• Report: #153214

Complaint Review: Bank Of America

Thank You

Read how Ripoff Report saves consumers millions.

  • Submitted: Wed, August 10, 2005
  • Updated: Sun, February 07, 2010

  • Reported By:Diamond Bar California
Bank Of America
2129 Shattuck Avenue Pasadena, California U.S.A.
  • Phone: 866-239-9285
  • Web:
  • Category: Banks

Bank Of America "Bad Faith" Policies and Practices are in volation of California Comercial Code, ripoff Pasadena California

*Consumer Comment: LAW FIRM POEM...

*Consumer Comment: bad case/good law

*Consumer Comment: Take responsibility for your bank accounts

*Consumer Comment: I've never had a problem

*Consumer Suggestion: You're complaining about standard banking practices

*Consumer Comment: Nice try. cut you some slack

*Consumer Comment: Can't you come up with anything better than that?

*Consumer Comment: You will never learn

*Consumer Comment: umm... problem that you legitimately caused yourself.

*Consumer Comment: There is more to the story.

*Consumer Comment: Did you have the funds or not?

*Consumer Comment: Why did you spend that much?

*Consumer Comment: Why did you spend that much?

*Consumer Comment: Why did you spend that much?

*Consumer Comment: Why did you spend that much?

*Consumer Comment: You agreed to those terms.

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!

Just the facts:

1. On 8/8/05 my bank account was overdrawn and on 8/9/05 I was charged the maximum NSF fee of $170 in a single day ($34 per item x 5 items).
2. Here is the ORDER in which BofA chose to process the items (taken directly from my account on their website a few moments ago).
3. These are all electronic debits (VISA ATM).

Date -> Item -> Amount -> Balance
8/8/05 -> Dennis Uniform -> $100.42 -> $5.78
8/8/05 -> Exxon Mobil -> $40.00 -> -$34.22
8/8/05 -> Sakura of Tokyo -> $34.99 -> -$69.21
8/8/05 -> Target -> $30.43 -> -$99.64
8/8/05 -> K-Mart -> $22.94 -> -$122.58
8/8/05 -> Payless Shoes -> $5.40 -> -$127.98

This happened to me once before exactly the same way which leads me to conclude that the bank, even though it may NOT be in violation of it's contract, is, in fact, in violation of California law (Commercial Code Section 4103) which holds them to a standard of commercial reasonableness with regard to overdraft fees. Specifically, here is what they do:

1. They hold all of your transactions until the end of the day, then
2. They exercise the maximum delay in posting deposits to extend the duration of the vulnerable period during which they may exercise overdraft fees.
3. They almost never decline electronic debits. If there are more than 5 electronic debits on any given that are presented against an overdrawn balance, they will hold the presentation of those debits until the following day so that overdraft fees may be collected.
4. They ALWAYS process debits in the order of largest to smallest (see the example above I have others and this is ALWAYS the way it works).
5. 1 thru 4 combined ensures that they will ALWAYS collect the maximum number of overdraft fees possible.
6. In addition, because overdraft fees are presented the following day, they sometimes collect overdraft fees on overdraft fees when an account remains negative. The contract does not prevent them from doing this. Theoretically they can charge you $1054 in overdraft fees on a 31 day month, or $12,410 if you were so stupid as to forget about your bank account for an entire year.

I did some research

My bank's contract states: When you do not have enough available funds to pay all items on a given day, we may pay one or more items, and return other items, in any order we deem appropriate. We may change our processing order at any time without notice to you, even though some processing orders may result in more insufficient funds fees than others (Bank of America California Deposit Agreement and Disclosures, Effective October 1, 2004, page 30).

Translation: If your account is overdrawn, we can present items in any manner that we see fit in order to maximize the penalties against you.

Is this legal? I'm not an attorney, but I did go to the California Law website (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html) to see what the law states. It seems that banking practices with regard to the presentation of items against an overdrawn balance are dealt with in the Commercial Code section. Specifically, there 2 areas, under which, I believe they are in violation of the law.

