Bank Of America Deceptive practices; caring only for profit, not customer Globally Worldwide

You said that you used your savings account at your new account provider to protect yourself, but every bank offers overdraft protection so you don't run into those fees.

You chose not to have that on your BofA account. Your bad.

Clara,

Tears have flooded my eyes after reading your story.

But they are tears of uncontainable laughter caused by my reaction to how foolish you believe we are. You should be on the Hallmark channel working in one of their featured series.

If BofA did what you narrate, then it must have been on Fantasy Island. I doubt they did all those nice gestures in continental USA. And without having a fit on the other side of the phone? Impossible.

Clara, how much did BofA pay you for such a ridiculous narration?

Thanks

Clara,

Tears have flooded my eyes after reading your story.

But they are tears of uncontainable laughter caused by my reaction to how foolish you believe we are. You should be on the Hallmark channel working in one of their featured series.

If BofA did what you narrate, then it must have been on Fantasy Island. I doubt they did all those nice gestures in continental USA. And without having a fit on the other side of the phone? Impossible.

Clara, how much did BofA pay you for such a ridiculous narration?

Thanks

Clara,

Tears have flooded my eyes after reading your story.

But they are tears of uncontainable laughter caused by my reaction to how foolish you believe we are. You should be on the Hallmark channel working in one of their featured series.

If BofA did what you narrate, then it must have been on Fantasy Island. I doubt they did all those nice gestures in continental USA. And without having a fit on the other side of the phone? Impossible.

Clara, how much did BofA pay you for such a ridiculous narration?

Thanks

I've use Wells Fargo, Key Bank, US Bank, and Bank of America is by far the easiest to deal with. The banking industry does rip people off, especially poor people, and BofA is no exception. But still, my interactions with them have been far more positive than with other banks.

I'm admittedly someone who also doesn't keep a balance on my checking account, but I am able to rely just fine on the online balances. I only write checks for my rent, and I use an ATM no more than three to four times per year. I do everything with the card. I use it as a debit for purchases, and credit for paying bills. The only thing I need to keep track of are the gas purchases - everything else is deducted instantly from the online available balance.

They have never allowed me to make a debit or credit card purchase when there wasn't enough money to cover it, and they've never charged me for attempting to make a purchase that I didn't have the money for. (though I've been with other banks that did that)

I do occasionally float checks for a day or two, and I have never had them give me an NSF based on when the check was written.

One time when I was especially broke and a single mom with a sick baby, I made several purchases on my card in one day - they were all less than $5.00 . I was very broke, and I went to like four different stores (all on the same block) to get the cheapest prices I could on each item I needed. I thought I was not overspending, but later that night I realized that I had a pending gas purchase. I cried my eyes out as I realized that I was gonna get slammed with an overdraft fee for each one of those tiny purchases, and I wasn't getting paid for like four more days - the $1.00 I'd tried to save on the cold medicine, the $.75 on the milk, the $2.00 on the diapers....they were now going to cost an extra $30 each. I had a few bucks that I put in the ATM, but it wasn't enough to cover it. I wrote a note explaining my mistake, apologizing profusely, and begging for any help they could give me. They held those debit card transactions for the whole four days and didn't charge me a single fee.

I had direct deposit with them, and whenever pay day fell on a Monday, the funds showed in my available balance on Saturday morning.

Later I got a job with a paycheck every Friday and I couldn't get direct deposit. They only offer a free account if you have direct deposit or do all your transactions by ATM. But I had a hard time waiting the whole weekend for my ATM deposits to clear, so I was going in the bank of Fridays and depositing them in person at $3.00 a pop. When they noticed that I was paying $12 a month to deposit my paycheck, they put a note on my account deferring the fees for the next five years.

Last week they credited a deposit later than they should have and I got two overdraft fees as a result. I called them and they were kind and apologetic, and the fees were removed within 12 hours.

These things happened in several different branches over a 5-6 year period. It's been a much better experience than with other banks I've used. Wells Fargo was the worst. They would literally berate me whenever I had an overdraft. They were so incredibly rude and mean. They would also put holds on deposits without telling me - not my regular paychecks, but gifts from family and that sort of thing. They sent a notice about it, but not until 12 days after I made the deposit. They recently held a friend's deposit for 21 friggin days. Really unbelievable.

Bank of America is great about sending out notices regarding overdrafts. They are mailed out locally the same day that they occur, and I always receive them the next day. All of the other banks that I've used sent out the notices 5-7 days later - by which point a $5.00 math mistake or forgotten transaction has cost you $200.

Wendy,

Thank you for the Heads Up on Bank of America. It is nice to know how they treat people and I don't think that I will be a customer!

I have noticed that there are over 491 reports/complaints just on the rip-off report website. Wow! That is a lot of complaints for a company that claims great customer service.

So I can only conclude that there is a problem with this company and that it would be best to shop around and ask questions.

Wendy, your insights leading up to the complaint are informative and sheds a light on the situation that will serve as a warning for all who have an open mind.

Of course those who don't have an open mind will spend countless time writing meaningless rebuttals. (We can't do anything about close-minded people!)

Again, thank you for the heads up!

While reading Stile's well thought out response, it came to me! I know what Michael is talking about when he claims "10s of percents in overnight transactions." He is correct. Well, sort of. You see, it is a little known business practice that EVERY SINGLE corporation does. They take their cash and loan it to someone else with the requirement that the loan be paid back before, say 9am the next business day. Why do the loaners do this? To get interest on that money. Why do the borrowers do this? Because they need to show more assets than they actually have, or they need to show more cash then they actually have.

HOWEVER, they cannot use "future" money as Michael claims, they have to actually take money from their accounts and move it to the borrowers accounts. You cannot do that if you do not have the money. And yes, sometimes they earn 10s of percents, but it is not illegal, it is very common, and even the federal government does it, almost nightly!

Michael,

The reason I quote your post in my response is so that it's clear to all what part of your response I'm discussing at any particular time. It's not a question of me taking it personally, I certainly don't unless I'm directly attacked. The practice of quoting the prior poster goes back to ---, which I've used for some time, so it's an old habit.

But back to the main point, I have reread what I've written, that BofA and Wells (and indeed most of the banking industry) had growth right around 10% from 2004 - 2005. This is not the same as your assertion that banks are running secret overnight transactions that make gains in the "tens of percents." If banks earned tens of percents per night, then the overall growth for the year would be much higher than ten percent total.

Secondly, with regard to my alleged bias. I appreciate that I am responding from the banker's point of view, however I do stick strictly to facts and avoid posting about my own employer to avoid bias. If you read my posting history, you'll see that I do advise ways to get fees back, to file claims, to contact executive departments, to contact the OCC, and to file suit when necessary. I believe that relationship between a bank and a customer is a contractual one and that when the terms of that contract are not met that there are penalties. I realize that people feel that OD/NSF fees are high and don't like the way they're calculated, but this is disclosed up front and they're easily avoidable.

I suggest that people should perform due diligence, maintain their accounts responsibly, and be aware of the terms of their agreements. How is any of this biased or controversial?

