#1 Consumer Suggestion
AUTHOR: J G Shrugged - Austin (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Thursday, July 10, 2008
POSTED: Thursday, July 10, 2008
Normally when I hear "pre-auth" it's referring to a ZERO dollar transaction that occurs to validate the bank account number on an ACH. If they are charging fees on that - well that would be criminal.
But if you swipe your card someplace, they "hold" the money for the merchant when the merchant settles and they owe that money to the merchant. So yes, they have the right to charge a fee if it causes you to be overdraft on available funds. (and they have the right to hold deposits X days according to a schedule with the Fed Reserve)
It isn't a pre-auth. It's the holding of the transaction. if they didn't have to hold it, what would happen if they refused to pay it? YOU would be charged with theft, since you took items from a store without paying for them.
#2 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Dot - LaGrange (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Thursday, July 10, 2008
POSTED: Thursday, July 10, 2008
Consumers who think the current system is unfair should write to the Federal Reserve and complain, and write to their congressional representatives asking them to support the "Consumer Overdraft Protection Fair Practices Act" introduced by Maloney.
No one knows exactly how much money banks are making this way, but there are some good guesses. Fees make up about one-third of bank revenue at this point, and overdraft fees make up a large chunk of that. The Center for Responsible Lending estimates that banks collected $10 billion in overdraft fees during 2005.
Banks ignore customer data
Many banks now allow consumers to withdraw money from the kitty included in the automatic overdraft protection. Bank customers hate this idea only 2 percent said they wanted banks to permit such withdrawals and tack on their overdraft fees. Most said they'd rather the withdrawal was rejected.
Instead, banks seem to be encouraging the use of these short-term loans to get cash, perhaps as a way of competing with the tide-you-over short-term loans offered by various paycheck advance loan retail stores. There are reports that banks even pad the "available balance" displayed on ATMs with amounts from the courtesy overdraft kitty. In other words, a consumer might only have $50 in their account, but an ATM might indicate a $250 "available balance." Then a $100 withdrawal would incur that $39 overdraft fee.
Go to http://redtape.msnbc.com/2007/06/bank_overdraft_.html for the rest of this story
As far as fifth third bank is concerned you may have success filing a complaint through www.cinbbb.org. Choose the url (www.53.com) for the company to complain about and select the headquarters branch.
#3 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Daj6600 - Deltona (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, July 11, 2008
POSTED: Friday, July 11, 2008
I agree with you completely. Since i changed banks to Fifth Third I have had numerous charges for "pending" items. I was not aware of this and cannot see how anyone thinks it is fair or even legal. A few times i have had something post to my account "gas" in particular. Because with Fifth Third when you use your card at the pump it only places a hold on your card for a dollar. So for 3 or 4 days your available balance does not reflect that. Maybe a check register would be better instead of passing the blame. Fine i can accept a NSF fee when it hits my account but to tack one on for each of the other 5 or 6 "pending" items is just wrong. Even if you get the money in before these pending items post they charge you. Banking at Riverside for several years i guess i was spoiled or maybe closer to the way banking should be. If your pending items are in the negative it has no impact or fees as long as you get the money in before these items post. How is it even possible to charge a NSF or UAF fee for money that has not even been taken from your account, as long as it is there when it posts? Thats not even the tip of Fifth Thirds pages of b.s.
#4 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Striderq - Columbia (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, July 11, 2008
POSTED: Friday, July 11, 2008
If the customer doesn't want OD fees, then why doesn't the customer keep a register and stop themselves when their account doesn't have enough money? I understand your point but this comes down to personal responsibility. If your account does not have the money ( as recorded in your register) then don't authorize the transaction. It's real simple and doesn't take government or business action.
#5 Consumer Suggestion
AUTHOR: Dot - LaGrange (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, July 11, 2008
POSTED: Friday, July 11, 2008
Consumers who think the current system is unfair should file a complaint with the OCC, http://www.occ.treas.gov/customer.htm. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) is a bureau of the United States Department of the Treasury. The OCC charters, regulates, and supervises about 1,700 national banks and about 50 federal branches of foreign banks in the U.S. (as of March 31, 2008) and their operating subsidiaries to ensure a safe, sound and competitive national banking system that supports the citizens, communities and economy of the United States. The OCC also supervises federally licensed branches and agencies of foreign banks. The national banks fund the OCC through assessments paid by the banks based on their assets and fees they pay for special services.