1. Commercial Reasonableness
a. The California Code specifically regulates the order in which items can be presented. Albeit extensive, the language is specific. The extent of language used to clarify matters here leads me to believe that the intent of the law is such that the bank certainly cannot have an anything goes policy.
b. Commercial Code Sections 3103 and 4103 are the most interesting. In these sections, a standard of commercial reasonableness is established that would seem to govern the bank's behavior. The bank can be held in breach of this standard if they fail to follow ordinary care procedures (Section 3103). This means that the bank must observe reasonable commercial standards, prevailing in the area in which the person is located, with respect to the business in which the person is engaged.

2. Bad Faith
a. California law defines Good Faith behavior on the part of the bank in the following manner: Good faith" means honesty in fact and the observance of reasonable commercial standards of fair dealing.
b. Under Section 4103, the penalty for bad faith is as follows: (e) The measure of damages for failure to exercise ordinary care in handling an item is the amount of the item reduced by an amount that could not have been realized by the exercise of ordinary care. If there is also bad faith it includes any other damages the party suffered as a proximate consequence.

Given that:
a. The bank maintains an anything goes policy, AND
b. The anything goes policy is always exploited to the maximum benefit of the bank every time (not only from my own experience but also judging from the many grievances that are posted here).
THEREFORE
C. I think it is reasonable to conclude that the bank is operating on bad faith. In other words, the policies at BofA, and the exercise thereof, always produce a maximum gain for the financial institution while at the same time exploiting the weaknesses of the most vulnerable customers.

If it is not illegal, it is at least immoral, which leads me back to the bad faith conclusion once again.

I do not care if the bank gives me my money back, I would like some justice to be done here. I have the means to carry this out as far as it needs to go and I am willing to suffer further losses to do so.

David
Diamond Bar, California
U.S.A.

Click here to read other Rip Off Reports on Bank of America

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 08/10/2005 12:42 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Bank-Of-America/Pasadena-California-91109-7022/Bank-Of-America-Bad-Faith-Policies-and-Practices-are-in-volation-of-California-Comercial-153214. 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 Bank Of America

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:
0Author 16Consumer 0Employee/Owner
Updates & Rebuttals

#1 Consumer Comment

LAW FIRM POEM...

AUTHOR: Karl - (USA)

is available right here at the 'Bank of America' page of Ripoff Report.


*Anyone can 'Google' this- BROCK O'BOMB-A POEM, and that should take to to where- "LAW FIRM POEM" is posted, right?



Thank You



****************************MORTGAGE ALERT*******************************



*Don't forget to read all of St. Clair's Ripoff Reports at the MERRILL LYNCH page of this site if you have a mortgage. It seems as though there may have been some "hanky-panky" taking place, huh?
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 Consumer Comment

bad case/good law

AUTHOR: ccc pa esq - (United States of America)

In this instance the customer had a negative balance at the end of the day and so his case is probably a loser but in cases where the client's balance would or could have been positive but for manipulation by the bank then closer scrutiny by the courts (and I would hope eventually the legislatures) is definitely apposite, despite what the banks's little "contract of adhesion" may say. 


Remember that NSF's cost the bank nothing and it incurrs no excess risk unless and until they decide to honor (pay) the instrument despite the fact that at that moment the customer's balance is or the transaction in question will cause it to go negative. (Almost all NSF's result in a dishonor.) Otherwise, the NSF is a pure "cash cow" for the bank.


This very matter is the subject of litigation at the moment in GA and elsewhere in our fair nation: See http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202429119415.


by christopherccarrlaw

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#3 Consumer Comment

Take responsibility for your bank accounts

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

I am a former employee of a different bank and employees are treated as customers. So if we overdraft on our bank accounts we to had to pay the overdraft fee. No exceptions!!! Oh the only nice benefit was getting free checks.

I've learned my lesson after the 2nd overdraft.
I sucked it up and ate the charges. I've been banking with that bank now for 4 years. I agree with Edwardo take responsibility on your accounts. And be thankful the bank paid it otherwise the merchants could also charge you for insufficent funds. The bank is also providing a service for you as well, since you didn't have the money to pay the debits in good faith the bank did it for you for a fee of course. Nothing in life is free.

