems regarding your alleged "re-sequencing scam" and misguiding people to your train of thought, your time would be better spent at a nice community college somewhere, enriching your English (note how that's capitalized?) skills so that you can hold a conversation and/or debate that at least appears to have some manner of redeeming intellectual value?

It'd certainly beat your continuous frothings regarding your "world view" on banks as pertains to the "Cult of Ronny".

Oh, didn't you say something regarding your posting here and how your posts were going to decline in number in the near future? Or was that all smoke and mirrors too?

Why do you come on ROR to personally attack people? I am sure you can find something more constructive to do with your time if you really focused.

The only person I can see being presumptuous is you. If you spent more time trying to help people instead of posting nonsense and picking through posts to find grammatical errors, I think you might find you can be of some actual use.

So, instead of "frothing" your venom here..why don't you do a little research.

There is no smoke and mirrors in my posts. My posts did decline..and now that we have a law firm investigating the RE-SEQUENCING SCAM..I am simply alerting people to it and letting them know they are not alone. That simple..no froth or whatever your feeble mind is misconceiving..you really need take a deep breath and count to 10 or something..you seem a little angry..and you are misdirecting it.

If you feel anything I am stating in my posts or rebuts are wrong..fine...rebut it. But to just throw insults really does not make you appear very intelligent. Perhaps it is smoke screening the issue at hand since I have to waste space defending myself to you...but honestly it does nothing to help anyone here....so...

If you are not a designated moderator of this forum..or a bank employee..or a consumer who also feels they were ripped off...what is it exactly that you are posting here to prove? and why?

I look forward to a mature, coherent answer..but will not hold my breath.

Ronny, I'm not sure where you go from here.  Having the customer go to the BBB (a useless exercise) and the attorney general (even more useless) to complain should be criticized since neither can effect any change.  Consider this - in order to rack up more than $800 in fees takes a lot of overdrafts.  A whole lot of them.  Even if she were overdrafted for 30 days (she wasn't), it means she had over $560 in overdrafts.  For someone who purportedly lives on $800 per month, it means she had over 15 transactions that she spent money on that she did not have, and this assumes she was overdrafted for 30 days.  It means there were far more than the 15 transactions she spent money on that she didn't have.  It meant she knew she was in an overdraft situation and continued to spend money....I don't know how one defends that.

For someone to live on $800 per month is sad.  For someone who doesn't keep track of spending his/her money is far more sad.  It is the latter that should be examined because that is where the OP has opened herself up when she lodges the complaint.

I believe that your post was intended for ReactorCore? It makes much more sense when viewed that way as you reference actions that I haven't taken (picking apart grammar errors, frothing venom and mentioning smoke and mirrors). If you want to see who authored any given post, simply look to the upper left hand corner of each post.

Everyone on here so far is jumping on the poster without having considered exactly how the bank might have screwed her. Consider the following situations and see if it changes your mind.

All checks and or debits were presented in the following order below. The Account holder is checking her online account and watching the checks credit from her account and her account should never have been over drafted by more than one nsf if any, The following debits I used directly from my own account just changing the amounts to more accurately portray the situation.

Account Balance is $900

Check 1 $4.67- Lunch

Check 2 $79.88 Groceries

Check 3 $ 15.00 gas

Check 4 $ 21.99 oil change

Check 5 $ 4.00milk and bread

Check 6 $ 80.00 electric bill

Check 7 $ 10.00 Dr. copay

Check 8 $ 20.00 cash written to self

Check 9 $ 13.87 Walmart

Check 10 $ 49.58 Gas Bill Company

Check 11 $ 111.29 Insurance

Check 12 $ 89.98 Emergency Auto Repair

Ssi check should have deposited already but landlord deposits check early or cashes in person on 31rst despite check written for first so the following check clears on the 31rst along with the rest of the checks.

Check 13 $ 500.00 rent check, Dated for the first

No she should only be over drawn by the $100.00 if anything, because the bank cashed a check early. Even had she deliberately written the check to bounce, she would only have one over draft fee. But Say, the bank reverses the order of presentation and Presents the checks in order from Largest to smallest.

So her account now looks like this.