#6 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Dot - LaGrange (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Saturday, July 12, 2008
POSTED: Saturday, July 12, 2008
You don't understand. It is not a matter of keeping track - the bank knows what human nature is and they know from their own bank statistics how often people make mistakes, the type of mistakes, and have devised policies to capitalize on them so they can maximize their profits. On top of that they change their policies knowing what the outcome will be to their benefit - they know most people don't read a note stating a policy change, or that they will forget or not even think it will effect them - it is all calculated to benefit their bottom line with no consideration for fairness to the customer. Just the fact that polls show only 2 % of people want their acct overdrafted and charged a fee tells you they don't care what people want - just their bottom line is all. Most want the charge denied but they won't even allow you that option or if they do they take it away without notice.
My only income is social security and I have had a checking account with Fifth Third Bank for 5 years. The bank charged me three overdraft fees when my available balance was overdrawn by ($35.85) although my daily balance was +$102.79. For the past 5 years my account was not considered overdrawn unless I went over the daily balance and that is what the clerks there had always told me . Apparently just recently they started basing overdrafts on the available balance instead. When I asked the manager he said they changed their policy but could not tell me exactly when. I do all my banking with them online and opted not to get paper statements so I never received notification of a change in policy. The manager said they don't notify customers through online communication of policy changes. I considered this unfair but I also informed the manager that their branch had given me the option to code the acct so that the bank would not payout charges if the money was not available and they would decline the charge and that I had elected to set the account that way a long time ago.
He confirmed to me that the account was coded to decline charges over the available balance when I said it should have been but that the main office changes the settings at random (without notice) back to paying out funds when they aren't there, creating an overdraft. I was not told this when choosing that option and was originally guaranteed by the clerk charges would be denied if the funds weren't available. The manager said he would set the code back but couldn't guarantee it wouldn't be changed again.
On top of all this the bank has the policy of deducting the largest charges to the account first on any one day charges are posted, even if the largest charge was the last charge posted to the acct that day. Smaller charges posted against the available balance one or two days earlier than a large charge will go in after the large charge, therefore on an account that is low on funds it can incur multiple overdraft fees for small charges when if taken in their naturally occurring chronology might only incur one overdraft fee for the large charge only.
When I pointed this out to the manager he said he was aware of the appearance of unfair manipulation but tried to explain the bank's view is that larger payments could be of the nature of mortgage payment or other more important bills to the customer which they think a customer would want paid. This is bogus because even if the charges were $10, $9, $8, and $7 the $10 comes off first and I don't know how any customer would rather pay three or four $35 charges in place of just one no matter who the payees are.
It appears to me that this bank deliberately manipulates its fee policies to take advantage of customers - especially those who can least afford to be taken advantage of - they only care about their own pockets - I can't understand how employees of this company can sleep at night once they know how this bank operates. I have had employees of this bank admit to me the bank policies are unfair but there is nothing they can do about it.
I had to deposit a couple hundred dollars in the account although they showed it overdrawn on available balance only ($35.85) because they said the overdraft fees could incur more overdraft fees themselves if I didn't have enough money in the account to cover all the overdraft fees - can you believe that!
They did not do everything they could to make customers aware of the policy change, their fee policies are unfair and they have told me one thing but do another. It would be nice to see them reevaluate their fee policy so as to be more fair.
If they were interested in the customer they would at least deduct smallest charges first, or at least in the chronological order they are made to avoid multiple overdraft fees - years ago that is how they did it.
#7 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Striderq - Columbia (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Sunday, July 13, 2008
POSTED: Sunday, July 13, 2008
it still comes down to the individual being responsible for their own spending. Especially those 'on a limited income'. Newsflash: every one is on a limited income. It's just some's limit is more than others.
However: if you have an income on $850 a month and spend $850 or less each month than you don't have any fees. But if you spend more than $850, even by one penny, then you are going to be accessed fees. The money in the account belongs to the account owner. It is their responsibility to make sure there is enough money to cover the transactions that the customer wants to make. Should the bank be able to decline debit card transactions that are above the available balance? Yes. But if you have $125 available balance showing and go spend $30, the bank didn't know about the $100 you had written last week. So keep your register with all transactions recorded and if you don't have the balance according to your register then don't do the transaction(s). If this is such a vast conspiracy by Fifth Third and all other banks, then why do the vast majority of account holders NOT pay fees? Because their responsible for their own actions and keep a register.
