Bank Of America (Atlanta, GA) Bank Of America (Charlotte, NC) Bank of America has new ABUSIVE, AGGRESSIVE overdraft charges for checkcards BEWARE! Charlotte North Carolina

My roommate had the same issue with Wachovia. He thought it would not work if the money was not there. Banks could correct this problem by not letting the sale go through if the money is not there. This is a RIP OFF.

So many people have such a problem with my advice, but I am the one who has NEVER paid an NSF fee in over 30 years of banking!!

Multiple accounts in many states.

Why is that?

And. to the person who talks about suprise fees, that is BS!
Any fee assessed to your account MUST be disclosed in your terms and conditions.

There are no "suprise fees". You just need to pay attention.

As far as posting goes, it has been checks/charges BEFORE deposits/credits at most banks for a ver long time.

Remeber, using your debit card for multiple small purchases like that $4 Hamburger is just asking for trouble.

Here's a suggestion for those who cannot manage a checkbook register. Use your credit card for those small purchases, and then just make one payment each month.

At every bank I worked for, credits always posted before credits.
Unless, the debit is electronic.

If you have a deposit and a check (or withdrawal form) clearing throughout the night in the proof work, the deposit will be posted before the check.
If you have a deposit waiting to post and a check comes in, the deposit will post throughout the night, and the check will post in the morning (credit before debit).

Now, if you have an electronic purchase, it will hit your account the second you swipe your card. If you don't have sufficient funds in your account when you made that purchase, that's it. There is no racing to the bank or "float" because you ARE going to get a fee. And everything else that comes through while the electronic charge is pending will also get a fee.

The last time I checked, which was probably a year ago, Bank of America was posting credits first. I haven't heard of any change to this policy, but then again, I don't know if I would have heard. In am well managed account, it shouldn't matter anyway.

I totally agree with you, bank of america is doing anything and everything they can to rip off its customers. it was bad enough taking our money thru thier unnecessary fees, posting payments any way they please, and believe me they do not stick to thier policys when debiting your account highest to lowest all the time, if they can charge a additional fee they will throw in their fee whereever needed to make everything else overdraft your account, dont tell me anything different because i have seen it happen many a times, and now they have a new policy that if you make your account go over even as much as a penny just from a authorization, not a actual payout of a charge, but just a authorization they will charge you 35.00, which really sucks because if you tell them NOT TO AUTHORIZE ANYTHING THAT ISN'T IN YOUR ACCOUNT, they will do it anyway just to get that 35.00.

Now all you DO-GOODER bank of america lovers who will tell us to keep a better accurate checkbook register can bite me cause that doesn't work either, you have all those nasty little electronic debits that charge your account whenever they see fit, even though it is supposed to be on a certain day it seems like the bank waits until your funds are low and then they hit you, i have seen that happen also, i dont care what all of you say, BANK OF AMERICA IS RIPPING OFF ITS CUSTOMERS DAILY-HOURLY-BY THE MINUTE and getting clean away with it, so yes its time i changed banks after 18 years of putting up with thier crap.

First, let me say I haven't received an overdraft fee for years. I was sick and tired of giving my money away and decided to keep a very accurate check register. However, this is to look at things from an overdrafters point of view.

As with this post, BOA recently changed their rules by assessing overdraft fees based on available balance. They saw people were still using the float and decided to capitalize on this. I agree with their reasoning to a degree (we shouldn't use money we don't have yet), but the way they went about it was wrong.

The bank recently decided to change their rules to benefit from people who float. That's fine. However, the way they went about it was not fine. From what I have been reading, they just sent out the new Terms and Conditions to account holders, most of which is not understandable. They could have sent everyone a letter stating 'as of this date, overdraft fees will be assessed on available balance, as well as posted balance.' That is in plain English. They could have posted signs throughout the bank that said the same thing, in plain English, using wording people could understand. They deliberately chose not to, just to rake in those fees. They took advantage of their account holders. That is the main reason people have been so upset about this new practice.