Mr. Stile, please apologize for my confusion with regard to the gender that I applied based on the name. It is caused my unfamiliarity with this name.

I admit that you are knowledgable, but you are biased also, and this doesn't give your opinion a balance.

Please don't quote all my sentences, because it tells me, and other readers, that you are taking it personal. Please state your disagreements without placing every paragraph that I wrote in between your paragraphs. I may be wrong, prove it on your own.

You know that there are profits that come from overseas money markets, excessive fees and "unethical" practices by banks. You know it! If you want to admit it or not, that's up to you.

I will not quote you, but in a few paragraphs that you wrote you gave me the reason. Read again what you wrote.

************
NOTE TO ALL READERS OF THIS THREAD:
************
And to the other readers of this thread, am I wrong? Am I biased? Is my opinion surrealistic?
Please advise. I would greatly appreciate it.

Everyone have a good night!

Thank you

"This is hilarious! It is an outrage! How dare you say that the banks don't have the profits in the 10's of percent points."

Because they don't. Since we're dealing with BofA, let's look at their numbers. In 2004, BofA had a profit of 14.14 billion. In 2005, that profit margin rose to 16.46 billion, a 16% increase, which would seem massive except that in 2004 BofA acquired Fleet Bank and Fleet's 1st quarter numbers are excluded from BofA's 2004 results. A little digging shows that Fleet earned 788 million in net income in 1st quarter 04, meaning the difference overall between 2004 and 2005 combined was 10.2%. Even this is not in the "tens of percents" as you claim.

"What are you reading? Those old fashioned, obsolete, federal and state law compliant yearly statements. Look at the stocks!"

Why should we use anything other than the annual reports and SEC filings? But let's take your suggestion and look at stocks. On Dec 31, 2004 BofA stock closed at $46.99, and on Dec 31, 2005 the stock closed at $46.15. By your logic, Bank of America had a 1.7% loss.

"Lady, you must work in some branch office and you know absolutely nothing of the real business of the banks."

It's "gentleman" actually, and I don't work in a branch.

"You work in a bank, and you don't know how to perceive the profit and the gains?"

I know what's on the quarterly reports. If you have some other way of knowing what the "real" income is, then please share it. By the way, why is there a difference between the real income and the income listed in the quarterly reports. Wouldn't a bank want to show as much profitability as possible to have a stronger stock profile?

"But I guess your bank isn't in this game too much right now. It has a better one: It lends money to people who can't afford to pay their homes and then it forecloses them and it has an overstock of real estate. It had a good game going on for a while, didn't it? Now it is in the state of shock. The brainstorming didn't predict the market burst so early. I bet they will go back into the overseas market very soon.

Didn't you know that one of Mexicos major income comes from transactions that go through your bank and its affiliates? Goodness gracious, how come you want to put the well-informed public in the donkey's stool."

What do either of these things have to do with the price of tea in China? How does any of this relate to banks making secret profits in the "tens of percents" in overnight transactions?

"What are you doing in this forum? Spying? Worried about what the people out there are saying now that you have implemented recently the Check21 system and are literally munching in the big bucks with all the maneuvers of swiftly sending back and forth digital images between banks. Yes, between BofA and WF they transmit the images before these going to the clearing house, how convenient."

No, I'm not spying, I'm contributing. I don't post to Wells Fargo complaints for this very reason.

"I believe the chief officers of all the banks must have been in the same "Skull and Bones" society. They really help each other out."

Yes, it's all a big conspiracy.

"Bank of America had profits of 16.5 billion dollars in its last report.

Sixteen and a half billion dollars! Most of it from NSF fees and overseas markets. Since interest rates are so low I doubt they made it with them."

Actually, if we look at the annual report, we can see where the profits came from. 52% of income came from "Global Consumer and Small Business banking" and the annual report notes that this comprised of a 25% increase in Credit card profits, 42% growth in home equity loans, deposit growth, corporate mortgage bank income, and balance growth which generated increased service fees. Now, of those service fees, certainly some are going to be OD/NSF fees, but the monthly maintenance charges are also included as well as things like check copy fees and stop payments. There's no breakdown of how those fees are divvied up.

"Sorry, your bank didn't do as well, only 7.7 billion dollars. But Wells Fargo's assets did escalate quite a bit. Housing market bubble?"

BofA is a lot larger than Wells, so you can't really compare the two. But we did have a 9% increase in revenue, so no shame there.

"This is public information. I would like to peak at the private stuff."

Why do you suspect it's any different?

"Stile, have a wonderful banking week! But please remember to stand for your customer. Aren't we your reason of existence?"

Indeed, and all banks value their customers which is why we provide deposit agreements to deal with all customers in an equitable and fair manner according to how they manage their account.

"And Stile, this is not personal. We just want to wake minds."

Many make it personal, Michael. Fortunately, I don't take things personally.

"This is hilarious! It is an outrage! How dare you say that the banks don't have the profits in the 10's of percent points."

Because they don't. Since we're dealing with BofA, let's look at their numbers. In 2004, BofA had a profit of 14.14 billion. In 2005, that profit margin rose to 16.46 billion, a 16% increase, which would seem massive except that in 2004 BofA acquired Fleet Bank and Fleet's 1st quarter numbers are excluded from BofA's 2004 results. A little digging shows that Fleet earned 788 million in net income in 1st quarter 04, meaning the difference overall between 2004 and 2005 combined was 10.2%. Even this is not in the "tens of percents" as you claim.

"What are you reading? Those old fashioned, obsolete, federal and state law compliant yearly statements. Look at the stocks!"

Why should we use anything other than the annual reports and SEC filings? But let's take your suggestion and look at stocks. On Dec 31, 2004 BofA stock closed at $46.99, and on Dec 31, 2005 the stock closed at $46.15. By your logic, Bank of America had a 1.7% loss.

"Lady, you must work in some branch office and you know absolutely nothing of the real business of the banks."

It's "gentleman" actually, and I don't work in a branch.

"You work in a bank, and you don't know how to perceive the profit and the gains?"

I know what's on the quarterly reports. If you have some other way of knowing what the "real" income is, then please share it. By the way, why is there a difference between the real income and the income listed in the quarterly reports. Wouldn't a bank want to show as much profitability as possible to have a stronger stock profile?

"But I guess your bank isn't in this game too much right now. It has a better one: It lends money to people who can't afford to pay their homes and then it forecloses them and it has an overstock of real estate. It had a good game going on for a while, didn't it? Now it is in the state of shock. The brainstorming didn't predict the market burst so early. I bet they will go back into the overseas market very soon.

Didn't you know that one of Mexicos major income comes from transactions that go through your bank and its affiliates? Goodness gracious, how come you want to put the well-informed public in the donkey's stool."

What do either of these things have to do with the price of tea in China? How does any of this relate to banks making secret profits in the "tens of percents" in overnight transactions?

"What are you doing in this forum? Spying? Worried about what the people out there are saying now that you have implemented recently the Check21 system and are literally munching in the big bucks with all the maneuvers of swiftly sending back and forth digital images between banks. Yes, between BofA and WF they transmit the images before these going to the clearing house, how convenient."