#8 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Daj6600 - Deltona (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Sunday, July 13, 2008
POSTED: Sunday, July 13, 2008
I actually talked with another Fifth Third rep on the phone and she didnt even know there own policies. I explained about the overdraft fees i had gotten when one thing posted i recieved 3 other fees on pending items and she told me they dont do that. Well it happened to me twice we went back in looked and found them. Put me on hold then changed her mind and gave me an explanation she couldnt even understand. Anyway Mr. Checkbook balancer how could you possibly say the vast majority of account holders havent recieved some sort of the new fees some banks are coming up with? I would like to see the report you are looking at because i can honestly say i never had fees from any other banks in 16 years. And i am not the best at keeping an accurate "balance" but Fifth Third does things alot different than my other banks and it's terrible.
#9 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Daj6600 - Deltona (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Sunday, July 13, 2008
POSTED: Sunday, July 13, 2008
In my last post i forgot to put the reason i contacted someone from the bank. Since this account seems to be the only one i have problems with i decided to transfer my direct deposit to Fifth Third. The only reason i use Fifth Third is there alot more of them in my general area but after last Friday i'm done with them. Anyway my direct deposit always goes in friday night at midnight....at least with my other bank. Come to find out i had something post that put me in the negative at 2:45 a.m. Which was gast so it was only taking a dollar out of my available balance but then posted for $45.00 putting me in the negative. Once again this was my fault for not keeping a "register" according to the gifted. My mistake i forgot about the gas, however on the flip side had my direct deposit posted at midnight i would not have been in the negative. I was told by the bank they do not post their direct deposits until 6:00 A.M. Whoa what a slap in the face i have never heard of such a thing. I have had direct deposit with a few banks over the years and it's always posted at midnight on the scheduled date. So why does fifth wait until 6:00 a.m.? Maybe because they post all the previous days transactions between 2 am and 4 am the next day. So if they wait until 6 more chances of fees, hence more money for them. Am i wrong does anyone else know of banks not doing Direct deposit until 6 am?
#10 Update By Author
AUTHOR: Sharon - Lakeland (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Sunday, July 13, 2008
POSTED: Sunday, July 13, 2008
Stop trying to defend your unethical banking practices. You are one of of only 2 banks that charges fees for 'pre-authorizations' that have not posted to an account. Bank of America is the other one. In a year or two (or less hopefully) you will not be able to pull this on customers anymore. The only reason you are allowed to do this now is because your attorneys stopped the bill in congress that was going to pass in 2005. There is also nothing about this in your 40 page rules and regulations about new checking accounts. Its very simple, you should have to tell customers you charge for pre-authorizations and that this could be very costly. But of course we know why you dont, no one would open a 'free' account then....
#11 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: John - Califon (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Sunday, July 13, 2008
POSTED: Sunday, July 13, 2008
There is no fraudulent fee being assessed.
You spent the money when there was not enough to cover it.
What is there to not understand about this?
You are not going to beat the computer with your bailout deposit because you have already been proven to not have enough to cover the purchase when you made the transaction due to modern technology.
Why are you not keeping an accurate register to avoid fees?
As always, why are there MILLIONS that have no problem but a scant 1% is doing all the crying?
Who really is in the wrong here? Look in the mirror.
#12 Employee
AUTHOR: Brian - Cincinnati (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Sunday, July 13, 2008
POSTED: Sunday, July 13, 2008
I am a customer service representative who works for 5/3, and I must say that anyone who accuses us of unfairly overdrafting your account is an IDIOT of the highest order. It really amazes me how people think that we are trying to rip people off on their accounts. I have heard every excuse imaginable. Guess what? If you don't like it, then by all means bank somewhere else. You're going to find that the standards 5/3 has concerning fees and holds are pretty much the same throughout the industry. The bank has the RIGHT to hold your funds until they are sure the check is valid. As a courtesy to the customer, we offer the first 100 dollars for use the day you deposit the check. Then we hold the remainder for one business day. Just because it may be a "payroll" check doesn't guarrantee that it is valid. There has been so much fraud in the industry, and we have to do what we have to do to insure that we remain in business.
Here's another tip: if you don't want to overdraft your account, BALANCE YOUR DAMN CHECKBOOK ACCURATELY! DON'T CALL US AND COMPLAIN THAT YOU SCREWED UP YOUR ACCOUNT AND NOT EXPECT US TO CHARGE A FEE! As a shareholder in the company, when you overdraft your account, YOU ARE SPENDING MY MONEY! The fees and other policies are fully detailed in the Terms and Conditions information you received when you opened your account. And don't say "I was never told", or "I didn't know about the fees". Ignorance of the policy is not an excuse. It is up to you as a customer to be fully aware of all the policies BEFORE you open your account.