Reminds me of something else the banks did a few years ago. Their funds availability signs used to read: Cash deposits made before 2:00 will be available next business day. Cash deposits made after 2:00 will be available in 2 business days. Now, they have changed their wording to: Cash deposits made before 2:00 will be posted same day. However, with the posting of debits B4 credits, that is very misleading. Why couldn't they just have left the signs as they were? That was really the true disclosure. They changed the wording, knowing people would not know about about the rule of debits before credits, so they could collect more fees.

And, when someone either goes into the bank or calls, asking why they are getting so many fees, the banks do not explain anything clearly. Why? So the account holder still does not understand and gets assessed with more fees.

Same thing with overdraft protection. How can so many people not realize they will still be assessed the overdraft fee? Probably because it was not worded plainly.

The banks are being very shady and not exactly up front with any explanations about their practices, just to incur more and more fees. Tomorrow, they will probably change another rule (which they are within their rights to do), but will again word it so it is not understandable.

Thanks again for the constructive criticism.

I would like to qualify your statements:

Regarding the draft on the account "at the time of the charge"...

Yes, this is only true as of LAST MONTH. Your statements are not true as applied to some competitor financial institutions. Your statement is accurate as of the new change to Bank of America's policy that only RECENTLY occurred. Your statement is inaccurate as it pertained to charges occurring before the change.

I would also like to kindly point out that, it is very easy to take the attitude (this is not directed specifically to you) that a person is at fault for not properly maintaining his or her account. I say this: just wait until Bank of America (or insert the name of the financial institution of your choice here) charges you a fee that you are not aware of, and you inadvertently go into an overdraft situation. Rhetorically speaking, are YOU going to take responsibility for your own actions and pay all those overdraft charges? No. You are going to be angry just like everyone else who has posted complaining of the same thing (look for yourself, there is at least one complaint against Bank of America on just this website almost every single day). You are going to march into your branch and demand the fees back. And, yes, YOU will feel justified that your argument applies in YOUR situation and the bank's fees are not justified. And when they justify the overdrafts as that you are a "non-revenue" customer, it does not make you feel welcome at the bank.

I loved the posting about the "free" Bank of America checking account. Yes, I too signed up for a "free" Bank of America checking account with no strings. Last fall I started getting charged $5.95 per month for the account. I called to advise Bank of America that I had this "free" account. What I did not realize was that they had the authority to "bait and switch" me into a ***fee*** account at their choice. So, Bank of America offer(ed)(s) online, a "free" checking/savings account that I signed up for, to avoid the $5.95 charge. I ended up cancelling those accounts because it was too much of a hassle to go and change all the other financial institution accounts that I had linked to the $5.95 account. This occurred after I was charged $3.00 (against a zero balance) for not funding the account quickly enough. Then, the account went into a negative status. Luckily I was not charged $35.00 for that!!!!

My point is, you never know when something is going to happen to your account at the direction of Bank of America that may cause to happen to you what happened to me. (Such as a paradigm shift in the way debit charges are charged.) Therefore, I think I may have the cavalier damning attitude that a person who overdrafts their account is automatically determined to have mismanaged it, had it not happened to me.

Govern yourself accordingly and hope that what happened to me does not happen to you. Good luck everyone! And, thank you for your posts.

First.
Debit card transactions count against your account at the time of transaction. Therefore, the funds MUST be available BEFORE you use your debit card according to standard banking procedures, AND your terms and conditions agreement you signed.

Second.
NSF fees ONLY apply to those who cannot comprehend the above, and how to properly maintain an ACCURATE checkbook register.

Third.
I have been a BofA checking customer for over 14 years and NEVER paid even 1 NSF fee. Why is that? I closed my account last Friday, only because I found a bank more convenient to me where I work. No problems. Ever.

I have had multiple checking accounts at the same time in several states over the past 30 years, and have NEVER paid an NSF fee. Not 1. And, I have lived paycheck to paycheck, and have maintained VERY low balances.