No, I'm not spying, I'm contributing. I don't post to Wells Fargo complaints for this very reason.

"I believe the chief officers of all the banks must have been in the same "Skull and Bones" society. They really help each other out."

Yes, it's all a big conspiracy.

"Bank of America had profits of 16.5 billion dollars in its last report.

Sixteen and a half billion dollars! Most of it from NSF fees and overseas markets. Since interest rates are so low I doubt they made it with them."

Actually, if we look at the annual report, we can see where the profits came from. 52% of income came from "Global Consumer and Small Business banking" and the annual report notes that this comprised of a 25% increase in Credit card profits, 42% growth in home equity loans, deposit growth, corporate mortgage bank income, and balance growth which generated increased service fees. Now, of those service fees, certainly some are going to be OD/NSF fees, but the monthly maintenance charges are also included as well as things like check copy fees and stop payments. There's no breakdown of how those fees are divvied up.

"Sorry, your bank didn't do as well, only 7.7 billion dollars. But Wells Fargo's assets did escalate quite a bit. Housing market bubble?"

BofA is a lot larger than Wells, so you can't really compare the two. But we did have a 9% increase in revenue, so no shame there.

"This is public information. I would like to peak at the private stuff."

Why do you suspect it's any different?

"Stile, have a wonderful banking week! But please remember to stand for your customer. Aren't we your reason of existence?"

Indeed, and all banks value their customers which is why we provide deposit agreements to deal with all customers in an equitable and fair manner according to how they manage their account.

"And Stile, this is not personal. We just want to wake minds."

Many make it personal, Michael. Fortunately, I don't take things personally.

"This is hilarious! It is an outrage! How dare you say that the banks don't have the profits in the 10's of percent points."

Because they don't. Since we're dealing with BofA, let's look at their numbers. In 2004, BofA had a profit of 14.14 billion. In 2005, that profit margin rose to 16.46 billion, a 16% increase, which would seem massive except that in 2004 BofA acquired Fleet Bank and Fleet's 1st quarter numbers are excluded from BofA's 2004 results. A little digging shows that Fleet earned 788 million in net income in 1st quarter 04, meaning the difference overall between 2004 and 2005 combined was 10.2%. Even this is not in the "tens of percents" as you claim.

"What are you reading? Those old fashioned, obsolete, federal and state law compliant yearly statements. Look at the stocks!"

Why should we use anything other than the annual reports and SEC filings? But let's take your suggestion and look at stocks. On Dec 31, 2004 BofA stock closed at $46.99, and on Dec 31, 2005 the stock closed at $46.15. By your logic, Bank of America had a 1.7% loss.

"Lady, you must work in some branch office and you know absolutely nothing of the real business of the banks."

It's "gentleman" actually, and I don't work in a branch.

"You work in a bank, and you don't know how to perceive the profit and the gains?"

I know what's on the quarterly reports. If you have some other way of knowing what the "real" income is, then please share it. By the way, why is there a difference between the real income and the income listed in the quarterly reports. Wouldn't a bank want to show as much profitability as possible to have a stronger stock profile?

"But I guess your bank isn't in this game too much right now. It has a better one: It lends money to people who can't afford to pay their homes and then it forecloses them and it has an overstock of real estate. It had a good game going on for a while, didn't it? Now it is in the state of shock. The brainstorming didn't predict the market burst so early. I bet they will go back into the overseas market very soon.

Didn't you know that one of Mexicos major income comes from transactions that go through your bank and its affiliates? Goodness gracious, how come you want to put the well-informed public in the donkey's stool."

What do either of these things have to do with the price of tea in China? How does any of this relate to banks making secret profits in the "tens of percents" in overnight transactions?

"What are you doing in this forum? Spying? Worried about what the people out there are saying now that you have implemented recently the Check21 system and are literally munching in the big bucks with all the maneuvers of swiftly sending back and forth digital images between banks. Yes, between BofA and WF they transmit the images before these going to the clearing house, how convenient."

No, I'm not spying, I'm contributing. I don't post to Wells Fargo complaints for this very reason.

"I believe the chief officers of all the banks must have been in the same "Skull and Bones" society. They really help each other out."

Yes, it's all a big conspiracy.

"Bank of America had profits of 16.5 billion dollars in its last report.

Sixteen and a half billion dollars! Most of it from NSF fees and overseas markets. Since interest rates are so low I doubt they made it with them."

Actually, if we look at the annual report, we can see where the profits came from. 52% of income came from "Global Consumer and Small Business banking" and the annual report notes that this comprised of a 25% increase in Credit card profits, 42% growth in home equity loans, deposit growth, corporate mortgage bank income, and balance growth which generated increased service fees. Now, of those service fees, certainly some are going to be OD/NSF fees, but the monthly maintenance charges are also included as well as things like check copy fees and stop payments. There's no breakdown of how those fees are divvied up.

"Sorry, your bank didn't do as well, only 7.7 billion dollars. But Wells Fargo's assets did escalate quite a bit. Housing market bubble?"

BofA is a lot larger than Wells, so you can't really compare the two. But we did have a 9% increase in revenue, so no shame there.

"This is public information. I would like to peak at the private stuff."

Why do you suspect it's any different?

"Stile, have a wonderful banking week! But please remember to stand for your customer. Aren't we your reason of existence?"

Indeed, and all banks value their customers which is why we provide deposit agreements to deal with all customers in an equitable and fair manner according to how they manage their account.

"And Stile, this is not personal. We just want to wake minds."

Many make it personal, Michael. Fortunately, I don't take things personally.

"This is hilarious! It is an outrage! How dare you say that the banks don't have the profits in the 10's of percent points."

Because they don't. Since we're dealing with BofA, let's look at their numbers. In 2004, BofA had a profit of 14.14 billion. In 2005, that profit margin rose to 16.46 billion, a 16% increase, which would seem massive except that in 2004 BofA acquired Fleet Bank and Fleet's 1st quarter numbers are excluded from BofA's 2004 results. A little digging shows that Fleet earned 788 million in net income in 1st quarter 04, meaning the difference overall between 2004 and 2005 combined was 10.2%. Even this is not in the "tens of percents" as you claim.

"What are you reading? Those old fashioned, obsolete, federal and state law compliant yearly statements. Look at the stocks!"

Why should we use anything other than the annual reports and SEC filings? But let's take your suggestion and look at stocks. On Dec 31, 2004 BofA stock closed at $46.99, and on Dec 31, 2005 the stock closed at $46.15. By your logic, Bank of America had a 1.7% loss.

"Lady, you must work in some branch office and you know absolutely nothing of the real business of the banks."

It's "gentleman" actually, and I don't work in a branch.

"You work in a bank, and you don't know how to perceive the profit and the gains?"

I know what's on the quarterly reports. If you have some other way of knowing what the "real" income is, then please share it. By the way, why is there a difference between the real income and the income listed in the quarterly reports. Wouldn't a bank want to show as much profitability as possible to have a stronger stock profile?

