• Report: #476426

Complaint Review: Wachovia Bank

Thank You

Read how Ripoff Report saves consumers millions.

  • Submitted: Tue, August 04, 2009
  • Updated: Wed, August 05, 2009

  • Reported By:North hollywood California
Wachovia Bank
.wachovia.com Nationwide U.S.A.
  • Phone:
  • Web:
  • Category: Banks

Wachovia Bank Notice to the victims of Wachovia, Wells Fargo, BoA ripoffs and those who defend the banks North Hollywood California

* : Class action suit "investigation" under way...

*Author of original report: Thanks

*Consumer Suggestion: One more item.

*Consumer Comment: Couldn't agree with Edgeman more...

*Consumer Comment: Debra...

*Consumer Comment: Regulation

*Consumer Comment: You're fighting the worng war...

*Consumer Comment: You'er Wasting Your Time

What's this?
What's this?
What's this?
Is this
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..

Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™

SEO Reputation Management at its best!

If you were a careless person..and you went out shopping with your wallet half hanging out of your back pocket..someone may pick pocket you and steal it. Now lets say the thief was caught red handed. What if you were told that the thief was allowed to keep your wallet and all it's contents because you were careless and it is all your fault..the thief bears no responsibility or blame?

This is what the banks and defenders of the banks "business" practices would say. Because they do not believe you are a victim just because you believe you were ripped off, defrauded, or simply been done wrong. They will always blame us..belittle us..and mock us..and insult us. And this is their only defense. Or saying things like keep a register, learn how to be responsible with your finances..or "read the terms and agreements". They will agree that it is an unethical practice for the banks to target poor people and that it is okay for them to re-sequence our transactions in a way that allows them to attach as many fees as they can rack up..causing us further hardship. They will say it is our fault for being careless..and that to them is a good enough excuse for the banks to get away with this.

I am new to this forum and I think it is great to have a place to report when we feel we got ripped off. I also respect that rebuttal is allowed as there is often 2 sides to every story. And some of the rebuts although not what we want to hear..or sometimes inaccurate, misleading or irrelevant to the issue at hand or a feeble (even if passionate) attempt to smoke screen it, are submitted with respect and occasionally genuine concern..to those I have no qualm with.

What I have noticed is some rebuts have been nothing more then personal attacks, insults, immature name calling and arrogant degrading replies that basically attempt to discredit our complaint by picking apart grammatical errors or using word play to twist the facts to suit their defense.

Unfortunately, they may get the last word in my case as I do not wish to spend anymore time on this site to have this happen over and over. Not to mention it is upsetting to me to see the way they have been responding to other victims..or to be fair.."alleged" victims, until the class action suits are won I will abide by our constitution and live by "innocent until proven guilty". But none of this diminishes our right to complain or post that we believe we are being ripped off and our stories.

You will all hear from me here again when the site is up and all the information regarding the class action suits will be posted there. I have been in contact with some of you already, and we are working now to team up with our attorneys and get the ball rolling. DO NOT BE intimidated by any of the bank employees and defenders here..they believe it is in their best interest to discourage us and kick us even harder when we are already down, but if they were smart they would realize that behavior like that is futile..and if anything is giving us even more pleasure in devoting all our free time to this lawsuit.

Now they will probably respond with the same nonsense and smoke screens they always redundantly use...so I will repeat again what the isuue is and is NOT.

This is NOT an attempt to recover any fees from overdrafts and NSF's that are legitimate. This is NOT about asking advice how to prevent overdrafts and NSF fees or being told that the banks are not at fault because we do not know how to use a register..or we did not read our terms and conditions fully. Whether that is true or not holds no weight against the fact that certain policies and practices used by the banks are directly and blatantly targeting a specific "group" so to speak. These predators will be stopped. And the "re-sequencing" scam will be focused on as well as a plethora of other practices. My advice is keep all records..do a printout of your statements at least once or twice a day..this can and will be used as evidence.