The concept here is simple.
1. I have funds posted and available prior to spending money.
2. I enter every debit/check transaction in my checkbook IMMEDIATELY.
3. I enter deposits ONLY after they are POSTED.
4. I stop spending when I hit $20.
5. I never run my balance below $20.

NSF fees ONLY affect those who engage in poor account management practices.
However, I like those people because they keep my checking account FREE!
Thanks!!

I notice a lot of banks taking negative hits about the way they slam people with OD/NSF issues.

First.......how can you not use a check register?
2nd........how can you not know, within a few bucks what you have in your account at any given time?
3rd.........how can you use a debit card, or write a check etc KNOWING you dont have the $$ available at that precise time?

I cant imagine not using a check register. I have never ever been overdrawn....though its been close a couple times. But at those times I KNEW before a purchase not to make that purchase....it MAY put me over. I just waited til I knew it'd be safe.

Once you make a purchase...why would you NOT just automatically.....even just in your mind, reduce your account by that amount.......rather than assuming or hoping there'd be a "float" time? I have the money deducted in my mind well before I actually spend it so that I dont risk an OD. I never have to look to see when something clears...that money is already gone to me..

I do think the fees are crazy and dont always understand the how or the why of the banks methodology of posting things..but.....I know if I dont spend what I dont have I wont have to worry about it.

Yep that must be it, because when someone posts something you don't agree with they must be an employee. First I am not nor have I ever been an employee of a bank or any financial institution.

From your last reply..."I must use that card as my carry around slush card, on average three to four times a day. No. I am not going to do what you say. If you do that, be happy and proud to do it yourself."

If you don't want to take the time to keep an accounting and use your debit card as your "slush" fund that is your choice. But if you then overdraft your account don't call it a RipOff.

Yep that must be it, because when someone posts something you don't agree with they must be an employee. First I am not nor have I ever been an employee of a bank or any financial institution.

From your last reply..."I must use that card as my carry around slush card, on average three to four times a day. No. I am not going to do what you say. If you do that, be happy and proud to do it yourself."

If you don't want to take the time to keep an accounting and use your debit card as your "slush" fund that is your choice. But if you then overdraft your account don't call it a RipOff.

Yep that must be it, because when someone posts something you don't agree with they must be an employee. First I am not nor have I ever been an employee of a bank or any financial institution.

From your last reply..."I must use that card as my carry around slush card, on average three to four times a day. No. I am not going to do what you say. If you do that, be happy and proud to do it yourself."

If you don't want to take the time to keep an accounting and use your debit card as your "slush" fund that is your choice. But if you then overdraft your account don't call it a RipOff.

"3. YOU SAY: 'What you are refering to was called 'Float' and there is NO float anymore.'

I SAY: Excuse me Robert? There is absolutely nothing wrong with float. In fact it works well in the charge arena, since, as you expressly point out, when an authorization is made, it is not necessarily representative of the amount that will be presented for payment. The 'old rules' only require that when writing a check, that the money be in the account 'at the time the check is presented for payment.' Your 'high and mighty' 'bankers attitude' that there is something wrong with that is not well received. Regarding 'float', why is it that the other two bank accounts that I have at OTHER banks do not have this same policy? Why is it that this was just implemented in March of 2008? "

I am sure there will be others to respond to the rest of the nonsense but this in fact is illegal.

Thank you for your post Robert. This may not be true, but I sense that you are a bank employee, defending the practice I complain about (you use the word "float", and your reply sounds too technical to be a layperson).

1. YOU SAY: "There is no way your bank would know that there is a bigger charge coming in because the Gas station has not transmitted it yet, but you did spend it."

I SAY: Exactly my point (you make my case better than I do!)-- if the charge has not been "presented for payment", then how the heck can you justify the overdraft in the first place?! Exactly my point Robert! It is *not* about the whether the purchase was made, it rather about the "presentment" for payment that has not yet occurred!