"But I guess your bank isn't in this game too much right now. It has a better one: It lends money to people who can't afford to pay their homes and then it forecloses them and it has an overstock of real estate. It had a good game going on for a while, didn't it? Now it is in the state of shock. The brainstorming didn't predict the market burst so early. I bet they will go back into the overseas market very soon.

Didn't you know that one of Mexicos major income comes from transactions that go through your bank and its affiliates? Goodness gracious, how come you want to put the well-informed public in the donkey's stool."

What do either of these things have to do with the price of tea in China? How does any of this relate to banks making secret profits in the "tens of percents" in overnight transactions?

"What are you doing in this forum? Spying? Worried about what the people out there are saying now that you have implemented recently the Check21 system and are literally munching in the big bucks with all the maneuvers of swiftly sending back and forth digital images between banks. Yes, between BofA and WF they transmit the images before these going to the clearing house, how convenient."

No, I'm not spying, I'm contributing. I don't post to Wells Fargo complaints for this very reason.

"I believe the chief officers of all the banks must have been in the same "Skull and Bones" society. They really help each other out."

Yes, it's all a big conspiracy.

"Bank of America had profits of 16.5 billion dollars in its last report.

Sixteen and a half billion dollars! Most of it from NSF fees and overseas markets. Since interest rates are so low I doubt they made it with them."

Actually, if we look at the annual report, we can see where the profits came from. 52% of income came from "Global Consumer and Small Business banking" and the annual report notes that this comprised of a 25% increase in Credit card profits, 42% growth in home equity loans, deposit growth, corporate mortgage bank income, and balance growth which generated increased service fees. Now, of those service fees, certainly some are going to be OD/NSF fees, but the monthly maintenance charges are also included as well as things like check copy fees and stop payments. There's no breakdown of how those fees are divvied up.

"Sorry, your bank didn't do as well, only 7.7 billion dollars. But Wells Fargo's assets did escalate quite a bit. Housing market bubble?"

BofA is a lot larger than Wells, so you can't really compare the two. But we did have a 9% increase in revenue, so no shame there.

"This is public information. I would like to peak at the private stuff."

Why do you suspect it's any different?

"Stile, have a wonderful banking week! But please remember to stand for your customer. Aren't we your reason of existence?"

Indeed, and all banks value their customers which is why we provide deposit agreements to deal with all customers in an equitable and fair manner according to how they manage their account.

"And Stile, this is not personal. We just want to wake minds."

Many make it personal, Michael. Fortunately, I don't take things personally.

I wish I could offer solid advice to aid you in resolving your problem in having a negative balance account with the bank. I can only offer personal experiences and opinions.

As to keeping a register, Yes, keep one. Even if you don't have checks. Jot your debits down. It is not unheard of to have merchants charge you twice or even over/undercharge for purchases. It is so much easier to look at a register to determine when/where incorrect charges occured rather than hunting for a receipt.

But, merchant errors aside, registers don't really mean a thing in terms of simple addition and subtraction. Debits are rather straight forward. Subtract it from your balance. Ignore references to check 21 and assume that all debits are deducted immediately. Check 21 appears to only benefit merchants and banks. Credits to your account seem to be where banks take advantage of people.

A person deposits monies, adds this amount to their register. Simple addition. Keeping your register balanced keeps you safe. Nope. When does your money get credited? The average bank wants you to sit tight and wait.

I, too, switched to a credit union (13 years ago.) My automatic payroll deposit is credited to my account the same day that the CU receives it. They don't have to make this money available that day, they choose to. Customer service vs member service?

Even if I can't offer pertinent advice, I encourage you to voice complaints about institutions that take advantage of the average consumer/customer. Your complaints are valid and the responses from persons such as Aafes and Michael add much to these complaints.

Actually, in a simple search of BoA's SEC fillings one can plainly see that BoA's net INCOME was 16.5 Billion. Their PROFIT was a mere 9.5Billion. While still quite high, this is almost half of what you quoted. Sorry. So where did the rest of that money go? COGS (cost of goods sold) which would be all of their expenses from payroll to insurance to the cost of people not paying their debts and so on and so on. (If you want to get techincal, BoA had a revenue of 84Billion and a COGS of 74.5Billion leaving them with 9.5Billion Gross Profit which is only 11%, nothing extreme). I would like to point out they paid over 7Billion in dividends (keeping the shareholders happy, always good). Oh and by the way, their return on assets (which would be all those accounts and all their building ect) is only 1.3%. So sorry, they did not get all of that profit from NSF. And interest rates are not all that low. They are paying low interest rates but most Americans pay quite high interest rates.

Again, I am not trying to support BoA, but if you are going to quite financials, please do it correctly.

All this information was obtained from the SEC website (www.sec.gov) in free searches. You can also read a more user friendly version at Hoovers (make sure the "s" is there) . com. This was all 2005 data. Enjoy! And please, look up any company you are going to business with. If you do not understand what the numbers mean, a quick google search will usually explain it!

Stile,

Sorry, your bank didn't do as well, only 7.7 billion dollars. But Wells Fargo's assets did escalate quite a bit. Housing market bubble?

This is public information. I would like to peak at the private stuff.

Stile, have a wonderful banking week! But please remember to stand for your customer. Aren't we your reason of existence?

And Stile, this is not personal. We just want to wake minds.

Thanks

Stile,

Bank of America had profits of 16.5 billion dollars in its last report.

Sixteen and a half billion dollars! Most of it from NSF fees and overseas markets. Since interest rates are so low I doubt they made it with them.

This is to answer your question.

Do you want more factual information?

Please advise.

This is hilarious! It is an outrage! How dare you say that the banks don't have the profits in the 10's of percent points. What are you reading? Those old fashioned, obsolete, federal and state law compliant yearly statements. Look at the stocks!

Lady, you must work in some branch office and you know absolutely nothing of the real business of the banks.

You work in a bank, and you don't know how to perceive the profit and the gains?

But I guess your bank isn't in this game too much right now. It has a better one: It lends money to people who can't afford to pay their homes and then it forecloses them and it has an overstock of real estate. It had a good game going on for a while, didn't it? Now it is in the state of shock. The brainstorming didn't predict the market burst so early. I bet they will go back into the overseas market very soon.

Didn't you know that one of Mexicos major income comes from transactions that go through your bank and its affiliates? Goodness gracious, how come you want to put the well-informed public in the donkey's stool.

What are you doing in this forum? Spying? Worried about what the people out there are saying now that you have implemented recently the Check21 system and are literally munching in the big bucks with all the maneuvers of swiftly sending back and forth digital images between banks. Yes, between BofA and WF they transmit the images before these going to the clearing house, how convenient.

I believe the chief officers of all the banks must have been in the same "Skull and Bones" society. They really help each other out.

Yes, lets make stronger corporations and weaker americans!

Like always, this will continue ...

P.D. I don't have enough time to expound as I would like to.

Aafes, the quote you've pulled from the NACHA website isn't saying what you think it does.