When the employees and defenders respond to this and say things like "this will be a waste of time because the banks did not break any laws"...ignore it. because many laws were put into effect simply because of business practices that are unfair, unethical or just plain wrong. Yes, thank God we live in a country where we have the right to go to court to regain our rights..I love this country and we are all very blessed to be citizens here..with the good and the bad.

In closing..I say this one last time until the hearings...

As I read through more and more of the complaints about the way these banks conduct business..I am kind of getting tired of the replies telling about how to prevent overdraft and NSF fees. GET THIS CLEAR!!!...NO ONE IS ASKING HOW TO PREVENT OD/NSF FEES!!!...and no one is asking the bank to dismiss legitimate OD/NSF fees. No one needs to be told to use a register..and no one needs to be told that the bank is not at fault because of the terms and conditions contract. (Not everything in a contract is always legal..regardless of who agrees to it)

All we want (AND TRUST ME WE WILL GET IT, EVERY PENNY) is the money that was "allegedly" ROBBED from us returned due to the "re-sequencing" SCAM, and any procedures and policies that intentionally and maliciously brought them on..We DO NOT want or expect a refund for ANY legitimate overdrafts or NSF fees, we want and demand a refund from ANY and ALL fees that were charged as overdrafts when the funds were available at TIME of transaction..it's really is that simple, I think a child would understand...I can't explain it any simpler. But if you need more details just read through a few hundred of the reports filed against these banks like I have and it should clear things up.

If you wish to participate and contribute until the site is up you can do many things like visit the web sites posted in some of the reports here...read through them all...write letters to your congressmen, use any contacts or methods to publicize this as much as possible..internet, local papers, cable news, mainstream newspapers etc. Together we can fight them. banks have lost or settled similar class action suits before, no reason this one can't..it is very legitimate but we need to work together and not roll over and allow them to crush us. I am a fighter and I don't lose well...how about you?

Ronny
North hollywood, California
U.S.A.

Click here to read other Rip Off Reports on Wachovia Bank

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 08/04/2009 03:47 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Wachovia-Bank/nationwide/Wachovia-Bank-Notice-to-the-victims-of-Wachovia-Wells-Fargo-BoA-ripoffs-and-those-who-de-476426. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.

Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.

Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on Wachovia Bank

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Search Tips
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?
REBUTTALS & REPLIES:
1Author 7Consumer 0Employee/Owner
Updates & Rebuttals

#1

Class action suit "investigation" under way...

AUTHOR: Ronny g - (U.S.A.)

Wachoivia and other banks engaging in certain practices are the perfect examples of corporate corruption and greed. They are backed by politicians (some, not all), lobbied by the banks,  who helped the banks insert a term in the law books that allows the banks to engage in this creative accounting practice to the detriment of the people (Political corruption and greed). If we get this suit underway you may or may not recover all of the funds the bank took..but the important thing is that the laws are changed to better protect the consumer..or it can be determined that current laws are actually being violated, are unjust, or unconstitutional.

If history repeats itself as is often the case, the banks will settle, the lawyers will get richer, and we will not recover all of our losses. But the law in it's current form is all we have to work with..so the choice is just bend over and take it..let the "advice" of others to use a register and not use your online statement as a valid/reliable available funds sheet be enough of a defense...or fight. I see this as black and white..no gray area.. other then what the lawyers/bank defenders may create.

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 possibility of a class action. 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.

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 direct result of the manipulating or "re-sequencing" of transactions that did have the funds available at the time of said transaction.

If you believe you may have been affected and are interested in participating in the investigation, please call 877*800*1450 or email contact@finkelsteinthompson.com.

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 Wachovia, among other 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}.