Who wants to pay for those fees??? I certainly didn't. But I did learn a valuable lesson. I'm sure Bank of America told you about overdraft protection. You can either open a savings account and link it to your checking and when you are short on funds in your checking account the bank automatically takes the money from your savings and deposits it to your checking account automatically there may be a small service fee for that like $6 but that sure beats the $30 dollar fee. Or you can look at your own checking account and if you realize you don't have enough to cover the items pending you can transfer the money from your savings to your checking for free. You could also get a credit card from that bank and use that as well for overdraft protection. It'll save you a lot of heart ache at the end.

You could also go inside the branch and speak to a manager. Tell the manager your predictament and see if the manager would be willing to waive all the overdraft charges, waive some of them, or waive half of them. Most mangers are willing to work with you, but it depends on how long you've been with the bank, customer loyalty. And if you have a history of overdrafting to much then they most likley will not because you're abusing the system. If you have a few overdrafts and you've been a loyal customer for quite a while more than likley they will help you out. But you need to go inside a branch and talk to a manager. Don't call the customer service center, you'll get better results going to a branch. And think about setting up for the over draft protection services.

One more thing when you do go inside a branch to talk with a manager, it will go well with you if you are nice and I emphasize nice. Because if you go in there screaming and cursing you won't get anywhere guarnteed.

And one side note a bank reserves the right to close your account if you've had too many overdrafts in a short period of time. Why? Because you've become a financial risk to the bank. They're risking losing money each time you go into the negative and constantly overdraft, the bank has guarnteed payment to all these merchants when there is no money in your account and you could end up skipping town on them and the bank ends up eating the charges. That is why fees go up to pay for accounts that have gotten into the red and haven't been paid up. So think about it. It not only effects you but also every customer who banks there as well. That's why the overdraft fees are raised, and other service charges are raised. FYI if the bank is forced to close your account due to a unpaid negative balance in a certain time period they will put you on the chex system and it won't clear for 7 years. That means you won't be able to bank ANYWHERE for the next 7 years. I don't know about you but thats quite a long time not to have an account anywhere. How will the other banks know you're on the chex systems?? The banker's when opening up accounts first thing they do is call chex systems to see if you are on their list and if so you'll be turned down.

Trust me the banks do check. And if some reason the bank was unable to get your information off the chex system and they open an account for you, and sometime later it could be a week or a month they caught their mistake and got their report that you are on chex system they will close your account immediatly i've seen that happen as well so take warning. You will have a very difficult time cashing checks without any type of an account. And to an extent it will ruin a part of your life especially if you depend on cashing checks and no more direct deposits either.

So do yourself a favor as well as for other consumers take responsiblity for your accounts.
I'm sure the other customers don't want to pay for your irresponsiblity either, it's a domino effect.

Oh and your arguement is that the bank shouldn't pay for it then if there is no money in the account, refuse the pending transaction i've seen that happen as well. But again it's a domino affect. So let's say you went to a retail store and knowing or unknowingly you didn't have the money in the account you went ahead and spent let's say $150 then in return you expect the bank to not make the payment due to lack of funds. So let's say they don't make the payment after you made the purchase. Well the retail store will send you a letter along with additional fees for non payment. you don't respond so they take you to court. They win their case and send it to a collection agency and try to collect their money. Well let's see who has been effected by this poor judgment. All the consumers who shop at that retail store. Why?? Again they in turn the retail store will raise prices because now your failure to pay the bill has now cost the company more than your $150 bill. They have court cost, legal fees, court time and of course the lawyer gets his cut by suing you for what you owe. And then if you still decided not to pay they have to turn around and find every means to collect from you.

So do us no favors and quit being selfish and just take care of business. No man is an island..

This is your lesson of banking 101

MB Phoenix AZ
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#4 Consumer Comment

I've never had a problem

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

David, I still don't understand your obsession with the order in which your expenses were charged to your account. As long as the funds are there to back them up, who cares right? Again, simple arithmetic is at play here.

You keep arguing about the punishment, but what about the cause of your problem? Namely, the inability to keep track of your expenses and deduct them from your working balalnce. I have kept a register ever since my very first checking account, and I refuse to trust electronic means to verify my balance. It has become a habit for me, so I don't see it as a hassle anymore. But guess what? I have NEVER overdrawn my account! You probably won't believe me, but I have a perfect record and I attribute this to my record keeping. This is why I find it so amusing to see people here complaining about overdrafts when they fail to acknowledge their lack of balance responsibility.