#13 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Striderq - Columbia (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Sunday, July 13, 2008
POSTED: Sunday, July 13, 2008
Real simple. Looking at the reports here on ROR for Fifth Third, there have been a total of 241 filed as of today. I'll even say all of these are about the fees, although some are probably about some other facet. So 241 complaints out of the accounts held at Fifth Third (which was listed 307 of 1000 companies by Fortune 500). So yeah, I'd have to say the vast majority of account holders know how to manage their register and not get fees. Maybe your perspective is that this site is just for OPs to register complaints. If all you hear are complaints, then yeah it sounds kind of bad. But when you look at the percentage of complainers versus the number of account holders it shows the real picture. No one is going to post here 'Hey I kept track of all my transactions this month and do you know that my bank had the audacity to not charge me any fees?' Get real, get a register and if you can't do math get a calculator.
#14 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Edward - Dallas (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Sunday, July 13, 2008
POSTED: Sunday, July 13, 2008
Hey Brian, you are exactly right when you say quote - 'You're going to find that the standards 5/3 has concerning fees and holds are pretty much the same throughout the industry.'
Your top bosses, the Federal Reserve agree with you. They agree that all banks have these same RIPOFF policies and scams throughout the industry. And the Feds now seek to reel you guys in with the proposed rules changes.
1. Regulation AA - Proposal to outlaw OD fees caused solely by debit holds, becoming common 'throughout the industy'.
2. Regulation AA - Proposed to outlaw the hospitality of banks to automatically sign customers up for OD buffers and protection they never agreed to and were never given the chance to opt out of, common 'throughout the industry'.
3. Regulation ZZ - Proposal to outlaw the deceptive account balances given via phone or ATM which magically include overdraft buffers, meant solely to trap the customer into thinking they have more money than they actually do which would cause them to overdraw, becoming common 'throughout the industry'.
Yes indeed Brian. How dare anyone unfairly accuse 5/3 of doing something that ALL other banks are doing. You are right, it's up to the customers to be aware of these ripoff policies, and they are. And so are the Feds, who are also FELLOW BANKERS by the way. And they now seek to put an end to your out of control scams. How's that for a ringing endorsement?
#15 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Striderq - Columbia (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Monday, July 14, 2008
POSTED: Monday, July 14, 2008
leaving out information on his reports.
The PROPOSED change in regulation AA would only effect debit holds that are settled for less than the hold amount. Not all holds as you are trying to insinuate.
#16 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Edward - Dallas (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Monday, July 14, 2008
POSTED: Monday, July 14, 2008
I know you and many other bankers are not to thrilled about these new proposals, from YOUR OWN SUPERIORS no less, as they would cut deep into your STOLEN profits. But FOR NOW you are correct. The WORDING as it reads now only addresses fees caused where the HELD amount is higher than the POSTED amount. And the account WOULD NOT have become overdrawn based on the true posted amount.
Now with the proposal as it reads now, let's sit back and watch the LAWSUITS start flying in. The lawsuits for the OTHER situations that are exactly identical, where the account would NOT have become overdrawn EITHER, except for HOLDS. But it has nothing to do with difference of amounts. Yet the final outcome is the same.
#17 Update By Author
AUTHOR: Sharon - Lakeland (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Thursday, July 17, 2008
POSTED: Thursday, July 17, 2008
Since I no longer use Fifth Third anymore I just wanted to share with everyone what a normal bank account can be compared to 5/3 and why. I bank with Washington Mutual now and their policy is not to charge for 'pre-authorizations' until they actually clear the checking account ledger and here is why. I went to Pep-boys the other day and bought a battery, accidently because their systems where not working properly, Pep-boys charged me 2 authorizations for the battery I bought on the account using the debit card. I had 75.00 available in the account and 2 battery authorizations totaled $110 where done when I went back later and looked online. I only signed one actual charge so eventually one of the 'pre-authorizations' will drop off. As everyone knows good ole Fifth Third would have overdrawn my account immediately in this case and slapped on fee after fee because 'technically' I was over my available balance by $35. Never bank with 5/3 because any merchant system can accidently do a double-authorization and you will be charged fees.