Class Action Lawsuit (edited template)
 "That this action challenges the predatory and bad faith business practices of the Defendant in increasing its profits by failing to disclose to the Plaintiffs that a pre-existing overdraft in their checking accounts was a condition precedent that could and did result in the assessment of additional insufficient funds fees even when the Plaintiffs had sufficient funds in their checking accounts to avoid the additional insufficient funds fees. This action also alleges that the Defendant falsely represented to the Plaintiffs that a condition precedent of insufficient funds was the cause of the additional insufficient funds fees in their checking accounts when the actual condition precedent was a pre-existing overdraft in their checking accounts that the Defendant used to manipulate the Plaintiffs checking accounts to assess additional insufficient funds fees. In fact, if the Defendant did NOT assess the additional insufficient funds fees on a condition precedent of a pre-existing overdraft, it would have been IMPOSSIBLE for the Defendant to  have assessed the additional insufficient funds fees on a condition precedent of insufficient funds because the Plaintiffs had sufficient funds in their checking accounts to pay the remaining debits (without the pre-existing overdraft, re sequencing and paying debits from high to low would have never resulted in the additional insufficient funds fees. And thus, no condition precedent of insufficient funds existed to justify the additional fees).

     That the Defendant utilized the Plaintiffs pre-existing overdraft conditions in their checking accounts to assess additional insufficient funds fees to the Plaintiffs. Thus, the Plaintiffs pre-existing overdraft in their checking accounts was the actual condition precedent that caused the Plaintiffs to be assessed the additional insufficient funds fees and NOT the condition precedent of insufficient funds. Therefore, in violation of 12 U.S.C. 4303(b)(1), the Defendant failed to inform the Plaintiffs that the condition precedent that could cause and did cause the assessment of the additional insufficient funds fees was a pre-existing overdraft in their checking accounts. Instead, the Defendant falsely informed the Plaintiffs that they were assessed the additional insufficient funds fees due to a condition precedent of insufficient funds."

     That the Defendant utilized the Plaintiffs pre-existing overdraft conditions in their checking accounts to assess additional insufficient funds fees to the Plaintiffs. Thus, the Plaintiffs pre-existing overdraft in their checking accounts was the actual condition precedent that caused the Plaintiffs to be assessed the additional insufficient funds fees and NOT the condition precedent of insufficient funds. Therefore, in violation of 12 U.S.C. 4303(b)(1), the Defendant failed to inform the Plaintiffs that the condition precedent that could cause and did cause the assessment of the additional insufficient funds fees was a pre-existing overdraft in their checking accounts. Instead, the Defendant falsely informed the Plaintiffs that they were assessed the additional insufficient funds fees due to a condition precedent of insufficient funds."
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 Author of original report

Thanks

AUTHOR: Ronny G - (U.S.A.)

As expected. All perfect responses to prove my point..thanks. Will get back to post all the info regarding the class action suits. We do not have a docket number yet. And we need a few hundred more victims..(I mean customers) for testimony, shouldn't take too long to get it together.

Personally I do need any more money back at this point..I got most of it back through relentless fighting at the bank...but I would like to see some of the laws changed to better protect the consumer..a register booklet is apparently not enough if the banks are making billions off these fees.


If you defenders of the banks and employees (sorry if you consider that an insult BUT IF YOU ARE TRULY NOT A BANK DEFENDER OR A BANK EMPLOYEE THEN THOSE REMARKS ARE NOT TO YOU) and don't care about people and unfair practices that is fine..do not participate in the law suits. But kindly stop with the PERSONAL ATTACKS and insults, it makes you come off as angry children and I would see no need to respond to that.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#3 Consumer Suggestion

One more item.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

I agree with all the rebuttals so far, but I'd like to offer Ronnie another item of advice. He made it clear that he considered the Non-ATM fee as "hidden" because in his world, he doesn't READ the agreement/contract.

Folks need to READ AND UNDERSTAND any business agreement/contract BEFORE SIGNING IT. I don't care WHAT it is for; bank account, auto loan, appartment lease, or post office box.

READ THE DAMN THING BEFORE YOU SIGN! If there is ANYTHING in the written agreement/contract you do not understand, DO NOT SIGN!

Ask to take the agreement/contract with you so that you can review it and consult with someone. If they won't let you take it with you, smile and wave to them as you WALK OUT THE DOOR.

RONNIE; please post the docket/case number and the complete/correct name of the court that is going to here your case.

Good luck.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#4 Consumer Comment

Couldn't agree with Edgeman more...

AUTHOR: ReactorCore - (Canada)

Everything Edgeman said is ultimately true.