2. YOU SAY: "It takes 30 seconds to write a transaction in your register."

I SAY: Robert, I must use that card as my carry around slush card, on average three to four times a day. No. I am not going to do what you say. If you do that, be happy and proud to do it yourself. But, my point again is that I should be able to rely on the technology that is out there. The TRUTH is, that your company, if you work for Bank of America or another company that does this, is that they WANT you to overdraw your account. There is no incentive for them to simply do the work for you. That's my point. By the way, the system has worked great for years. You go online, look at your balance, it's getting low, you put more money in it. It even let (past tense) you, get this, look at pending charges before the account actually went in the negative. Now they have changed this because they apparently realize there is a literal UNIVERSE OF MONEY they are missing out on.

3. YOU SAY: "What you are refering to was called 'Float' and there is NO float anymore."

I SAY: Excuse me Robert? There is absolutely nothing wrong with float. In fact it works well in the charge arena, since, as you expressly point out, when an authorization is made, it is not necessarily representative of the amount that will be presented for payment. The "old rules" only require that when writing a check, that the money be in the account "at the time the check is presented for payment." Your "high and mighty" "bankers attitude" that there is something wrong with that is not well received. Regarding "float", why is it that the other two bank accounts that I have at OTHER banks do not have this same policy? Why is it that this was just implemented in March of 2008?

4. YOU SAY: "This is actually an interesting question. But instead of asking us this, have you asked your bank?"

I SAY: Bank of America lies (this may come as a surprise to you Robert, yes "lies") and says they do not have the technology to do this. Imagine that. Why are they not honest and say that it generates a huge part of the income for our bank?

I challenge you Robert, whether you are a bank employee or not, YOU find out why they do not allow the customer to choose to decline charges that would prevent an overdraft situation.

Thanks for your post again Robert. I sense the tone of your posting is that you are defending the practice. If you are unrelated to a financial institution then I say to you, read all these other posts about people's experiences. At some point in your life, you may become an unwitting victim, and you will have it THROWN IN YOUR FACE how it is ALL YOUR FAULT. Then, when you have to pay $300 or $400, you'll understand why the rest of us are so angry.

After this happened to me, I tried to tell everyone I know my terrible experience with Bank of America. I continue to do this. Some people I talked to told me of similar stories, for example with Wachovia. I heard anecdotally that Wachovia started this practice sometime last year, and my friend had to learn the hard way, the same thing that happened to me. But that isn't bad, $300-400 per customer per year.

Anyway you cut it, I think it is a scam that needs regulatory intervention.

Thank you for your post Robert. This may not be true, but I sense that you are a bank employee, defending the practice I complain about (you use the word "float", and your reply sounds too technical to be a layperson).

1. YOU SAY: "There is no way your bank would know that there is a bigger charge coming in because the Gas station has not transmitted it yet, but you did spend it."

I SAY: Exactly my point (you make my case better than I do!)-- if the charge has not been "presented for payment", then how the heck can you justify the overdraft in the first place?! Exactly my point Robert! It is *not* about the whether the purchase was made, it rather about the "presentment" for payment that has not yet occurred!

2. YOU SAY: "It takes 30 seconds to write a transaction in your register."

I SAY: Robert, I must use that card as my carry around slush card, on average three to four times a day. No. I am not going to do what you say. If you do that, be happy and proud to do it yourself. But, my point again is that I should be able to rely on the technology that is out there. The TRUTH is, that your company, if you work for Bank of America or another company that does this, is that they WANT you to overdraw your account. There is no incentive for them to simply do the work for you. That's my point. By the way, the system has worked great for years. You go online, look at your balance, it's getting low, you put more money in it. It even let (past tense) you, get this, look at pending charges before the account actually went in the negative. Now they have changed this because they apparently realize there is a literal UNIVERSE OF MONEY they are missing out on.

3. YOU SAY: "What you are refering to was called 'Float' and there is NO float anymore."

I SAY: Excuse me Robert? There is absolutely nothing wrong with float. In fact it works well in the charge arena, since, as you expressly point out, when an authorization is made, it is not necessarily representative of the amount that will be presented for payment. The "old rules" only require that when writing a check, that the money be in the account "at the time the check is presented for payment." Your "high and mighty" "bankers attitude" that there is something wrong with that is not well received. Regarding "float", why is it that the other two bank accounts that I have at OTHER banks do not have this same policy? Why is it that this was just implemented in March of 2008?

