Bank of America Won't Stand Behind Their Decisions Topeka, Kansas

How does that "simple resolution" address the problem that the bank regards it as their prerogative to make statements verbally that they cannot and will not put in writing? THAT is the point I'm complaining about: the bank doesn't just let me say "I'm so-and-so," or "My income is $X," or "I promise to repay the money on these terms." They make me put it in writing or show them proof, right down to the last detail.

They, however, don't play by those rules. I want the rules and policies in writing: "too bad, so sad, go away."

Create a spreadsheet listing the expenses. If someone questions the expenses present them with the receipt(s). Easy as pie.

The point of my original complaint is that Bank of America refuses to put in writing what they tell you in person.

After another conversation today with another officer of the same bank, I am informed this is official BoA policy. They cannot, do not, will not provide any written documentation of any answer to any question *unless* there is a preprinted and preapproved form or marketing brochure.

If you go in and ask them "why did you take money from my account?" or "what is your policy about X?" or "what do I need to do such-and-thus?", they will give you a verbal answer. They have people in the bank whose main job is to give verbal answers to those kinds of questions. However, the answers CANNOT and WILL NOT be written. They can hand you a brochure, and if that brochure has what you need, then great. If that brochure does not answer the question, well, you are just going to have to take it on faith that what they said today is what they're going to say next time somebody asks the same question.

I have always taken the attitude that where financial and legal matters are concerned, if it's not in writing it didn't happen. The particulars of what question I wanted answered in writing are less important than the fact that the bank refuses to give a written answer to a question, any question. That is an unreasonable business practice, which IS a rip-off.

And voiceofreason, you are unreasonable. When you go to your bank and ask to purchase cashier's checks out of the account in your name, does your bank refuse to do so on the grounds that "you could later claim they stole the money" and insist that all checks and withdrawals out of that account have to be payable only to you? MY bank says fine, here's the form to sign and here's the checks. YMMV.

As far as paperwork to satisfy the relatives, I'm not sure that is even possible--no amount of invoices and receipts is likely to prevent assorted ugly scenes

-  If what you are saying is true one more document is not going to all of the sudden change your relatives from the Bundy's to the Cleaver's.  If you have the legal documents that say you have this authority and you have the receipts of how you spent the money they can throw a "hissy fit" all they want.  In short..who cares if your relatives are satisfied.  Yes that is a sad thing to say, but I have a feeling you may be thinking the same thing.

In the end BofA is not a family counselor and they did not RipOff you by not giving you a document that you don't even seem to need.

There is no court-appointed executor yet, and may not be for months. (Yes, I have strange relatives.) I had all of the proper legal documents to take custody of the body and arrange the funeral, which in this state is a power distinct from being in charge of the financial affairs of the estate. (Yes, these are usually the same person, but see above about relatives.) Most of the funeral was preplanned and prepaid, so all I had to worry about was the little extras, and this separate account was funded just for that purpose.

I have full legal authority to withdraw the money, and the bank agrees the money is now mine to do with as I see fit. It was a payable-on-death account that passes outside the venue of the probate court, and as far as paperwork to satisfy the law or the court, that is not an issue--I've already had proper legal advice there. As far as paperwork to satisfy the relatives, I'm not sure that is even possible--no amount of invoices and receipts is likely to prevent assorted ugly scenes. (FORTY YEARS after the fact, they're still arguing over where great-grandma was buried, because the person who had to decide picked the "wrong" cemetery. Ann Landers would have had a field day.)

I want to build as strong a paper trail as I can, however. The bank doesn't have to take my word on how the money is spent--they didn't ask and they don't care. Their position is that they are unable to give the money to anybody other than me, even at my direction. The account said payable to me, so they MUST pay the money directly to me, in a single check. All I wanted was a statement on letterhead: "We are unable to give the money to anybody other than the named beneficiary, even at her direction. The account said payable to this person, so we as the bank MUST pay the money directly to this person, in a single check."

That is basically verbatim what they told me in person, and what they categorically refused to put in writing.

there are $17 Billion in 'secret life insurance policies' that Bank of America has taken out on its current and former employees, okay?

Seventeen billion dollars is 17,000 piles of cash each containing one million dollars!

Simply 'Google' this- BANK EXECUTIVES PROFITING ON THE DEATH OF EMPLOYEES, and read the related articles on the web for proof. (Wells Fargo has $17 Billion and JP Morgan Chase has $11 Billion in these secret life insurance policies on their employees.)

Then type in 411913 at this site and read Ripoff Report #411913 for additional information regarding these 'secret life insurance policies' that the banks have taken out on their employees.

Thank You

***POLITICIAN ALERT: Make sure to type in the following at this site and read the Ripoff Reports from people all over America for important information-

POLITICIAN
OBAMA
BUSH
CHENEY
CLINTON
REAGAN
COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN
MAYOR
SENATOR
GOVERNOR
PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE
US GOVERNMENT

Yo, buddy boy! The bank is REQUIRED to pay the beneficiary - YOU! That's what a payable upon death account is!
If they wrote checks to every Tom, d**k and Harry you asked them to, you could later claim they stole the money rightfully left to you. and none of that is here nor there; they had no option whatsoever to do anything else but make out 1 single check to you.
No other relatives have anything to do with this account. It was left payable to YOU! It bypasses probate entirely! It is YOUR money, to do with as you please. Even if you're not the executor, nobody can make you spend the cash on anything, were you of a mind to keep it.
You choose to pay for all these funeral services? Fine and dandy. Go ahead, using YOUR OWN CHECKS!