"Your financial institution processes the ACH file, extracting any transactions for individual accounts at your institution, and delivering the remaining transactions for distribution through the ACH Network ONE OR TWO DAYS PRIOR to the direct deposit date."

So, in other words, the money is out of the employer's hands one to two days prior to the pay date. In that one to two days it is being transferred through the ACH network, it is not in the hands of the receiving bank. NACHA (the National Automated Clearing House Association) is an interbank network, not a bank itself.

And, Michael, you've posted in several places that banks are making "tens of percent" gains on overnight overseas transactions. If this is the case, why aren't banks making year over year revenue gains in the tens of percents? Can you give us an example of one of these types of transactions?

And yes, I am employed by a bank (Wells Fargo).

The analogy that John is giving is a good one.

Regarding your comment about the bank not receiving the Direct Deposit before the date is not totally corrrect in one sense.

But the bank does use the future of those transactions that will be coming in for overnight operations. That is inherent to the system.

Like I said, I have also worked in banking, albeit I am not a banker, but I wish I were. Many banks in the USA do overnight overseas operations that return hefty profits. Overseas banking (or offshore banking) return overnight profits in the 10's of percent points. I implemented software that tracked this type of activity. I can not mention for what banks it was, but there were major participants. And it is widely known in the worldwide banking market that US banks enjoy intangible currency for performing investments that come from the security of the legal system and the guarantee of deposits from various sources, one important one being the payroll through direct deposits.

So banks do use the security from the direct deposits, but of course they assume their risks also. The account holder will never be affected by this. Unless the bank wants to recover from a loss and then does magic with the NSF fees.

Continues ...

My best analogy for our system is that is is not unlike online banking where you can schedule a payment in advance for a specific date. That is how our emlpoyer-clients present their payroll. Only problem is if they wait until the cutoff (in this example, Thursday afternoon after the end of the banking day) to try set it up...that's when we advance the funds until the following business day.

Take care,

Banker John

For heavens sake! Federal law has nothing to do with check writing! When have you seen an FBI agent arrest someone for a bad check!

Check21 recommends that you have sufficient funds in your account to cover the check when you write it, mainly to a business, in order not to have problems since the process is a lot speedier than it used to be before the implementation of this clearing system.

And Nicole, quit giving impossible and ficticious examples. When you write the check has no importance, only when the check hits your account should you have funds in it. If a bank did what you are explaining then that is downright fraud. You can write a check whenever you want and you can enter an agreement with the person (or business) to whom you wrote the check to cash it once you can confirm to do so. You can post date a check also. The bank can not read the date on the check and decide based on your funds on that day and then charge you an NSF fee and return it with you having funds in your account. This example would be a huge legal issue for that bank.

Legally, 8 pm at night on a given day, is actually the next banking day. Banks legally have to close the day.

The only legal stamp on a check nowadays is the Check21 stamp if the bank is compliant.

With all due respect, I must disagree.

I am not a banker. I did, however, while working for the payroll company witness the processing of the withdrawals from the employer's accounts, and the subsequent electronic transfers to the regional and individual banks. In the case of regional banks the money must then be distributed to the local banks for posting to the accounts. Let me stress the money LEFT the employer's payroll account and was transferred to the banks involved.

In the situation I worked the funds were not "held" in the employers account until the paydate. Perhaps you can provide further clarification on a question I have regarding that:

The Employer banks with ABC Bank, a small, independent local bank. The employees, let us say 80%, bank with other banks from small to large nationwide banks or credit unions. In your scenario the paydate is the 15th. You stated -

"...the funds are set to release on the payroll date by the employer. They remain in their account to accrue interest for them until the release date."

If ACH transactions must be processed through the clearing house, released to regional banks, and subsequently released to member (individual) banks how are the funds then IMMEDIATELY available for withdrawal, processing and posting on the same day (the paydate)?

I don't contend my prior explanation is true of ALL banks, and the scenario may differ for independent banks.

I have utilized banks that perform the posting in both manners. For my pension check - some that never made funds available before the actual paydate (release date) to banks that made the funds available 2-3 days prior every month - up to 5 days prior on holiday weekends. If your contention is correct, this would not be possible.

From the NACHA website the following guidance is given to financial institutions regarding direct deposit (this is an excerpt):

"Your financial institution processes the ACH file, extracting any transactions for individual accounts at your institution, and delivering the remaining transactions for distribution through the ACH Network ONE OR TWO DAYS PRIOR to the direct deposit date."

So you see even NACHA states that these funds are in the individual bank's hands before the paydate.

First of all, I've read many responses by AAFES and quite frankly, he almost always provides useful and accurate information. In this case however..

I am a banker for a independent bank that handles direct deposits for several large employers, and to be totally honest, we do NOT have the funds prior ro the payroll date. For example, if today, Friday the 15th, is the payroll date for their enployees, the employers will submit their payroll disbursement requests earlier in the week but the funds are set to release on the payroll date by the employer. They remain in their account to accrue interest for them until the release date.

In fact, as a service to our clients, there have been times when they have submitted payrolls late and they cannot be released until the following Monday. When this happens, we "memo post" the deposits to the employees accounts so they can continue to cash checks and make withdrawals without having the inconvenience of having to wait over the weekend. In this case, we are actually advancing the funds at our expense, but this we do as a service.

Finally, while a banker, it's certainlly not for B of A, and I'm not tryhing to be an apologise for them. Just explaining the way it works for us.

Banker John

Are you a bank employee Stile? Just curious.

I don't contend this is true through sheer imagination. I worked for one of the largest payroll processing companies in the U.S. for several years. As a matter of course the average payroll with direct deposit was handled in this manner:

Payperiod ending on a Friday with paydate due on the following Friday. Payroll information was transmitted to our company no later than Monday at 8 a.m.

Payrolls were processed within 24 hours, funds were disbursed from the payroll company escrow account to the individual bank electronically no later than Tuesday 8 a.m. These transfers involved confirmation from the receiving bank that the funds were indeed received in the banks account.

I have had direct deposit accounts with several different banks or credit unions over the years. I have seen the disclosure on availablity of funds you quoted over and over. Ironically, in the case of my goverment pension most banks would not credit the funds to my account until the actual paydate. Credit unions often would; with my current credit union they make the funds available "when the funds are received" - this has never been less than 2 days prior to the paydate and often, with holiday weekends involved, has been as many as FIVE days in advance. The same credit union credits my payroll from my current employer 2 days minimum before the paydate.

The banks HAVE the funds, they simply choose not to make them available for the account holders use.

"The true issue with checking accounts that have direct deposit is that the bank has the account holder's money 1-2 days prior to the scheduled paydate. I fully expect denials on this statement from all the bank supporters."

You should expect denials, since your statement is patently false.

"Government issued payments are electronically transferred to the bank 5 business days prior. The MAJORITY of private businesses, paying via direct deposit, transfer payroll deposits to the bank 1-2 business days prior to the paydate.

The account holder's money is IN THE BANK'S CONTROL and in their accounts waiting for the posting date. As the bank knows this money is present if a debit transaction or check is presented the payment should be made to the presenter."