#18 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Dana - Louisville (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Tuesday, July 22, 2008
POSTED: Tuesday, July 22, 2008
1st-
Fifth Third cannot process transactions around the clock; they have to have a cut-off time. That cut-off time is 12 a.m... SO if you get paid on Friday, what difference does it make whether the check posts at 6:00 a.m.? It will not change your overdraft or your balances from THURSDAY because you do not get paid until FRIDAY! So accept the fact that you are spending your paycheck before you receive it and move on. From now on, may I suggest that you hold off on the ice cream cone or any other "pre-authorization" purchases until you have your paycheck or other sufficient funds in your account to cover the money being spent?? (THAT'S A NOVEL IDEA)
2nd-
A Pre-Authorization is authorizing a merchant to take money out of your account. Am I correct? So why would Fifth Third be ILLEGALLY charging you overdraft fees if you AUTHORIZED said merchant to take money out of your account and you didn't have the money in there to cover it? It is no different than check writing, do you spend the money that was earmarked for that check because it hasn't "posted" to the account and is still "pending." At least Fifth Third's website shows that the authorizations and other purchases are pending. They could just post it, this at least gives you time during the day to make it positive before the fees hit.
3rd-
Sure, the overdraft fees are expensive. But why shouldn't they charge you a lot of money. You are taking an unsecured loan and the rates for those loans are usually pretty high...and that is when they willingly underwrite that loan. They offer overdraft protection to offset this through a savings account transfer or line of credit transfers. Nothing is free but it's a lot cheaper than overdraft fees...May I suggest my 1st bullet though which is not spending money unless you have it... (That is the most affordable idea)
4th-
The posting of a check is also incorrect. Please know the facts before you bash someone or a company. As long as the Federal Reserve is open, it is considered a normal banking day. On normal banking days, Monday - Friday the first $100 of a deposit containing checks is available. The rest is available the next day. (This is assuming no Reg CC holds were placed on the checks which in most cases are rare especially for customers with matching funds or this is normal behavior). On Saturday, Sunday and Bank Holidays (days the Federal Reserve is not open) the bank is accepting transactions but the behind the scenes processing does not actually happen because it is not a banking day. SO, in this instance it may seem like three days but your Saturday deposit is actually on Monday's business day so it will be completely available on Tuesday. Cash ALWAYS available immediately.
You could complain about this but keep in mind Fifth Third's VERY convenient hours on Saturday and Sunday. MOST BANKS aren't open those days and that is why you never run into these "problems" at other banks.
5th-
First Charter customers need to remember that Fifth Third simply bought the bank; for the most part they did not change the employees working in the banking centers. If they feel it is not warm and welcoming anymore, maybe it has more to do with the "Former First Charter employees" needing attitude adjustments than the bank that bought them out being a joke. Of course things change, that's what happens but instead of immediately hating the new bank and pointing fingers 1) accept some responsibility and 2) take some time to learn the new processes and new options available to you. Chances are a larger super-regional bank will have more competitive products offerings and rates. As well as more advanced online banking systems, etc...
6th-
Keep in mind that most of the employees working at banks are consumers and hard working people just like you. We are all living through this tough economy and it's not like they are shielded from it because they work at a bank. If anything its worst for them, not only do they have to deal with it personally but they also have to deal with uneducated know-it-alls who post slander without knowing all the facts.
#19 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: J G Shrugged - Austin (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Wednesday, July 23, 2008
POSTED: Wednesday, July 23, 2008
It is going to be very difficult to program a computer that will keep track of charges on holds v. settlement amounts, esp. since it would have to fall within 96 hours (or is it 72, I can't remember) before the hold has to be removed. So if a hold is posted and never settles, there can not be an OD fee on the acct.
I was reading the other day on the Red Tape Chronicles about these proposed changes (most deal with credit cards), and they have received well over 22k in comments. However, the industry hasn't made their formal response yet. Odds are the industry is going to ask for 18 months to be able to figure out a system to the hold timing issue.
Personally, I think the system is going to turn into the same as a credit card - they will check your balance at the POS and accept/decline based on the overdraft protection, and if the funds are in the acct at the time. And they will begin declining transactions if there isn't sufficient funds.
Then we'll hear about the complaints about the people who got arrested at restaurants because the banks bounced a payment that was 1 penny over their balance.
#20 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Striderq - Columbia (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Wednesday, July 23, 2008
POSTED: Wednesday, July 23, 2008
the proposed regulation change does not bother me one way or the other. The banks are in compliance with the regulations now and if the regulations are changed, the banks will change their policies to be in compliance. However, I find it very telling that you want to hold this PROPOSED change up as the great redeemer of the overdrafted masses without relating all the information. This is only proposed not not a done deal. And only affects OD fees where the charge is settled for less than the hold. Again this is not the great cure for the 'evil banks' that you and several others espouse it to be.