Okay, accidents can happen and mistakes can be made. But please, once you goof up, then you are at the mercy of whichever company you are dealing with. Overdrafts, returns, exchanges, and such are subject to an established procedure. You can't fight it, especially when you are at fault. You can go ahead and yell all you want about the unfairness of your situation, but I'm pretty sure anyone willing to help would ask you first "Did you have enough money in your account to begin with?". What are you going to say?

Overdrawing your account is stealing. Don't sugarcoat it and don't deny it. You went to various businesses, bought products or services, and failed to compensate them in return. What's that you say? They WERE paid? Oh, I see, the bank went ahead and used THEIR money to pay for YOUR purchases even though you DID NOT have the funds to cover it? Wow, sounds like they cut you a break instead of bouncing your purchases like they had every right to! Look up the definition of "kiting." This is the very illegal practice of writing hot checks. You can go to jail for this. You made "hot" debit card purchases, therefore you STOLE also!

Please do your bank a favor and just go close your account. I'm sure they won't miss having to bail you out everytime you miscalculate. Just start over somewhere else and start keeping a manual register.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#5 Consumer Suggestion

You're complaining about standard banking practices

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

1. They hold all of your transactions until the end of the day, then

This is normal. All banks post transactions at the end of the business day. There must be a time at which transactions are cutoff for the given day and everything else goes to the next day.

2. They exercise the maximum delay in posting deposits to extend the duration of the vulnerable period during which they may exercise overdraft fees.

All deposits are posted in accordance with Reg CC (Expediated Funds Availability Act). Deposits are posted before debits.

3. They almost never decline electronic debits. If there are more than 5 electronic debits on any given that are presented against an overdrawn balance, they will hold the presentation of those debits until the following day so that overdraft fees may be collected.

Debits are posted the same business day that they are presented to the bank by the merchant. Debits are not held for the purpose of maximizing fees.

4. They ALWAYS process debits in the order of largest to smallest (see the example above I have others and this is ALWAYS the way it works).

I have never known a bank not to do this. Keep in mind, the bank is a business and one of it's sources of income is fees. If you maintain your account without overdraft, then you are not charged overdraft fees, but if you authorize charges without having the available balance, then then bank is within it's rights to charge you a fee for this violation of your deposit agreement. Incidentally, Bank of America uses a tiered fee structure. If you're getting charged $34 per occurrance, you must have been overdrawn at least 3 - 4 other times.

5. 1 thru 4 combined ensures that they will ALWAYS collect the maximum number of overdraft fees possible.

If you fail to maintain your account within the terms of your deposit agreement, then yes the bank will charge you the maximum possible under the circumstances. In some cases, the maximum is $19 (for a single overdraft when there have been no previous occurrances) up to $170 (for 5 or more overdrafts when there have been more than 4 occurrances).

6. In addition, because overdraft fees are presented the following day, they sometimes collect overdraft fees on overdraft fees when an account remains negative. The contract does not prevent them from doing this. Theoretically they can charge you $1054 in overdraft fees on a 31 day month, or $12,410 if you were so stupid as to forget about your bank account for an entire year.

Overdraft fees do not generate additional overdraft fees. Nor do account maintenance fees, check enclosure fees, etc cause additional overdraft fees. The only thing that causes overdraft fees are merchant debits.

Section 4401 (b)
A customer is not liable for the amount of an overdraft if the customer neither signed the item nor benefited from the proceeds of the item.

So, perhaps you didn't sign for the gas you purchased at Exxon Mobil, but you did benefit from the proceeds of the item, therefore you are liable for the fee.

The end result is that if you maintain a proper check register then you will not overdraw your account, and you will not be subject to overdraft fees.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#6 Consumer Comment

Nice try. cut you some slack

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

Eduardo, I am going to cut you some slack and assume that you are telling the truth about not working for the bank. Reading through some of the posts like yours, 9 times out of 10, it is safe to assume that you would be a bank-worker. Fine.

I am also willing to accept that you don't care what the bank does to somebody whose balance becomes overdrawn. Most people do. That is really weak to make your point on the basis of a minority opinion.

You have really set yourself up here, Mr. Perfection. All I have to do now is just wait for your name to popup attached to a complaint and then it looks like I will have a chance to laugh even harder than you! Your obsession with personal responsibility seems more like a mental illness.