Here is my bank's statement on direct deposit availability from our website:

We add your direct deposit amount to your Available Balance on the same day we receive your deposit. Your Available Balance is the amount of funds available to you for withdrawals, ATM or Check Card purchases, or writing checks.

If you were expecting a direct deposit and have not received it, or there was an error in the direct deposit amount, please contact the company or individual who is sending you the money.

Now, if what we're saying is false then why haven't we been sued a thousand times over for false advertising?

"Rather, the bank, knowing this money is present, intentionally posts the debit transactions prior to posting the payroll receipt. This is done SOLELY to generate fee income."

And I suppose you have evidence to support this assertion? Would you care to share it?

The true issue with checking accounts that have direct deposit is that the bank has the account holder's money 1-2 days prior to the scheduled paydate. I fully expect denials on this statement from all the bank supporters.

Government issued payments are electronically transferred to the bank 5 business days prior. The MAJORITY of private businesses, paying via direct deposit, transfer payroll deposits to the bank 1-2 business days prior to the paydate.

The account holder's money is IN THE BANK'S CONTROL and in their accounts waiting for the posting date. As the bank knows this money is present if a debit transaction or check is presented the payment should be made to the presenter.

Rather, the bank, knowing this money is present, intentionally posts the debit transactions prior to posting the payroll receipt. This is done SOLELY to generate fee income.

Let's say I'm your best friend, for sake of argument. And you give me a thousand dollars to hold for you and to give to you as you request it. I do, and hand out dollar after dollar as you request it. Pretty soon you're down to under $10 dollars and you come to me and ask for $11. I tell you you don't have $11 left to give, you only have $10. You say give it to me anyway. I say ok, but I want $1 in penalty to make sure you pay it back. You say ok. So I do...reluctantly, but I do. Now I'm $2 in the hole from my personal funds ($1 for the overdraw and $1 for the penalty). And you come back to me and ask for $25. I say HEY, you owe me $2, why should I give you $25?

You respond that you'll make it up to me, we've been friends for years, COME ON, give me the money. So I do, again charging you $1. This goes on for awhile. Now my bottom line is being affected because of your abuse of our friendship, and my having to take money out of my account to give to you.

At what point do YOU have a responsibility to me to not abuse our friendship and to have kept track of the original thousand dollars so you don't ask me to drain my account for you???

Multiply this parable by millions of people and dollars and you'll have what you're asking the banks to do...look the other way for you so you can abuse the "relationship" and cause the bank to go use their corporate funds to fund your excessive living expenses. Believe it or not, there are PEOPLE behind each bank, not just walls made of glass and steel. Right now, due to the war in Iraq, 2/3 of the US Debt is owned - yes OWNED - by Asian countries (China, Japan, Hong Kong and Taiwan). What will happen to our country, our banks, our money, and our way of life if our creditors - these countries - call our debts due? Can you see China or Japan posting here on ripoffreport.com that we're deadbeats because we're not paying our bills like we said we would?

Here is what you wrote:
"The issue is the following: If I have a direct deposit that posts on the 15th and I write a check on the 14th at 8pm in a major department store or in a grocery store the problem arises. I go online at 2Am on the 15th and I happily see my direct deposit with a positive balance. Then at 8Am the same day when I go online again I see the transaction of the grocery store posted, a negative balance in my account, and then my direct deposit".

You wrote a check when the funds were not in your account. If your direct deposit is on the 15th, why are you writing a check on the 14th? Have you heard of the "check22 program"? If you wrote a check to a major retailer or grocery store, they would process the check electronically.

And, checks and other debits post BEFORE deposits at evey bank I have ever seen, including Bank of America.

By your own admission, you write checks without the funds in the bank to cover them. This is knowingly and willingly writing a check without the funds to cover it.

Federal law requires that the funds are available at the time you write the check.

AND, with Bank of America, pending deposits will show in your balance before they are actually posted and available.

Here is the problem with that simulation: At 8pm on the 14th, the money to cover that check was not in your account. The bank can go and look and see that you wrote a check that did not have funds when the check was presented to the grocery store. They then charge you a NSF. And rightfully so.

I didn't know this at one time as well. I fell victim to this ignorance once. I knew I would be depositing a large check into my account on Friday. I wrote a check on Thursday evening. The deposit went through without a hitch.

Next Wednesday when that check that I wrote hit the bank, they charged me a NSF and returned the check. I called and asked (the account now had several thousand dollars in it...the check I wrote was for less than $20). They explained that even though I had money in the account now, I did not have it Thursday and this was their way of deterring writing checks without funds at the time you write the check (pay attention to that: not just the time the bank recieves the check..the time YOU WRITE THE CHECK and when the bank RECIEVES the check). I thought about it, agreed I was wrong, and moved on. As everyone should.

Oh, and keep a register. If you can add and subtract, you can keep one. If you cannot add and subtract, a cheap $2 calculator can. But then again, if you cannot keep a register, you probably cannot afford luxuries like that.

Now, I will admit, I am not fan of BoA, or any big bank for that matter. But sometimes, it is not the bank's fault. Sometimes, we just need to suck it up and accept responsibilities. Oh, and read our Terms of Service. It states that BoA can post things in any order they like. When you opened the account you agreed to this.

Here is the problem with that simulation: At 8pm on the 14th, the money to cover that check was not in your account. The bank can go and look and see that you wrote a check that did not have funds when the check was presented to the grocery store. They then charge you a NSF. And rightfully so.

I didn't know this at one time as well. I fell victim to this ignorance once. I knew I would be depositing a large check into my account on Friday. I wrote a check on Thursday evening. The deposit went through without a hitch.

Next Wednesday when that check that I wrote hit the bank, they charged me a NSF and returned the check. I called and asked (the account now had several thousand dollars in it...the check I wrote was for less than $20). They explained that even though I had money in the account now, I did not have it Thursday and this was their way of deterring writing checks without funds at the time you write the check (pay attention to that: not just the time the bank recieves the check..the time YOU WRITE THE CHECK and when the bank RECIEVES the check). I thought about it, agreed I was wrong, and moved on. As everyone should.

Oh, and keep a register. If you can add and subtract, you can keep one. If you cannot add and subtract, a cheap $2 calculator can. But then again, if you cannot keep a register, you probably cannot afford luxuries like that.

Now, I will admit, I am not fan of BoA, or any big bank for that matter. But sometimes, it is not the bank's fault. Sometimes, we just need to suck it up and accept responsibilities. Oh, and read our Terms of Service. It states that BoA can post things in any order they like. When you opened the account you agreed to this.

Here is the problem with that simulation: At 8pm on the 14th, the money to cover that check was not in your account. The bank can go and look and see that you wrote a check that did not have funds when the check was presented to the grocery store. They then charge you a NSF. And rightfully so.

I didn't know this at one time as well. I fell victim to this ignorance once. I knew I would be depositing a large check into my account on Friday. I wrote a check on Thursday evening. The deposit went through without a hitch.