4. YOU SAY: "This is actually an interesting question. But instead of asking us this, have you asked your bank?"

I SAY: Bank of America lies (this may come as a surprise to you Robert, yes "lies") and says they do not have the technology to do this. Imagine that. Why are they not honest and say that it generates a huge part of the income for our bank?

I challenge you Robert, whether you are a bank employee or not, YOU find out why they do not allow the customer to choose to decline charges that would prevent an overdraft situation.

Thanks for your post again Robert. I sense the tone of your posting is that you are defending the practice. If you are unrelated to a financial institution then I say to you, read all these other posts about people's experiences. At some point in your life, you may become an unwitting victim, and you will have it THROWN IN YOUR FACE how it is ALL YOUR FAULT. Then, when you have to pay $300 or $400, you'll understand why the rest of us are so angry.

After this happened to me, I tried to tell everyone I know my terrible experience with Bank of America. I continue to do this. Some people I talked to told me of similar stories, for example with Wachovia. I heard anecdotally that Wachovia started this practice sometime last year, and my friend had to learn the hard way, the same thing that happened to me. But that isn't bad, $300-400 per customer per year.

Anyway you cut it, I think it is a scam that needs regulatory intervention.

Thank you for your post Robert. This may not be true, but I sense that you are a bank employee, defending the practice I complain about (you use the word "float", and your reply sounds too technical to be a layperson).

1. YOU SAY: "There is no way your bank would know that there is a bigger charge coming in because the Gas station has not transmitted it yet, but you did spend it."

I SAY: Exactly my point (you make my case better than I do!)-- if the charge has not been "presented for payment", then how the heck can you justify the overdraft in the first place?! Exactly my point Robert! It is *not* about the whether the purchase was made, it rather about the "presentment" for payment that has not yet occurred!

2. YOU SAY: "It takes 30 seconds to write a transaction in your register."

I SAY: Robert, I must use that card as my carry around slush card, on average three to four times a day. No. I am not going to do what you say. If you do that, be happy and proud to do it yourself. But, my point again is that I should be able to rely on the technology that is out there. The TRUTH is, that your company, if you work for Bank of America or another company that does this, is that they WANT you to overdraw your account. There is no incentive for them to simply do the work for you. That's my point. By the way, the system has worked great for years. You go online, look at your balance, it's getting low, you put more money in it. It even let (past tense) you, get this, look at pending charges before the account actually went in the negative. Now they have changed this because they apparently realize there is a literal UNIVERSE OF MONEY they are missing out on.

3. YOU SAY: "What you are refering to was called 'Float' and there is NO float anymore."

I SAY: Excuse me Robert? There is absolutely nothing wrong with float. In fact it works well in the charge arena, since, as you expressly point out, when an authorization is made, it is not necessarily representative of the amount that will be presented for payment. The "old rules" only require that when writing a check, that the money be in the account "at the time the check is presented for payment." Your "high and mighty" "bankers attitude" that there is something wrong with that is not well received. Regarding "float", why is it that the other two bank accounts that I have at OTHER banks do not have this same policy? Why is it that this was just implemented in March of 2008?

4. YOU SAY: "This is actually an interesting question. But instead of asking us this, have you asked your bank?"

I SAY: Bank of America lies (this may come as a surprise to you Robert, yes "lies") and says they do not have the technology to do this. Imagine that. Why are they not honest and say that it generates a huge part of the income for our bank?

I challenge you Robert, whether you are a bank employee or not, YOU find out why they do not allow the customer to choose to decline charges that would prevent an overdraft situation.

Thanks for your post again Robert. I sense the tone of your posting is that you are defending the practice. If you are unrelated to a financial institution then I say to you, read all these other posts about people's experiences. At some point in your life, you may become an unwitting victim, and you will have it THROWN IN YOUR FACE how it is ALL YOUR FAULT. Then, when you have to pay $300 or $400, you'll understand why the rest of us are so angry.