I know that you feel the 'keep your register, don't overspend' routine is unrealistic. But the truth is it works. Exactly what advice that you give people will keep them from continuing to pay fees? You say it's wrong, underhanded, whatever; but what should the people do to keep the money in their account? Just continue with the same financial management style and hope that the regulations are changed? Seems it's better to tell them what causes the fees and try to cure the problem than just treating the symptoms.
#21 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Dani - Clive (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Wednesday, July 23, 2008
POSTED: Wednesday, July 23, 2008
"the bank knows what human nature is and they know from their own bank statistics how often people make mistakes, the type of mistakes, and have devised policies to capitalize on them so they can maximize their profits."
Well, yeah. Every business opperates this way.
#22 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Striderq - Columbia (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Saturday, July 26, 2008
POSTED: Saturday, July 26, 2008
Actually what Edward said was '1. Regulation AA - Proposal to outlaw OD fees caused solely by debit holds, becoming common 'throughout the industy'. This is not what the proposed chenge says. The proposed change deals with debit holds that settle for lees than the hold not for all debit holds as Edwards insinuates.
I will admit I have not read all of the proposed change and the point you bring up of holds that ar placed that are never settled (like Bill Matrix holding $1 before processing your utility bill) is an interesting point. However, as I've stated, the banks are complying with the current regulation and will comply with any finalized change. Just trying to make sure that the correct information gets included in the discussions here.
#23 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Edward - Dallas (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Tuesday, July 29, 2008
POSTED: Wednesday, July 30, 2008
I agree with you. I have stated on other threads the proposed Regulation changes from the Federal Reserve are far from being a done deal, sign, sealed and delivered. I am certainly not holding up these proposed changes as the great redeemer of the overdraft masses.
Let me be clear. What I am holding up and EMPHASIZING is the IRONY of the proposals. For years, customers have been complaining about SHADY, UNFAIR, RIPOFF practices by banks. In response, bank supporters would submit rebuttals ridiculing customers with statements that they don't get to dictate what THEY think is fair. Just because THEY think something is unfair, doesn't make it a ripoff.
Well guess what! The FEDERAL RESERVE has now spoken out and said in effect, they agree with the customers. Some of these practices are outright wrong. So don't take your angst out on me Striderq. Your beef is with your TOP BOSSES who are BANKERS themselves, by the way. Bankers who DISAGREE with some of these RIPOFF policies and practices. Even if the proposals fall flat, the ramifications from just their INTENT are already overwhelming. It speaks VOLUMES that the Federal Reserve has now gone ON RECORD agreeing with customers and basically telling their SUBORDINATES that in fact these practices are INDEED ripoffs.
Hence the name of the proposals: 'Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices'. The Federal Reserve's words. Not mine.
#24 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Striderq - Columbia (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Wednesday, July 30, 2008
POSTED: Wednesday, July 30, 2008
No angst here. Just trying to help people avoid the fees which is completely in their power. The title of the proposed change is just a title. As the regulations stand now, the banks are doing nothing wrong. Have people complained, yes. Have the people caused the problem they are complaining about, yes. By overspending their accounts. If, and when the regulations change the banks' policies will change to be in compliance. But I'm willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that the people complaining now about the 'unfair fees' will continue to overspend their accounts, causing themselves more fees and still complain about it being a ripoff.
#25 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: J G Shrugged - Austin (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Wednesday, July 30, 2008
POSTED: Wednesday, July 30, 2008
The regulations are far from finalized (hey only another week or so for the public commenting period), and they are currently following them.
And the closer we get to a final version, we may see the banks switch practices. It's happening with the major credit card companies (pressure from Congress with a bill pending on interchange, and at my company they've already lowered our rate)
#26 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Edward - Dallas (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Wednesday, July 30, 2008
POSTED: Wednesday, July 30, 2008
JG I too have reviewed merely a sample of the comments submitted by thousands, and as you might expect they are overwhelmingly in favor of the proposals. And while it's true 'THE INDUSTRY' has not made their formal response yet, you would be surprised at the number of comments from small town bankers, banking employees, banking insiders, lawyers, law firms, etc., all on board and also agreeing with the proposals. Just read their comments. These are not just comments coming from whining customers.
And Striderq, if you haven't already, feel free to add your $.02 and send in to the Feds, expressing your ho hum attitude about their well thought out proposals and how they will DO LITTLE to solve anything. Feel free to send in your comments about how it's just a big waste of time and money which will solve nothing. I'm sure YOUR SUPERIORS will give your feedback much consideration.