Ronny here can't accept the fact that the fees he refers to don't work "his way", as in the way and order he wants them to work in regards to being processed and posted on his account. This makes Ronny butthurt and sad.

Ronny's analogy of a thief and a wallet is piss poor too... Firstly, any victim (and that's an ACTUAL victim of an ACTUAL crime) would go through pretty much the same process; they'd be told sincerely; "it's too bad that happened to you", and then offered suggestions on how to prevent it happening again, which is exactly what Ronny was offered. Next, a thief is, well.. a THIEF. Their primary "job" is to ensure you lose your belongings and/or money and ensure it becomes their possession(s).

Ronny wants to have his cake and eat it too... He admits he screwed up, but seems to think that the bank should make an exception for him because he's special somehow and the rules should not apply to him. He admits, openly, that he doesn't fully read the terms and conditions in his contract to his bank in regards to fees and rates, but again, seems to be of the opinion that if he didn't read it, it's been somehow "hidden" from him and, again, due to that, shouldn't apply to him. That he flip flops back and forth between admitting that he's in error, yet insisting that he's still been wronged, makes me wonder if he doesn't suffer from some manner of bipolar disorder.

It's actually very telling that Ronny, instead of manning up, taking the advice for what it's worth and going on his way to tilt at windmills if he so chooses, decides to issue another "Rip Off Report" just to take a swipe at the many people with common sense who DARED tell him he was in the wrong, in addition to exhorting the masses to join his mighty cause in wasting their time, effort and precious resources in the ever-popular "class action" army. Ronny, indeed, seems to revel in fostering the "victim complex" and attempts to spread and incubate that virus in others with his sad flag waving like a Class 4 CDC pathogen. Kind of like Ebola.

Ronny makes people who genuinely and honestly do not understand bank fees and will honestly learn from their oversights on the issue and adjust their habits accordingly look unnecessarily foolish and, quite frankly, is a living embarrassment to them, as he presents himself as the epitome of consumer ignorance and presents a sense of unwarranted self importance and privilege, a trait that's becoming all too common among those who feel somehow "wronged" by bank fees, all because they couldn't keep tabs on their personal spending habits and take the time to understand how electronic and traditional commerce and transactions interact with each other in today's world.

No, Ronny is one of those well on his way to spiraling down the well of madness that wholeheartedly believes in the "New World Order - Illuminati - Freemason - Obama - Corporate Shadow Government Conpiracy" where subscription to that group has no "hidden fees" and a sign up bonus of two tinfoil hats for the price of one. He can share the second one with Karl, I suppose...

Naturally, anyone and everyone who told him he was just plain wrong and to STFU and GTFO, simply MUST work for the EVIL corporations or bank. This makes it much easier for Ronny to dismiss the careful logic and well thought out and detailed explanations his detractors have laid before him in enough flavors for him to chose one, absorb the information and move on.

The truly lulzy thing will be, that when his Charge of the Light Brigade against the banks via the beloved "class action" ultimately meets with Epic Fail, he'll probably come back to the ROR with yet another report saying how whatever attorney he dealt with "ripped him off" by not getting any results for him and taking his money.

Ronny truly lives in a world made of asspats and rainbows where everyone drinks unicorn giggles. Must be nice. You can actually almost imagine him; sitting in a seedy little bar somewhere, back to the corner in his chair (so the pickpockets can't get to his wallet), nursing his beer (paid for with a debit card close to being overdrafted) and muttering to himself as his eyes dart back and forth from patron to patron, envisioning them all as part of the great conspiracy to take the hard earned money (that he won't have after he pays for that next beer) from his bank account via his wallet.

Pretty sad, really.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#5 Consumer Comment

Debra...

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

While there are others who will spend hours upon hours trying to prove that the banks are evil, you actually figured it out. The best way to avoid the fees is as you said by "exercising firm discipline".

It didn't take any Class Action Lawsuit, any Acts of Congress. It just took you taking responsibility over your account.

By the way Congress has had the opportunity in the past to regulate these fees. In each case they have refused, saying basically that the banks can charge what they want.