Next Wednesday when that check that I wrote hit the bank, they charged me a NSF and returned the check. I called and asked (the account now had several thousand dollars in it...the check I wrote was for less than $20). They explained that even though I had money in the account now, I did not have it Thursday and this was their way of deterring writing checks without funds at the time you write the check (pay attention to that: not just the time the bank recieves the check..the time YOU WRITE THE CHECK and when the bank RECIEVES the check). I thought about it, agreed I was wrong, and moved on. As everyone should.

Oh, and keep a register. If you can add and subtract, you can keep one. If you cannot add and subtract, a cheap $2 calculator can. But then again, if you cannot keep a register, you probably cannot afford luxuries like that.

Now, I will admit, I am not fan of BoA, or any big bank for that matter. But sometimes, it is not the bank's fault. Sometimes, we just need to suck it up and accept responsibilities. Oh, and read our Terms of Service. It states that BoA can post things in any order they like. When you opened the account you agreed to this.

Steve, I am not kidding. And by the way, I don't have a problem of mismanaging my accounts. I have 6 checking accounts all active. I have run into inconveniences that get resolved in prompt and hassle-less manners.

I personally don't use ATM's, so I won't discuss more about them.

The following is a simulation for demonstration:

***
*** START OF SIMULATION
***
"I use the online features. What I do is the following: Every day I leave home, perform X amount of transactions and I religiously write them down. Once I arrive home I reconciliate them with what appears online. Every single transaction appears in my online statement. None of them are missing. The only transactions that do not appear are the gasoline station ones. I take note of them and keep track of them until they post.

The issue is the following: If I have a direct deposit that posts on the 15th and I write a check on the 14th at 8pm in a major department store or in a grocery store the problem arises. I go online at 2Am on the 15th and I happily see my direct deposit with a positive balance. Then at 8Am the same day when I go online again I see the transaction of the grocery store posted, a negative balance in my account, and then my direct deposit. Something slipped in between 2Am and 8Am. Ok, they claim Check21, but if you request the copy of the digital check you will see that it hit your account at 5:34 am, hours after your direct deposit. The system magically inverts the transactions in order to affect your account to product hefty NSF profits."

***
*** END OF SIMULATION
***

This isn't about writing "Bad Checks". This is about unethical business procedures.

By the way, did you ever work for Enron?

Steve, I am not kidding. And by the way, I don't have a problem of mismanaging my accounts. I have 6 checking accounts all active. I have run into inconveniences that get resolved in prompt and hassle-less manners.

I personally don't use ATM's, so I won't discuss more about them.

The following is a simulation for demonstration:

***
*** START OF SIMULATION
***
"I use the online features. What I do is the following: Every day I leave home, perform X amount of transactions and I religiously write them down. Once I arrive home I reconciliate them with what appears online. Every single transaction appears in my online statement. None of them are missing. The only transactions that do not appear are the gasoline station ones. I take note of them and keep track of them until they post.

The issue is the following: If I have a direct deposit that posts on the 15th and I write a check on the 14th at 8pm in a major department store or in a grocery store the problem arises. I go online at 2Am on the 15th and I happily see my direct deposit with a positive balance. Then at 8Am the same day when I go online again I see the transaction of the grocery store posted, a negative balance in my account, and then my direct deposit. Something slipped in between 2Am and 8Am. Ok, they claim Check21, but if you request the copy of the digital check you will see that it hit your account at 5:34 am, hours after your direct deposit. The system magically inverts the transactions in order to affect your account to product hefty NSF profits."

***
*** END OF SIMULATION
***

This isn't about writing "Bad Checks". This is about unethical business procedures.

By the way, did you ever work for Enron?

Steve, I am not kidding. And by the way, I don't have a problem of mismanaging my accounts. I have 6 checking accounts all active. I have run into inconveniences that get resolved in prompt and hassle-less manners.

I personally don't use ATM's, so I won't discuss more about them.

The following is a simulation for demonstration:

***
*** START OF SIMULATION
***
"I use the online features. What I do is the following: Every day I leave home, perform X amount of transactions and I religiously write them down. Once I arrive home I reconciliate them with what appears online. Every single transaction appears in my online statement. None of them are missing. The only transactions that do not appear are the gasoline station ones. I take note of them and keep track of them until they post.

The issue is the following: If I have a direct deposit that posts on the 15th and I write a check on the 14th at 8pm in a major department store or in a grocery store the problem arises. I go online at 2Am on the 15th and I happily see my direct deposit with a positive balance. Then at 8Am the same day when I go online again I see the transaction of the grocery store posted, a negative balance in my account, and then my direct deposit. Something slipped in between 2Am and 8Am. Ok, they claim Check21, but if you request the copy of the digital check you will see that it hit your account at 5:34 am, hours after your direct deposit. The system magically inverts the transactions in order to affect your account to product hefty NSF profits."

***
*** END OF SIMULATION
***

This isn't about writing "Bad Checks". This is about unethical business procedures.

By the way, did you ever work for Enron?

I appreciate your advice. I am already with a credit union - that is the bank of which I spoke. Far more consumer-friendly and customer-oriented than any bank that depends on stockholders' satisfaction to remain in existence.

I appreciate your advice. I am already with a credit union - that is the bank of which I spoke. Far more consumer-friendly and customer-oriented than any bank that depends on stockholders' satisfaction to remain in existence.

I appreciate your advice. I am already with a credit union - that is the bank of which I spoke. Far more consumer-friendly and customer-oriented than any bank that depends on stockholders' satisfaction to remain in existence.

Michael,

Are you kidding? Do you really expect to get an accurate balance from the ATM?

Here is what Michael wrote:

" I rely on accurate information provided by the bank. I rely on timely efficiency. When I go to an ATM I want to see a real balance, not a supposed one. I have been doing every transaction electronically, then why isn't it up to date. They promise this will work this way when you are opening an account. They promise the bells and whistles".

Well, I hate to break it to you, but you will NEVER get an up to the minute balance from the ATM. It is physically impossible, and I can guarantee you that no bank representative ever told you you could. Every bank employee will tell you to keep an accurate register.

If you are using a checking account without a register being properly maintained, you are a moron. This is financial suicide. NSF fees are very rarely the fault of the bank and are almost always the fault of the financially illiterate and/or irresponsible.

Take some responsibility for your own actions, or lack thereof. Stop blaming other for your mistakes.

The reason your electronic transactions are not immediately posted has absolutely nothing to do with the bank! It has everything to do with the merchant. The merchant can control when they post transactions. Some do immediate post, some do daily or weekly batch. Even if you use your PIN in every transaction, your transaction may not actually post until the start of the next business day. Also, what about ATM fees, monthly fees, etc.. How do you account for them without a register?

This is the second post I have read so far today regarding BoA's practice of making money off their customers' direct deposits days in advance of the actual deposit. Now I am beginning to understand just WHY they kicked me to the curb after I cancelled mine back in April and began doing partial deposits. They suddenly claimed that I was a "poor risk" due to my "past history of being overdrawn", and labeled me as such on my account, when the fact of the matter was that it had not been overdrawn and had been in good standing for over nine months!