900 Balance

-Check 13 $ 500.00 rent check, Dated for the first 400

Balance: 400

-Check 11 $ 111.29 Insurance

Balance: 288.71

-Check 12 $ 89.98 Emergency Auto Repair

Balance: 198.73

-Check 6 $ 80.00 electric bill

Balance: 118.73

-Check 2 $79.88 Groceries

Balance: 38.85

-Check 10 $ 49.58 Gas Bill Company NSF $35.00

Balance: -45.58

-Check 4 $ 21.99 oil change NSF $35.00

Balance: -102.57

-Check 8 $ 20.00 cash written to self NSF $35.00

Balance: -157.57

-Check 3 $ 15.00 gas NSF $35.00

Balance: -207.57

-Check 9 $ 13.87 Walmart NSF $35.00

Balance: -256.44

-Check 7 $ 10.00 Dr. copay NSF $35.00

Balance: -301.44

Check 1 $4.67- Lunch NSF $35.00

Balance: -341.11

Check 5 $ 4.00 milk and bread NSF $35.00

Balance: -380.11

Now she wont have another deposit for the rest of the month because she recieves Ssi Disability. So she is being charged

7 bucks a day for 28 Days which is a Additional $196.00

Ending Balance is -576.11

Sis check is say $575.00 ending balance after the bank screws her is 1.11

Now because of one goof up, which come on people we all have goof ups!! She is being charged 576.11 no frigging way! That is completely not fair. Had the bank presented the check to the account in the order they were recieved she would have only need to pay the $100.00 plus 35.00 which would have immeadiately been deducted from her Ssi check. the next month. So imagine you Wrote all these checks. And you watch all of the checks but one show up in your online account. Everythings good and then your Car breaks down. The Mechanic wants cash or check. You dont have that much cash with you but between cash and check you have enough to pay the balance. So you write a check for the whole amount and immeadiately go to the bank and make a deposit to cover the check. The deposit credits and shows you your new balance is 20.00 over the amount needed to clear all checks. Now say the next week you check to see if the mechanics check cleared and you find yourself oweing over 800.00 to the bank with over a dozen Nsf charges for every bill and check you wrote having bounced. Come to find out the Bank changed the deposit credit date to the next day on purpose!!!! Then changed the post dates to suit themselves to making money! So your largest checks come in first even though they suppoosedly cleared 5 days before the mechanics check was written and by the time you get to the Small debit and credits for lunch your wracking up $35.00 Nsf charges on over a dozen small 2-6 dollar chanrges!! That folks is how she got screwed! She may not be entirely responsible after all.

Everyone does realize that the Banks are failing because of their own greed and the crazy $100 million bonus's right? WHo do you think pays those Bonuses? NSF FEES!

Kymberly, you can't come here and claim that because someone screws up, that they shouldn't be penalized to the extent they should.  Sorry - nobody should buy that for even a moment.  It does not take a rocket scientist, a brain surgeon, or anything of the sort to keep an accurate register.  It takes the education of an elementary school student and the discipline to keep an accurate register.

In this case, we know VERY well the huge number of transactions this person incurred while in an overdraft position; giving me your scenario about forgetting one transaction is pointless because the facts of the case don't support your scenario.  If this is what happened to you - that's also too bad because that's also on you for managing to not record the only important transaction you're going to record in a month to your register.

At this point, if a bank earns NSF fees, the only place where one can place fault is on the account holder.  A bank can resort every transaction highest to lowest and post debits before credits - if you have enough money in the account, the bank can't overdraw your account.  Only the account holder can do that....  Even the courts have found this process as legal and have basically told a recently decertified class that they need to exercise some due diligence - which means keeping an accurate register.  Since none of them did - they were decertified as a class and the suit tossed out.

Got my rebuttal opponents mixed up..Regardless it's usually either yourself, Reactorcore or Robert. Not to lump you all into one category, but it does seem all three of you have the most to say regarding these specific re sequencing ripoff reports, with the least advice to do with the subject of the ripoff...which is re sequencing of transactions which cause additional fees...not overdrafts per say or how to prevent them.

Any condescending statements, comments, insults (personal or typographical/ grammatical error related) or rebuttals that do not directly deal with that subject matter..are not of any use to the posters. So I ask again..if not a bank employee..a consumer who has been victimized, or an authorized forum moderator..what is the point to any other comments from uninvolved outside spectators?