Don't expect this to change anytime soon. Because the leaders of Congress are all but bought and paid for by the banking industry(among others). Heck the VP is from Delaware which has probably the most lienient banking laws in the Country. These regulations are the reason why several banks are located in Delaware.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#6 Consumer Comment

Regulation

AUTHOR: Debra - (U.S.A.)

Managing your account is your business. I'm the world's worst at this and I have managed to avoid such fees by exercising firm discipline. For the rest of it, it will not be settled by class action, the banks will throw you a bone and continue on as they have been. The bigger the banks get, the smaller their incentive to keep depositors. Change will only come at the federal level. Save your money, demand stricter regulations on the banking industry from your concresscritters.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#7 Consumer Comment

You're fighting the worng war...

AUTHOR: Edgeman - (U.S.A.)

Ronny,

Very rarely do I see people become as emotionally invested in an artificially constructed fantasy world as you appear to be. You'll go so far to protect your vision as to suggest that people like Jim or Robert are bank employees and even describe a plainly listed $2 ATM fee as "hidden". You call foul on the use of insults and belittling behavior but have no qualms about doing the same to others.

I know that you believe that you will get back all of the money that you paid in overdraft fees and normally I'd try to use logic to explain why this won't happen, but it's obvious that you won't heed the advice. I only hope that you will post the docket number of your case so that the rest of us can track your progress.

While you may be tired of advice on how to avoid overdraft fees, the sheer number of reports indicate that a lot of people can benefit from this advice. In this economy there are clearly better uses for You are not required to read this advice if you're tired of doing so.

And yes, many of the reports on this site are about demanding refunds of legitimate overdraft charges? Don't believe me, let's go through a random sample of a hundred, two hundred or even five hundred reports and see how many of those overdraft fees are due to mismanagement on the part of the account holder.


Consider this - According to the 2008 FDIC study on overdraft fees, the majority of checking account holders do not pay overdraft fees. Do you think that their methods of managing checking accounts might be worth considering?

What's really ironic is that Ronny and the people that he refers to as bank employees and defenders have a similar goal. We all want to see people pay fewer or no overdraft fees to the bank. The difference lies in the course of action. We advocate personal responsibility and tried and true techniques for avoiding overdraft fees. These techniques are proven to be effective. Ronny's approach is to promote a sense of victimhood and to waste time, energy and resources on a lawsuit that will ultimately fail to change anything.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#8 Consumer Comment

You'er Wasting Your Time

AUTHOR: Jim - (U.S.A.)

Banks arent going to give you a refund of their money - and let's remember it is their money since people who overdraft their account essentially gave it to the bank. As I've already indicated to you on other posts, nobody is going to give you a refund for a process that is LEGAL. The courts have already established a due care test, and while you don't WANT to talk about some of the failures like not keeping a check register, exercising due care REQUIRES that exactly. You can't have a meaningful discussion - period - about this issue unless you talk about those things you wish not to discuss. BTW - if you want to give your lawyer something to chew on - have him look up the Gutierrez vs. Wells Fargo case that led to the dissolution of one class of the suit and should also result in the dismissal of the resequencing class based on the test issued. That should finally end the idiotic class action lawsuits against that victimize the public more than the bank.

Everyone has the right to go to court, but it's stupid if you can avoid it. It is much easier to exercise due care like keeping a check register. If you do it right, you will never see a court room, never have to speak to a lawyer, and finally you will never have to lose a single dime to a bank.

Even if the bank's settle, your share will amount to less than $80. That's what the class received in a Bank of America settlement. You may have brought the case to the lawyer, but $80 will be all you'll get and that will be years down the line. Your lawyers will thank you for bringing work to them - which will be very profitable to them. It will net them hundreds of thousands of dollars.

BTW - the big ripoff isn't the bank. It's the class action lawsuits against the bank. Anyone who received $78 after blowing thousands in NSF fees would appreciate that they got $78, but probably paid that out in other fees back to another bank. The winners in lawsuits are the lawyers and the bank. Not you. Not me. Certainly not the insurance companies who pay the lawyers.
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?
Wal-Mart.com USA, LLC

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.



Ripoff Report Legal Directory