Charter one Banks Ripoff NSF Charges post from smallest to largest to profit from customers. Charter One and others like them should not be able to decide how a transaction should be posted to the cust. acct. They take it upon themselves to go from small to large which result in huge fees. Internet

Yes..the bank is very "compassionate"..they wanted to make sure your $70.00 mortgage payment didn't bounce..it's all a crock of bull..these banks are ripping people off. I have posted this info in other ripoff reports as well. The following is contact information for one of our firms that is investigating the legality of these practices by the banks. It won't take much of your time but you may recover some funds and get to zing it to the bank as a bonus..call it a "fee" if you will. But most of all we want some regulation here to better protect the consumer..especially during these tough economic times. In any case the more publicity regarding the policies and practices these banks are performing to fleece us, the better the chance of laws being put into effect to better protect us..and/or to determine if any laws are currently being violated. Keep in mind this particular suit IS NOT about fighting overdraft fees per say, and not about the amount of "a fee" per say. It is about the banks tactics of charging ADDITIONAL fees which occur as a result of the manipulating or "re-sequencing" of transactions that did have the funds available at the time of transaction. If you believe you may have been affected and are interested in participating in the investigation, google  "Finkelstein Thompson LLP". As well, other charges may or may not be filed to related or unrelated activities by the Defendants..but the investigation will deal with the specifics as follows at this point in time... Finkelstein Thompson LLP is currently investigating claims that several banking institutions are systematically re-sequencing their customer's checking and electronic debit transactions from the highest to lowest dollar amount instead of posting the transactions in the order in which they were actually received.  It is alleged that the practice of re-sequencing electronic debits from largest to smallest maximizes the bank's profits from overdraft fees by putting the customers' accounts into a negative balance as quickly as possible.  Many customers claim they had sufficient funds in their accounts to cover the transactions when they made the purchase and when the bank authorized the charges.   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 didnt 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 banks 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}. Now this has been fought before in congress..we lost..but this is America so we don't give up. Contact your congressmen regarding this... H.R. 946, introduced in the US House of Representatives on February 8, 2007, would increase regulation of overdraft loan programs. The proposed legislation would Amend the Truth in Lending Act (Regulation Z) to clarify that overdraft fees are covered, require written consent before enrollment in the overdraft loan program, require financial institutions to warn the customer when an ATM withdrawal will trigger a fee, and prohibit financial institutions from changing the order of check clearing or delaying the posting of deposits solely to increase overdraft fees. This bill was referred to committee in April 2007 and died in committee. As of February 2009, the FDIC was taking comments on the issue.

Correction:  In my above post, I meant largest to smallest debits.

They have been taking the smallest debit first for years, even on a cash deposit.  I don't know how many times they have denied doing that.  They told me that is the way the transactions came in.  Told them I was a programmer, so I knew how the program was set up.  Refused to credit my account.

One time I'm in there and a local newspaper woman came in and I overheard her talking to bank rep, that she had accidentally overdrew her account.  The bank rep told her she would credit her account for the NSF charges she received.  My mouth almost hit the floor. 

Now, I juts got off the phone with bank rep after same thing happened to me. Only this time it was hundreds of dollars they got from me.  She told me they would not credit my account, even though I hardly have any money left to survive on and I have a traumatic brain injury.  I blew up on the phone and am taking my money out of there tomorrow.

I am also going to report this information to every place I can find on the internet, where people want opinions before opening a bank account with a certain bank.

Consumer reports in Michigan.   

They have been taking the smallest debit first for years, even on a cash deposit.  I don't know how many times they have denied doing that.  They told me that is the way the transactions came in.  Told them I was a programmer, so I knew how the program was set up.  Refused to credit my account.

One time I'm in there and a local newspaper woman came in and I overheard her talking to bank rep, that she had accidentally overdrew her account.  The bank rep told her she would credit her account for the NSF charges she received.  My mouth almost hit the floor. 

Now, I juts got off the phone with bank rep after same thing happened to me. Only this time it was hundreds of dollars they got from me.  She told me they would not credit my account, even though I hardly have any money left to survive on and I have a traumatic brain injury.  I blew up on the phone and am taking my money out of there tomorrow.

I am also going to report this information to every place I can find on the internet, where people want opinions before opening a bank account with a certain bank.

Consumer reports in Michigan.   

The truth is that you agreed to how they post transactions when you opened the account there.  The agreement contains a provision by which they can post transactions in any particular order.  In this case, it gives them the right to post transactions highest to lowest AND to post debits before credits.  The reason they provided you as to why they put them in this order is correct...

There is no class action lawsuit that will meet with your satisfaction.  To begin with, the courts have ruled recently in favor of the bank - in other words, the courts have concluded that as long as the disclosure regarding the fees and the order processing is made, the bank has done its duty.  It then becomes the duty of the account holder to exercise their due diligence by keeping a register, allowing the check deposits to become available, etc....  You failed to do that.  Even when the bank decided to settle such cases, as BofA did last year, the members of the class each received $78 after a 3 year wait.  With the precedents set this year....no settlement is likely.

When you make a deposit, the money is not available immediately, with the exception of the first $100.  Depending on the size of the check, the rest could be available from as soon as the next day...to about 2 weeks.  There is a lesson here.....