I also ask (although do not expect compliance), that when someone lodges a report regarding the ADDITIONAL fees that were charged due to re squencing of transactions..when the OP is fully aware and admits openly to causing an overdraft, that they not be given advice on how to handle finances and bank registers, and that they not have to be subjected to belittling and insult.

It is a given that everyone needs to be aware of overdrafting if they do not want an overdraft fee. But since it is unrealistic to think no one will ever overdraft..why not try to do something to help consumers not be ripped off by re sequencing. let the punishment fit the crime. You overdraft once..you pay once..not 10 times. If a debit card is accepted as a form of payment at a given time..and funds were available at that time..the transaction is paid and done for. It should not be manipulated into a fee just because the banks like to do it that way..not because the banks are such great humanitarians and don't want our mortgage payment to be late (so if the highest transaction was 4 dollars I guess the bank thinks that is a mortgage payment), and not because of the nonsense that the bank claims they could not have known about the transaction due to a "hold", when the bank had to know about it because it is on our statements..electronic money transfers are very fast..there are no funds secretly lost in cyberspace..the bank always knows when a card is swiped, they just choose to ignore/manipulate the time and manipulate the sequence.

If you read though this and other reports you will see that not everyone is "jumping" on the poster. As a matter of fact, I get jumped on more then anyone because of the fact that I agree with the posters that the banks have ripped them off..and I offer what help I can.

I can tell you right now from my brief experience here that YOU may get jumped on and ripped apart from trying to defend the OP. Here is an example of what you may hear...

1)That you should not use your debit card for small purchases. So in other words never mind the convenience of having a card to begin with (or your RIGHT to use it for smaller purchases)...because the bank will rip you off sideways from here to eternity..you now must carry cash. I am being sarcastic of course..but since some volunteer bank defenders will tell you this..be ready. because remember we are all unable to handle our finances...that is what they see the problem as..not that the bank screwed people. And the financial wizards who come on here to advise us morons how to balance our checkbooks..be prepared for the "profound" suggestions and advice.

2) "Ssi check should have deposited already but landlord deposits check early or cashes in person on 31rst despite check written for first so the following check clears on the 31rst along with the rest of the checks."

Here they will tell you it's not the banks fault this happened. And that is true. BUT..this is the catalyst that is going to bring down the avalanche of overdraft fees..and it is a significant point. The point being it is not about the consumer being charged an overdraft fee for this..because a single fee due to the landlord depositing the check early may be refunded by the landlord..and if not one fee is not going to wipe out your SSI payment..THE BANK is going to do that..and if they give any refunds at all..it will be a time consuming nightmare..but most likely they will fight tooth and nail to not refund a dime..and will FULLY blame the consumer for this.

3) Everything you posted makes sense to me..but some people are not fair minded..they blame the consumer for trusting online banking..and not noting this re sequencing practice mentioned in our terms and conditions...you know...in other words we were IDIOTS for trusting our banks..seems to be the bottom line (sarcastically of course). And correct they will make BILLIONS off these ADDITIONAL RIP OFF fees..and the officers will receive nice bonuses...while some of their customers go without their SSI checks due to an error or oversight of a single transaction which overdrafted..and which the bank then decided to manipulate other transactions to fleece the consumer out of every penny they can get..and this to me is a rip off...avoidable?...perhaps, but not always, things happen in life that can cause an overdraft..how much do we need to pay if this happens? It's never enough for these banks.

Howdy Jim from Anaheim..we are neighbors. I will respond neighborly, you seem like a reasonable fellow.

"Ultimately - The Customer Did This To Herself"

Perhaps you can look at it that way..but in my eyes it is the bank that ultimately charged all kinds of fees. Let us not forget that due to the manipulation and re sequencing of transactions that many banks practice, there could have very well been funds for all but ONE transaction that would cause the bank to charge the fees for transactions that did have the funds at the time..the manipulations is what caused this many fees..and that is where we feel the ripoff is. We don't have to see eye to eye on it, and perhaps never will..but many of us feel it is wrong, and apparently from the amount of reports on this very subject..and more added daily (not to mention how many consumers have this complaint that do not lodge a report here..I am witnessing it is a lot)..many people are not aware of this until it is too late. I will not go as far to say that every consumer is wise with their finances..or keeps an accurate register..I have no reason to disagree with that..but..it still does not make the re sequencing any less of a ripoff..and I am hoping something can be done.