I'm sure the Feds, YOUR SUPERIORS would welcome your comments from your previous post about how the customers bring these problems on themselves. When that MERCHANT ran a DOUBLE HOLD on the customer's card, the customer brought it on himself. When the ATM showed the customer he had a $520 balance instead of $20, the customer brought it on himself because he assumed the extra $500 was from a deposit hold he was waiting on. He didn't realize it was the $500 overdraft buffer sneakily added in. Yet he brought it on himself when the fees start rolling in.
Why is the Fedearal Stinking Reserve Board wasting TIME and MONEY with this?
#27 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Edward - Dallas (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Wednesday, July 30, 2008
POSTED: Wednesday, July 30, 2008
JG I too have reviewed merely a sample of the comments submitted by thousands, and as you might expect they are overwhelmingly in favor of the proposals. And while it's true 'THE INDUSTRY' has not made their formal response yet, you would be surprised at the number of comments from industry insiders, who openly disclose their affiliation, like small town bankers, banking employees, banking insiders, lawyers, law firms, etc., all on board and also agreeing with the proposals. In other words, pepople who DO NOT condone UNFAIR or DECEPTIVE practices. The support is not just coming from whining customers.
And Striderq, if you haven't already, feel free to add your $.02 and send in to the Feds, expressing your ho hum attitude about their well thought out proposals and how they will DO LITTLE to solve anything. Feel free to send in your comments about how it's just a big waste of time and money which will solve nothing. I'm sure YOUR SUPERIORS will give your feedback much consideration.
I'm sure the Feds, YOUR SUPERIORS would welcome your comments from your previous post about how the customers bring these problems on themselves. When that MERCHANT ran a DOUBLE HOLD on the customer's card, causing fees, the customer brought it on himself. When the ATM showed the customer he had a $520 balance instead of $20, the customer brought it on himself because he assumed the extra $500 was from a deposit hold he was waiting on. He didn't realize it was the $500 overdraft buffer sneakily added in. Yet he brought it on himself when the fees start rolling in.
Why is the Federal Stinking Reserve Board wasting TIME and MONEY with this?
#28 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Christopher - Winston-salem (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, August 01, 2008
POSTED: Friday, August 01, 2008
Why I am tired of listening to complaints about overdraft fees
I am a customer service representative who works for 5/3, and I must say that anyone who accuses us of unfairly overdrafting your account is an IDIOT of the highest order. It really amazes me how people think that we are trying to rip people off on their accounts. I have heard every excuse imaginable. Guess what? If you don't like it, then by all means bank somewhere else. You're going to find that the standards 5/3 has concerning fees and holds are pretty much the same throughout the industry. The bank has the RIGHT to hold your funds until they are sure the check is valid. As a courtesy to the customer, we offer the first 100 dollars for use the day you deposit the check. Then we hold the remainder for one business day. Just because it may be a 'payroll' check doesn't guarrantee that it is valid. There has been so much fraud in the industry, and we have to do what we have to do to insure that we remain in business.
Here's another tip: if you don't want to overdraft your account, BALANCE YOUR DAMN CHECKBOOK ACCURATELY! DON'T CALL US AND COMPLAIN THAT YOU SCREWED UP YOUR ACCOUNT AND NOT EXPECT US TO CHARGE A FEE! As a shareholder in the company, when you overdraft your account, YOU ARE SPENDING MY MONEY! The fees and other policies are fully detailed in the Terms and Conditions information you received when you opened your account. And don't say 'I was never told', or 'I didn't know about the fees'. Ignorance of the policy is not an excuse. It is up to you as a customer to be fully aware of all the policies BEFORE you open your account.
here is where you are WRONG!!!!!! my brother in law has had direct deposit with first charter for seven years before your ripoff company merged with them. he has a savings and a checking, savings only has a small percentage of his check going into it and the rest (well over a 1500 check weekly) goes into the checking account. somehow your bank decided to only deposit his check into his savings causeing over 750 dollars in OD fees alone. now direct deposits are tied to account #'s and his savings is a auto transfer. so his check was rerouted into his savings ( not the right account #) causing his OD fees ( not his fault) bank admitted to the error but would only remove half of the OD fees they caused. so screw you on balancing checkbooks and all that you are the idiot for thinking that there are fools big enough to believe you and all your tripe!