I am SO glad that I closed my account with BoA last month. Where is the BOTTOM, with them??

This is the second post I have read so far today regarding BoA's practice of making money off their customers' direct deposits days in advance of the actual deposit. Now I am beginning to understand just WHY they kicked me to the curb after I cancelled mine back in April and began doing partial deposits. They suddenly claimed that I was a "poor risk" due to my "past history of being overdrawn", and labeled me as such on my account, when the fact of the matter was that it had not been overdrawn and had been in good standing for over nine months!

I am SO glad that I closed my account with BoA last month. Where is the BOTTOM, with them??

This is the second post I have read so far today regarding BoA's practice of making money off their customers' direct deposits days in advance of the actual deposit. Now I am beginning to understand just WHY they kicked me to the curb after I cancelled mine back in April and began doing partial deposits. They suddenly claimed that I was a "poor risk" due to my "past history of being overdrawn", and labeled me as such on my account, when the fact of the matter was that it had not been overdrawn and had been in good standing for over nine months!

I am SO glad that I closed my account with BoA last month. Where is the BOTTOM, with them??

This is the second post I have read so far today regarding BoA's practice of making money off their customers' direct deposits days in advance of the actual deposit. Now I am beginning to understand just WHY they kicked me to the curb after I cancelled mine back in April and began doing partial deposits. They suddenly claimed that I was a "poor risk" due to my "past history of being overdrawn", and labeled me as such on my account, when the fact of the matter was that it had not been overdrawn and had been in good standing for over nine months!

I am SO glad that I closed my account with BoA last month. Where is the BOTTOM, with them??

1) I don't buy checks, therefore, I don't have a register.
2) I bounced checks (not deliberately) when I had a register, so having a register does NOT prevent that. As stated previously, I am human, as are you - unless you have some superhuman quality no one is aware of.
3) I have to wonder, Steve of Bradenton, how it is you have so many opinions because your name and comments are everywhere in this site. You appear to be a self-proclaimed expert to every problem that exists (I believe one was dropshippers - a far cry from banking, I would think).
4) My complaint was that the bank allows debit cards to overdraw when credit cards often prevent going over limit - yet they are processed through the same systems. The previous bank taken over by BofA had no problem denying any attempt, purposeful or accidental, to overdraw the account. They were not up front about this change.
5) There were no statements on which to see any potential messages because my statements were electronic and there were no messages.
6) I rarely had ATM fees because I would take extra cash during a POS transaction rather than use an ATM, if there were no Bank of America ATMs available. But, I didn't do this often. My current bank does not charge ATM fees at all, so this is not an issue.
7) Back to registers, I do all transactions electronically, and do not want a register. I made more errors using a register than I have ever made not using a register.
8) I am fully aware of the fact that Bank of America has free checking for direct deposit - the fact that I didn't mention it does not mean I don't know about it. My point, and I was clear in that, was that they did not inform me that the free checking I had under Fleet did not carry over in their takeover, that I would not be grandfathered in as Fleet had done when it took over Summit (who grandfathered in the free checking from Collective Bank when it took them over). I am not stupid enough to continue paying a ridiculous $12/month for the privilege of a checking account. In fact, I only found out about the direct deposit option was when I went in to the local branch to close my account to avoid the fees - they were not up front about this information until they thought they'd lose the account. I would rather use a check cashing firm and deal in cash than pay anyone who uses my money to make money, but expects ME to pay them for that privilege. But, I am happy with my current bank and I have no plans to ever return to BofA.

Banks have been able to get away with their frivolous excuses: "Keep a register ...", "Manage your account wisely ...", etc. They will always make the customer look silly and guilty. Just like it used to be with a victim of a crime, where the victim was responsible for being victimized.

Why do I have a bank account? Because I require a service for managing my money. I rely on accurate information provided by the bank. I rely on timely efficiency. When I go to an ATM I want to see a real balance, not a supposed one. I have been doing every transaction electronically, then why isn't it up to date. They promise this will work this way when you are opening an account. They promise the bells and whistles.

Banks have been able to succesfully incline the legal system towards their side (where is the power of the people?). They have been able to convince courts that activities which are common in the business world are crimes when done by common folk. If you count on immediate future funds, I'm talking about a direct deposit coming in tomorrow, then you are "kiting" or "floating". They are trying to turn common practice into a crime. How convenient. But don't worry, they aren't pushing it, they go down the middle road right now and just charge you a hefty fee.

But what the government doesn't care about is what they do with the future reliance on your direct deposit. Yes, they actually make money on that future transaction, many days before it is actually processed, many days before it actually is in their hands.

This, in my common way of thinking, is "hyper-floating", yes, banks in america "hyper-float" transactions, and this is apparently legal. And they use your future transaction to perform overseas transactions that return hefty profits in countries like Argentina, Brazil, Venezuela, etc. Do you not know that a major financial company in the US is from Brazil? And they make profits of in the tens of percent points overnight.

My final advice is: Close your account and pay your negative balance. You have no way of winning with our current legal system. If not, they will report you to the Check system they conveniently govern and they will damage your credit report in a very harmful way. And try opening an account in a credit union of some sort. I believe that they are more customer oriented than the banks are.

Wendy,

It does not suprise me that you are having problems with your checking account. How can you possible keep track of all charges without one? ATM fees, service charges, etc..

Using an ATM to determine your balance is financial suicide, and your problem with Bank of America proves it.

You brought this on yourself. Bank of America had absolutely nothing to do with it.

There is no rip off here.

ps..You get free checking at BofA if you have direct deposit.

I don't use a register because I don't use checks. I have never purchased checks for my current account because I use my debit card exclusively for bill payment, groceries, gas, etc. It is one less expense I have to worry about. Yes - one could keep track better if one used a register religiously, but being human, even using it regularly wasn't always perfect - it only takes one forgotten withdrawal to cause a problem. So far, 90% or better of my transactions hit my account immediately - either posting immediately or freezing funds while in pending status. I am not stupid, but I am not perfect, either. The only time I've gone over limit since changing banks is while on vacation when an ATM gave me a false balance - the balance it gave me was the one prior to the transaction, not AFTER the transaction, so I was not aware how close I was. Because it called it the "available balance", I assumed it meant AFTER the withdrawal. Fortunately, because I have money put in savings every pay, I didn't have to worry about it. I was just dismayed to learn that the balance provided was pre-withdrawal, not post-withdrawal, and money had moved that I hadn't planned to move. A new lesson learned. I'd have used the cybercafe in the area, but wasn't willing to pay 40 cents a minute.

There are so many banks that allow your account to go in overdraft. All the banks around here are like that even the ATM's will let you go in the hole. In addition depending on how the card is used debit/credit, it might not hit right away and if you are trusting your online balance or atm balance you will go in the hole.

The best way to avoid this is to keep a register, write down every transaction, and balance the account. This avoids 99.9% of the complaints people have with banks.

Did you read all the fine print that came with your statement? often the changes are printed there and the average person just tosses it?

As long as you have money in the savings doing the transfers like you suggest is a good idea. But why should you go in the negative to begin with if you keep a register?