Stealing? Give me a break, an overdrawn balance is not a crime and nobody buys that either.

There are 301 complaints against BOA on this website right now. Reading through them, anybody with half a brain can figure out that this company is corrupt from to bottom to the top.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#7 Consumer Comment

Can't you come up with anything better than that?

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

OK Michel, BS. That should settle it for everyone reading this Michael says BS.

Here is the excerpt from the banking contract again. I think it needs repeating so that any potential BOA customers can be forewarned and choose another bank.

When you do not have enough available funds to pay all items on a given day, we may pay one or more items, and return other items, in any order we deem appropriate. We may change our processing order at any time without notice to you, even though some processing orders may result in more insufficient funds fees than others (Bank of America California Deposit Agreement and Disclosures, Effective October 1, 2004, page 30).

With regard to the order in which transactions are processed, if you can't understand that this means anything goes, then you are pretty stupid. Proof? What are you talking about? This isn't a scientific journal. It's a complaint about BOA. Yikes, how idiotic can you be?

About Signatures:
Give me a break on your interpretation of the law. I never signed an electronic transaction, did you? If you think that was the basis for my dispute then you really are a moron!

Michael, you are stupid. Is that all you can come up with? What is your bank number?. Tell us.

I'll get to Eduardo later. I could argue with you guys all day and all you can do is just keep repeating yourselves. It's funny that BOA doesn't have to guts to settle something like this for themselves, but instead, the banks send idiots like you guys to do the dirty work. All this is doing is lowing my opinion of the banks.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#8 Consumer Comment

You will never learn

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

First of all, I do not work at a bank , work for a bank, or any type of financial institution. I am a salesperson for an electronics company. I guess anyone who dares to challenge your view is automatically "working" for the bank somehow! I'm sure all of those people out there living normal lives never having problems with their accounts are part of the "conspiracy" also, right?

I guess you just don't get it, so I'll repeat myself. Did you or did you not have the appropriate balance to pay for all of your purchases at the time you made them? I'm gonna take a wild guess here, but I bet the answer is NO. So who cares what order they charge your expenses, or the amount they charge for overdraft fees. I stand by my original statement in that your argument falls flat on its face because you put yourself in this situation with your "exploited weakness" of not being able to add or subtract. I guess it's my fault assuming you knew how to perform basic arithmetic. I didn't know you were so touchy about your problem. Mea culpa.

YOU put yourself in this situation, so why should the bank be at fault? I just love how you are trying to argue how the bank penalizes you for your lack of financial responsibility. It's like arguing the severity of punishment a court hands down for your admitted crime. The point is, YOU COMMITED THE CRIME in the first place. Who cares what they do to you, how about admitting some fault and taking your lumps? It's too late running to deposit money in your account AFTER the fact. How can this absolve you from having overdrawn your account in the first place? Like you stated, the fees come after overdrawing your account. They are in response to each specific overdraft transaction. They are not dependent upon FUTURE balances, they are reflecting your PAST balance. Even I can see why the fees are still coming through even though you made a deposit AFTER the fact. I was laughing so hard at your attempt to somehow justify your point with the phone reps. I would have blown you off as well! "Are you the president?" Ha, Ha, give me a break! You stole money by purchasing with funds you did not have, so anything you say about the unfairness of your bank is moot. "Can you please hold off on punishing me? No, then I think you operate illegaly!" Ha,Ha, you can't be serious right? Oh my god, you STOLE money. How can you even ask for such a favor with a straight face?

This world is full of people unwilling to take responsibility, always ready to point fingers and claim injustice. David, I'm sorry but I refuse to feel sorry for you when you have not convinced me that you were not at fault first.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#9 Consumer Comment

umm... problem that you legitimately caused yourself.

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

You're complaining because of a problem that you legitimately caused yourself. You need to suck it up and pay the fees.


"California law defines Good Faith behavior on the part of the bank in the following manner: Good faith" means honesty in fact and the observance of reasonable commercial standards of fair dealing."

How did they not act in good faith? If you have money in your account, you don't pay fees. If you spend more than you have, you pay fees. That's more than fair.

"Given that:
a. The bank maintains an anything goes policy,

You haven't proven that.