#29 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Edgeman - Chico (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, August 01, 2008
POSTED: Friday, August 01, 2008
How is the bank "illegally" charging fees?
#30 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Striderq - Columbia (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Saturday, August 02, 2008
POSTED: Saturday, August 02, 2008
For Christopher, Man take a chill pill. Yes I work for a bank but not Fifth Third, so I and my company did not do anything to your brother. It's a bit strange though that your here complaining for your brother and I don't see his post anywhere.
For Edward, The two situations that you mentioned in your last post are unique and have nothing to do with the vast reports here of people overspending their accounts by not keeping a register. In my replies about specific instances like you mentioned, I have made suggestions to help the customer get straightened out. However, the vast majority of the complaints here are not like your examples. They are from people that mostly do not keep a register of their transactions, rely on the online balance to see what's availabl to spend (not what's already posted) and spend their direct deposit on their check card the night before the deposit is available to them. If the proposed changes go through and these people keep their same habits, guess what? They'll be receiving the same fees. The holds affected by the proposed change are the ones settled for less than the hold placed. These are caused basically at restaurants, hair salons, places you might leave a tip. Right now, their machines add an extra 10-20% to the hold request. Then if you leave less than that or a cash tip, the item would post for less than the hold. Probable solution, have the machine companied (not the bank by the way) set the machine to request only the amount of the service. And then if you leave a tip, they;ll probably want to run your card again for the difference to make sure they'll get paid. But when you read the majorty of these posts, these are not the transactions taht are causing the fees. It the transactions where the person has $100 in their account, buys $40 worth of gas (which doesn't create a hold) and then goes on to buy another $80 to $100 of products because 'that's what my online balance said'. Will the proposed change happen? Possibly. Will these people change their habits? Probably not. Will they still get hit with fees? Definately yes. The proposed change is not about doing away with the fees, just changing the way that a select few of them are enforced.
#31 Consumer Suggestion
AUTHOR: Barbara - Hanover Park (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Sunday, August 03, 2008
POSTED: Sunday, August 03, 2008
I have been banking with 5/3 for a few months now. I haven't had any problems with them so far, because I keep a check register and balance it to a "t". It takes a lot of self disicpline to keep track of your finances. It doesn't matter what bank you use they pretty much have the same fees and practices. You as the customer are responsible for your account and keeping track of what goes in and what goes out of your account. I really appreciate that 5/3 allows the first $100 avaliable when I deposted a check, because not all banks do that.
#32 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Dnmh - Strongsville (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Thursday, November 06, 2008
POSTED: Thursday, November 06, 2008
I ended up here on behalf of my 18 yr old daughter. I'm ready to post my own "rip-off" report but wanted to read more before I do.
I agree that those who overspend their accounts should be held accountable, but the accountability should be fair. When she first started her student checking account at 17, she made mistakes that caused a few overdrafts. She learned her lesson and went to using her own register that came with her checkbook. She even opened a savings account to link with for the just in cases as she is still learning. Using the register and not the online balance made an accounting error which made her account overdrawn by 0.53 cents! And we didn't get the letter from the bank until 6 days later! She was charged $37.00 as an overdraft fee. This caused several more overdrafts, one totalling $148.00, another for $36.00 for daily fees! She will not get paid for another 2 weeks, all the while these fees will keep accumulating. Over $200 for 0.53 cents! The bank agreed to remove only the first $37.00...
Well, our bank manager Kristy decided to transfer $263.00 from our account (she's in the process of switching from a joint student account to her own over 18 account) last night at 6pm without informing us... wait, she called my house but hung up after 3 rings, not even bothering to leave a message! That transaction caused her other account that she is desperately trying to keep balanced to overdraw!
I strongly do believe that people should be accountable for thier actions as it teaches a lesson, BUT it should be a percentage of the overdraft to be fair. Is it fair that someone who accidentally overdraws by0.53 cents to pay the same fee that someone who overdraws by $400.00 or $150,00 or $800.00? Credit card companies charge a percentage on the customer's balance, why shouldn't banks? Again, it's fair accountability!
#33 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Striderq - Columbia (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Saturday, November 22, 2008
POSTED: Saturday, November 22, 2008
it's a set fee per item that posts to the negative. If you don't want to pay the fee, keep your register properly and don't overspend your account.
#34 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Resty - Waunakee (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Saturday, November 22, 2008
POSTED: Saturday, November 22, 2008
end up spending banks money..expecting them to cover your overdrafts and then dictate to them HOW much of a fine you'll pay...or how they can assess them.