"Ronny, I'm not sure where you go from here.  Having the customer go to the BBB (a useless exercise) and the attorney general (even more useless) to complain should be criticized since neither can effect any change". 

I never have requested any customer report to the BBB or attorney general regarding this issue (although the OP wants to report there). I have requested they contact their congressman (we want the word out that we as consumers feel this practice is excessively harsh and is causing additional financial hardships during an economic crisis), and I have left contact info for those who wish to participate in an "investigation" by a law firm that is looking into the legality of re-sequencing and transaction manipulation. Other then that anyone is free to post here if they feel they were ripped off..and rebuttal is welcome as well..but to tell someone keeping an accurate register or to read their terms and conditions does nothing to help the issue at hand..which was they were over charged fees..many additional fees on top of the legitimate overdraft fee. So..stating that if the consumer never over drafted, they would not have to worry about transaction manipulation and fees is essentially true..the reality of it is people will overdraft..(billions of dollars in additional fees to the bank..you think they would not notice if that gravy train stopped coming in?), and many consumers would like some kind of protection from getting fleeced. I have used the analogy before of if you were speeding and got caught..so you get a fine and pay it. But if the officer decided to give you 9 additional fines for the same offense..any normal reasonable person would fight it. Guilty of speeding??? Yes....but let the punishment fit the crime. Sure it is easy and not exactly "profound" to state if you never speed, you would never have to worry about tickets..but we don't live in a fantasy land of perfection..we live in a world where people will speed..and people will overdraft..nothing will change that..but it does not mean we should allow anyone to charge arbitrary or manipulated fees for the sole purpose of greed.


"Consider this - in order to rack up more than $800 in fees takes a lot of overdrafts.  A whole lot of them.  Even if she were overdrafted for 30 days (she wasn't), it means she had over $560 in overdrafts.  For someone who purportedly lives on $800 per month, it means she had over 15 transactions that she spent money on that she did not have, and this assumes she was overdrafted for 30 days.  It means there were far more than the 15 transactions she spent money on that she didn't have.  It meant she knew she was in an overdraft situation and continued to spend money....I don't know how one defends that."

Speculation unless we see her statement. She states the bank took the largest check first in order to gain the additional fees. Now I am not able to defend the particulars without seeing a statement..but it would appear she was victim to transaction manipulation..be it one or 50, be it in the terms or not...it is not right.

"For someone to live on $800 per month is sad.  For someone who doesn't keep track of spending his/her money is far more sad.  It is the latter that should be examined because that is where the OP has opened herself up when she lodges the complaint."

I will not debate this point..Once again I do not know the specifics. Either way I don't expect the bank to have any compassion..after all they are a business, not a charity..but if any manipulation of her transactions took place to cause additional fees...many of us feel she has a case, simply put.

Ronny wrote: “Got my rebuttal opponents mixed up.”

Response: In that case, I advise greater attention to detail on your part. I think that you'll find this to be a helpful trait in life.

Ronny wrote: “but it does seem all three of you have the most to say regarding these specific re sequencing ripoff reports, with the least advice to do with the subject of the ripoff...which is re sequencing of transactions which cause additional fees...not overdrafts per say or how to prevent them.”

Response: Are you serious?! Learning how to avoid overdrafting a checking account is KEY to avoiding overdraft fees. You won't be charged one, then or a hundred overdraft fees if you simply stay within your account balance in the first place. The vast majority of account holders do not overdraft their account and they are subject to the same resequencing that the OP is. The trick is to get that minority of people who do pay overdraft fees to a point where they don't pay pay those fees anymore.

The BBB won't help them with that. Neither will the Attorney General and a class action lawsuit definitely won't (though it will make the lawyers happy when they get paid). It takes far less effort to not overdraft in the first place than to take all of these actions that won't change anything and leave the fee-payers back at square one.

Ronny wrote “Any condescending statements, comments, insults (personal or typographical/ grammatical error related) or rebuttals that do not directly deal with that subject matter..are not of any use to the posters. “

Response: Are you seriously going to lecture others on condescending statements, comments, insults and rebuttals that don't deal directly with the subject matter? YOU of all people?! Kettle, thy name is black.

Ronny wrote: “So I ask again..if not a bank employee..a consumer who has been victimized, or an authorized forum moderator..what is the point to any other comments from uninvolved outside spectators? “

Response: If people choose to stop overdrafting their accounts, then they won't be donating as much of their money to the banks. THAT is the point.