The poor shnooks in the branch office had no obligation to give you such a silly letter, and probably had no authority to even were they of a mind to. Nor was it necessary. Any moron can look up the particulars of a POD account on the internet.

You were a real a-hole posting this as a ripoff. Of all the thing Barf of America does that deserve posting here, and they do plenty, you're one of the few totally unjustified reports on them.

It's wonderful that you at least had the integrity to want to do the right thing with those funds, because legally you could just pocket them and leave funeral expenses to whatever assets were left to probate. It's just too bad you have little common sense to go along with your heart, and tarred innocent workers and a bank for nothing here.

do you think that is so very odd or suspicious?
- Without knowing all of the details...Possibly

As they say the "Devil is in the details" as to if you did or did not have the legal authority to even withdraw the funds.   But for this posting sake let's say you did.

You could have accepted the single check and pay each of these companies yourself with the funds.  When you did that you would have received an invoice/receipt this would have accomplished the same thing.  In fact it would actually be better.  Because while the bank would just say that they issued the check, the receipts would PROVE that you actually use the funds for the appropriate purpose.

In that respect I can see why the bank would not want to put themselves into the position of having to "trust" you that you would do as you said.  A letter showing that you withdrew a single amount would not hold up in any court as proof that you actually spent the money appropriately.

but I wanted something to explain why I put the money in my own account, for if or more likely when certain relatives throw a fit. That seemed perfectly reasonable to me; do you think that is so very odd or suspicious?

Who is the court (probate) appointed executor of the estate?  If it is YOU, then the relatives can "throw a fit" all they like.  An executor of an estate has the full backing of the courts to perform all transactions necessary to the closing of the estate IAW the deceased's Will and applicable State laws.  An executor is allowed to be reimbursed by the Estate for expenses incurred in discharging the liabilities of the Estate (funeral expenses, transferring title of vehicle, insurance, liquidating assets, etc.)  Additionally, in many States, the executor is allowed to be paid a FEE from Estate assets for performing Executor duties-the amount of this fee varies from state to state.  These expenses are discharged before any relatives can "throw a fit" about what they think they should inherit.

If you're that concerned about the reactions of your relatives, you can have the bank issue you a draft for the funds in the savings account (close the account) and use that draft to open an "estate checking" account- "The Estate of John Doe" account with you as the authorized person to write checks.  This isn't necessary for the court, but it might help you deal with your relatives.  Be aware that this will pose an ADDITIONAL expense for the administration of the estate (additional bank fees) and result in LESS assets to be disbursed.  As estate assets are liquidated (selling of vehicle, furniture, other assets, etc) you could deposit the proceeds of any liquidation actions into this estate account pending final disbursement to heirs.  I wouldn't do it this way because of the additional costs (unless it is required by State law-check with your nearest probate court), but the choice is yours.

I've had some experience with probate court and was the executor of 2 estates.  My wife was the executor of her mom's estate, so I have experience setting up a trust (for her sibling) with her as the administrator of the trust.

Record keeping is the key.  If you keep accurate and complete records of all actions you take to close the estate, you shouldn't have any problems with the court or your relatives.

IF you are NOT the executor, that is a problem for you.  You should file in probate court to be appointed the Executor of the Estate before one of your fit throwing relatives gets the idea.

IF someone else has been appointed the Executor of the Estate, you very likely will have BIGGER PROBLEMS and should consult with an attorney very soon.

that he had in the bank to his grandchildren, but the people at the bank told him that the money was gone.

Feel free to type in 453956 at this site and you can read Jim's Ripoff Report. Jim had a $100,000 CD at Wells Fargo bank, which was for his grandchildren's college education, but Wells Fargo was not able to disburse the money because they told him that it was no longer there.

I hope that the money you have at Bank of America is still there. The only way that you'll ever know if the money is still there is if you are able to receive it, correct?

EXAMPLE: Let's assume that someone has a savings account at Bank of America, and they have $100,000 in the account. Then one day the account holder went to his Bank of America branch to see if they could process four "disbursements" of $20,000 to each of the account holder's four grandchildren for their college tuition. If the bank said that they would not disburse the $80,000 to the grandchildren, then it is possible that the money is no longer in the account, right? And if the bank is unable to "disburse" the money to the account holder, then we can logically conclude that the money is gone, wouldn't you agree?

Good luck to you.

***POLITICIAN ALERT: Feel free to type in the following at this site and read the Ripoff Reports from people all over America for important information-

POLITICIAN
OBAMA
BUSH
CHENEY
CLINTON
REAGAN
COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN
PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE
MAYOR
SENATOR
GOVERNOR
US GOVERNMENT

It was a savings account payable to me on the death of an older relative. It was intended that the money be used to pay unbudgeted final expenses, so I wanted them to disburse it by writing separate cashier's checks to the florist, the minister, etc. Bank of America insisted they could only issue one check for the full amount, which leaves the workaround: get a single check to me that I then deposit in my own account and write my own checks to pay those bills.

Since they would not write multiple checks, what I wanted them to put on letterhead was something like, "We will not write multiple checks, but only pay it out in one single check to the named beneficiary." The bank is perfectly willing to give me the whole amount, but I wanted something to explain why I put the money in my own account, for if or more likely when certain relatives throw a fit. That seemed perfectly reasonable to me; do you think that is so very odd or suspicious?

For a bank to say that they can't "disburse" the funds the way you want, and then you wanting a document on their letterhead stating why you were doing a "work around" sure makes it sound like something is not quite right with what you are trying to do.

So exactly what did you want to do?