After this happened to me, I tried to tell everyone I know my terrible experience with Bank of America. I continue to do this. Some people I talked to told me of similar stories, for example with Wachovia. I heard anecdotally that Wachovia started this practice sometime last year, and my friend had to learn the hard way, the same thing that happened to me. But that isn't bad, $300-400 per customer per year.

Anyway you cut it, I think it is a scam that needs regulatory intervention.

Thank you for your post Robert. This may not be true, but I sense that you are a bank employee, defending the practice I complain about (you use the word "float", and your reply sounds too technical to be a layperson).

1. YOU SAY: "There is no way your bank would know that there is a bigger charge coming in because the Gas station has not transmitted it yet, but you did spend it."

I SAY: Exactly my point (you make my case better than I do!)-- if the charge has not been "presented for payment", then how the heck can you justify the overdraft in the first place?! Exactly my point Robert! It is *not* about the whether the purchase was made, it rather about the "presentment" for payment that has not yet occurred!

2. YOU SAY: "It takes 30 seconds to write a transaction in your register."

I SAY: Robert, I must use that card as my carry around slush card, on average three to four times a day. No. I am not going to do what you say. If you do that, be happy and proud to do it yourself. But, my point again is that I should be able to rely on the technology that is out there. The TRUTH is, that your company, if you work for Bank of America or another company that does this, is that they WANT you to overdraw your account. There is no incentive for them to simply do the work for you. That's my point. By the way, the system has worked great for years. You go online, look at your balance, it's getting low, you put more money in it. It even let (past tense) you, get this, look at pending charges before the account actually went in the negative. Now they have changed this because they apparently realize there is a literal UNIVERSE OF MONEY they are missing out on.

3. YOU SAY: "What you are refering to was called 'Float' and there is NO float anymore."

I SAY: Excuse me Robert? There is absolutely nothing wrong with float. In fact it works well in the charge arena, since, as you expressly point out, when an authorization is made, it is not necessarily representative of the amount that will be presented for payment. The "old rules" only require that when writing a check, that the money be in the account "at the time the check is presented for payment." Your "high and mighty" "bankers attitude" that there is something wrong with that is not well received. Regarding "float", why is it that the other two bank accounts that I have at OTHER banks do not have this same policy? Why is it that this was just implemented in March of 2008?

4. YOU SAY: "This is actually an interesting question. But instead of asking us this, have you asked your bank?"

I SAY: Bank of America lies (this may come as a surprise to you Robert, yes "lies") and says they do not have the technology to do this. Imagine that. Why are they not honest and say that it generates a huge part of the income for our bank?

I challenge you Robert, whether you are a bank employee or not, YOU find out why they do not allow the customer to choose to decline charges that would prevent an overdraft situation.

Thanks for your post again Robert. I sense the tone of your posting is that you are defending the practice. If you are unrelated to a financial institution then I say to you, read all these other posts about people's experiences. At some point in your life, you may become an unwitting victim, and you will have it THROWN IN YOUR FACE how it is ALL YOUR FAULT. Then, when you have to pay $300 or $400, you'll understand why the rest of us are so angry.

After this happened to me, I tried to tell everyone I know my terrible experience with Bank of America. I continue to do this. Some people I talked to told me of similar stories, for example with Wachovia. I heard anecdotally that Wachovia started this practice sometime last year, and my friend had to learn the hard way, the same thing that happened to me. But that isn't bad, $300-400 per customer per year.

Anyway you cut it, I think it is a scam that needs regulatory intervention.

Simply put- Pay Cash or use a credit card. No NSF FEES. Even the interest on a credit card is better than NSF FEES. If you even think that there is a chance that a debit card purchase will put you in overdraft then DON'T DO IT.

Your premise of your report is that you feel that the bank is at fault for causing your overdraft and causing these fees which you feel are outragous. However, you seem to forget that you are the one who did not keep track of your balance and you spent more than you had. Even if it was a mistake, the fact is that you still did this. As to some of your comments.