Ronny wrote: “I also ask (although do not expect compliance), that when someone lodges a report regarding the ADDITIONAL fees that were charged due to re squencing of transactions..when the OP is fully aware and admits openly to causing an overdraft, that they not be given advice on how to handle finances and bank registers, and that they not have to be subjected to belittling and insult. “

Response: Okay.

Ronny wrote: “It is a given that everyone needs to be aware of overdrafting if they do not want an overdraft fee. But since it is unrealistic to think no one will ever overdraft..why not try to do something to help consumers not be ripped off by re sequencing. “

Response: Oh, come on. Account holders can choose not to overdraft their accounts if they really want to. I'm not particularly good at math. If I can do it (as well as the vast majority of account holders), so can anybody else. By the way, advice on avoiding overdrafts IS helping people to “not be ripped off” by resequencing.

Ronny wrote: “let the punishment fit the crime. You overdraft once..you pay once..not 10 times. “

Response: And if you overdraft ten times, you pay ten fees.

Ronny wrote: “If a debit card is accepted as a form of payment at a given time..and funds were available at that time..the transaction is paid and done for. It should not be manipulated into a fee just because the banks like to do it that way..not because the banks are such great humanitarians and don't want our mortgage payment to be late (so if the highest transaction was 4 dollars I guess the bank thinks that is a mortgage payment), and not because of the nonsense that the bank claims they could not have known about the transaction due to a "hold", when the bank had to know about it because it is on our statements..electronic money transfers are very fast..there are no funds secretly lost in cyberspace..the bank always knows when a card is swiped, they just choose to ignore/manipulate the time and manipulate the sequence. “

Response: Take all of that up with the merchants because the bank can't process those transactions until the merchant actually submits the charge.

Ronny said, "and not because of the nonsense that the bank claims they could not have known about the transaction due to a "hold", when the bank had to know about it because it is on our statements..electronic money transfers are very fast..there are no funds secretly lost in cyberspace..the bank always knows when a card is swiped, they just choose to ignore/manipulate the time and manipulate the sequence."

   I've posted this on similar threads, but apparently you haven't caught on yet.  The bank may know that you swiped your card within minutes of the transaction, BUT they will not know the (all important) actual amount of the transaction until it is posted by the merchant.  Usually days later.

   I looked at my account this morning and there are a couple of good examples.  One transaction is from the gas station.  The "pending" amount shows $1.00, but my check register knows that the real amount is $43.40.  Another transaction is from a restaurant.  The "pending" amount is $47.40, but my check register knows that I added a tip and the true amount is $58.00.   That's $53 that my bank does not know about that will hit my account sometime this week.

  So, you could say that I have $53 that is "secretly lost in cyberspace".

Never in my life have I ever witnessed such a whining, crying person so afraid to grow up and advocate responsibility. You seriously blame the bank for this moron overdrafting the account and defaulting on terms and conditions previously signed and agreed upon?

I can't wait to hear your justification for having an automobile repossessed for failing to make payments. Is that the loan company's fault?

How about someone getting their DSL shut off for failing to pay the bill. Must be the phone company's fault, right?

I forgot to pay my taxes. Fault of the consumer? Nope, must be the fault of the IRS.

In short, nothing I ever do wrong is my fault. Every agreement I sign that I do not honor is the other person's fault. When I cheat on my spouse, she forced me to do it.

Now, I rack up $800 in overdraft fees and penalties because I can't demonstrate 3rd grade math skills and balance a checkbook. Me? I will blame the education system. After all, it's their fault for letting me out of school without having the intelligence of an eggplant. That or I blame the bank, which practically forced me at gunpoint to overdraft with their unfair policies.

Ronny, sell crazy someplace else. We're all stocked up here...

You should never post date a check. It is NOT the responsibility of the person you give the check to or the bank to check the date. You should never write a check for more than the balance in your account. Balancing a checkbook is a wonderful tool to get back at the banks and NEVER pay another overdraft fee again.

1) Balance account often

2) Don't write check or use ATM/Debit card for more than you have in your account

If you follow those two simple rules, I promise you won't ever bounce anything even with the banks evil re-sequencing practices. It really shouldn't matter what order items post to your account.

Bottom line, keep a close eye on your account, keep a good balance, and don't write checks that are post dated.