AND
b. The anything goes policy is always exploited to the maximum benefit of the bank every time (not only from my own experience but also judging from the many grievances that are posted here).

That's not 'anything goes', that's how a business works. They always try to do stuff towards their benefit.

THEREFORE
C. I think it is reasonable to conclude that the bank is operating on bad faith. In other words, the policies at BofA, and the exercise thereof, always produce a maximum gain for the financial institution while at the same time exploiting the weaknesses of the most vulnerable customers.

I claim BS.

Act like an adult and resolve the mess you made.

Submissions like this make me sick. It's ALWAYS the company's fault. Take responsibility for your actions first and foremost.

Oh, and calling attempting to tell them that since you didn't sign for a transaction it's not valid is a violation of federal law. Regardless of the circumstances. You're lucky if they don't prosecute.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#10 Consumer Comment

There is more to the story.

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

I have more to add to my grievance, but first, let me answer Eduardo.

You are crafty! Of course you don't work "at a bank" but I can tell that you work "for a bank." I have read enough of these reports to know that the banks have their apologists all over this website. It's a dead giveaway, when somebody like you comes on here and gives a lecture about simple arithmetic or spending too much but then chooses to ignore illegal and immoral behavior on the part of the financial institution. I am so glad that you had enough to cover your last car note, but gosh if you just had a few more dollars in the bank you might not have paid $37 bucks for your fast food bill! That was one hell of an expensive Big Mac!

You say that if a person overspends then his or her argument is moot? You can't be serious. That is like saying that anybody who overspends, not matter what the circumstances, deserves whatever they have coming to them. How about if I was the bank holding your money and you accidentally made a mistake in your simple arithmetic which lead to overspending. If the overspending argument is moot, then you shouldn't mind if I decided to shoot you in the foot instead of chagrining you $34!

You also say that it is makes sense to put in the big payments first. What a bunch of bull! Since when did it become the benevolent bank's responsibility to decide which one of my payments was most important? Let's get back to your simple arithmetic. If the bank calculates that a big first policy will generate and extra $900 million in annual revenue, do you really think they were so concerned about your car note when they made this decision?

Now to give you all a few more details

As soon as I found out about this, I immediately took everything I had and made a deposit in the amount of $605. The next morning when I got up and looked on the internet, the bank was showing my deposit, dated 8/9/05, in the pending column. They also showed a few other transactions posting against a negative balance on 8/9/05, in addition to the NSF fee of $170.

I called customer service right away and spoke with a man named Robert Stevenson. First of all, I didn't argue with him about bank policies. I simply asked him to explain this. He said that they were fixing to charge me another $134 in overdraft fees on 8/9/05. How can that be when you have a deposit showing? They never did explain this to me. Without disputing the fees, I asked if the bank could hold off on these and any more charges for a short period of time until I could get the situation under control. Not a chance. For some reason, he launched into a weird mantra asking me Did you authorize these charges? That's what they do--they go down the decision tree and then just repeat whatever is there until you either hang up in frustration or insist on speaking to a supervisor. Here is another excerpt from the California Commercial Code:

Section 4401 (b)
A customer is not liable for the amount of an overdraft if the customer neither signed the item nor benefited from the proceeds of the item.

I decided that two can play at that game, so I told him. I never signed for them. I told Robert that under California Commercial Code, I would seem to have certain rights as a customer, one of which is to be dealt with reasonably. If the bank has automatic procedures in place that cannot be halted or interrupted no matter what the circumstances or consequences are (even life or death) then this is clearly illegal.

He connected me to the supervisor, Amora Akabar, #1580.

When 1580 came on the phone, she tried to hook me into some ridiculous argument immediately saying so you called to dispute transactions that you did not authorize. I said, no wait a minute. I called to ask you about overdraft charges. I asked again if the bank could hold off on any more charges for a short period of time until I could get the situation under control. She refused. "We can't and won't do that." I explained that it seems to be illegal (if you don't believe me check out the California Code yourself) to treat me in an unreasonable way and that I had certain rights as a customer. I also explained that even if the bank couldn't stop an automatic process, they could temporarily credit my account and then reverse credits and charges later. When I asked to speak to her manager for further assistance, she specifically told me that there was no higher authority at Bank of America. I asked very specifically: Q: "Are you the president?" A: "No, but I am THE last and final authority on these matters." Q: So let me get this straight, you, 1580, are THE highest authority for customer service at Bank of America in the State of California. A: "That's right." Q: And you are refusing to help me, even if it is illegal. A: "That's right." I explained to her several times that I was only asking for the bank to treat me according to a consumer reasonableness standard and to deal with me in good faith but she did not care. She said I could write (not fax, not email, and no exceptions even in an emergency) to executive relations. If you want to get it there quickly you can send it by overnight mail.

I never realized how corrupt and immoral the backing industry has become. BANK OF AMERICA, SHAME ON YOU FOR SYSTEMATICALLY EXPLOITING THE WEAKNESSES OF YOUR MOST VULNERABLE CUSTOMERS WHO YOU CONSIDER TO BE TOO STUPID TO FIGURE OUT SIMPLE ARTIMETIC -- as Eduardo states. WHY DON'T YOU COME ON HERE YOURSELF AND EXPLAIN TO ALL YOUR POTENTIAL CUSTOMERS WHO MIGHT BE READING THIS ALL ABOUT YOUR HIGHER STANDARDS. I think it is disgraceful that you would have to hide your dishonesty and racketeering behavior, in my opinion, behind such flimsy excuses about your phony benevolence and care and concern for your customer's most important payments, while at the same time considering them to be stupid idiots who can't do simple math. Whatever makes you the extra $900 million!

Robert, thanks for telling me about Regulation E, I think I will check it out. It is hard to believe that compliance with federal regulation would allow them to ignore state law, but you might be right.

I take back what I said earlier I do want my money back and I am going to make one hell of an effort even if I can't get it.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#11 Consumer Comment

Did you have the funds or not?

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

This whole argument becomes moot if you fail to answer the simple question: "Did you spend more than what you had?" It's a very simple question to ask, yet you conveniently avoid discussing your beggining balance and why you felt it was okay to spend money you did not have.

Of course it makes sense to pay the large items first, these are usually the most important. Would you rather have your mortgage, car payment, or insurance paid versus a $5 dollar fast food bill? I hope so because I would be hopping mad if my bank bounced my car note but paid a $5 food purchase.

You mention something about the bank holding onto the debits as long as they can before presenting them all at once. SO WHAT? You are keeping track of your expenses, right? You should know what purchases you have made, deduct them from your balance, and wait for them to clear your account. Please don't tell me you blindly follow whatever balance you see (online, ATM, phone) without confirming which of your expenses have cleared or not!

When you get down to it, it's all about simple arithmetic! You subtract what you spend and add when you deposit. Is this just too hard for you to understand? Accept responsibility and stop harassing your bank.

BTW, I do not work at a bank, I'm just a guy who gets upset at people not willing to accept their mistakes and dumping their pathetic excuses on others!
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#12 Consumer Comment

Why did you spend that much?

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

Based on the information you provided, it appears that you had $100.42 in the bank. According to my calculations of the information you provided, you spent 234.18. So who do you think is in the wrong here?
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#13 Consumer Comment

Why did you spend that much?

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

Based on the information you provided, it appears that you had $100.42 in the bank. According to my calculations of the information you provided, you spent 234.18. So who do you think is in the wrong here?
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#14 Consumer Comment

Why did you spend that much?

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

Based on the information you provided, it appears that you had $100.42 in the bank. According to my calculations of the information you provided, you spent 234.18. So who do you think is in the wrong here?
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#15 Consumer Comment

Why did you spend that much?

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

Based on the information you provided, it appears that you had $100.42 in the bank. According to my calculations of the information you provided, you spent 234.18. So who do you think is in the wrong here?
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#16 Consumer Comment

You agreed to those terms.

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

I am not sure, but California law may not apply since BofA corporate office appears to be in North Carolina. But I could be wrong. Also do a web search for "Regulation E". Bank policies are based on it.

You did, however agree to those terms when you opened your account.

I would suggest closing your account with BofA and finding a smaller community based bank that is more comsumer oriented. Try to steer clear of the large national banks. Most national banks have similar policies. Read the terms and conditions located on the web site of any bank you may be considering moving your account to.

Good luck.
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?

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.



Ripoff Report Legal Directory