"...For example, how difficult is it to program a web page to simply display balance, net of unposted transactions....."
- That is fine for transactions that the bank has received, but what about ones that they do not even have yet. For example you make a purchase at a Gas Station. They may only authorize a small amount like $1, it may take 1-2 days before they actually post the real amount. There is no way your bank would know that there is a bigger charge coming in because the Gas station has not transmitted it yet, but you did spend it. With a register you know you spent that amount.

"..."But the bank by design purposefully OBSCURES transaction data such that it makes it extremely difficult to ascertain a balance. If you are manually balancing everyday, I challenge you to 'get a life'! My example was the *first time* I have ever overdrafted my account with Bank of America...."
- Again if you keep a register you DO NOT need to check your balance every day because your register shows what you have. It takes 30 seconds to write a transaction in your register. If you don't want to take 30 seconds away from your life to do that then don't be surprised if your first time was not your last.

"....If an account holder in the good old days were presented with an OD situation, the account holder could go into the bank and simply make a deposit to avoid further fees. In our modern banking world, the 'crime is committed' at the instant the purchase is made...."
-What you are refering to was called "Float" and there is NO float anymore. So you have to change the way you do things or you will continue to run into problems. Now you may say that this goes against the Gas Station example, but it really does not. There is no float because you have NO control of when the debit is actually transmitted to the bank from the business so you always have to assume that it is immediate.

"...Let me ask you this: then WHY ON EARTH will the banks not permit you to instruct it to disallow/decline any transaction that would create an overdraft situation.."
- This is actually an interesting question. But instead of asking us this, have you asked your bank?

If you feel that you don't have the time to keep a proper accounting you may want to look at setting up Overdraft protection. This is usually a very low cost, usually less than the cost of one overdraft.

Your premise of your report is that you feel that the bank is at fault for causing your overdraft and causing these fees which you feel are outragous. However, you seem to forget that you are the one who did not keep track of your balance and you spent more than you had. Even if it was a mistake, the fact is that you still did this. As to some of your comments.

"...For example, how difficult is it to program a web page to simply display balance, net of unposted transactions....."
- That is fine for transactions that the bank has received, but what about ones that they do not even have yet. For example you make a purchase at a Gas Station. They may only authorize a small amount like $1, it may take 1-2 days before they actually post the real amount. There is no way your bank would know that there is a bigger charge coming in because the Gas station has not transmitted it yet, but you did spend it. With a register you know you spent that amount.

"..."But the bank by design purposefully OBSCURES transaction data such that it makes it extremely difficult to ascertain a balance. If you are manually balancing everyday, I challenge you to 'get a life'! My example was the *first time* I have ever overdrafted my account with Bank of America...."
- Again if you keep a register you DO NOT need to check your balance every day because your register shows what you have. It takes 30 seconds to write a transaction in your register. If you don't want to take 30 seconds away from your life to do that then don't be surprised if your first time was not your last.

"....If an account holder in the good old days were presented with an OD situation, the account holder could go into the bank and simply make a deposit to avoid further fees. In our modern banking world, the 'crime is committed' at the instant the purchase is made...."
-What you are refering to was called "Float" and there is NO float anymore. So you have to change the way you do things or you will continue to run into problems. Now you may say that this goes against the Gas Station example, but it really does not. There is no float because you have NO control of when the debit is actually transmitted to the bank from the business so you always have to assume that it is immediate.

"...Let me ask you this: then WHY ON EARTH will the banks not permit you to instruct it to disallow/decline any transaction that would create an overdraft situation.."
- This is actually an interesting question. But instead of asking us this, have you asked your bank?

If you feel that you don't have the time to keep a proper accounting you may want to look at setting up Overdraft protection. This is usually a very low cost, usually less than the cost of one overdraft.

Your premise of your report is that you feel that the bank is at fault for causing your overdraft and causing these fees which you feel are outragous. However, you seem to forget that you are the one who did not keep track of your balance and you spent more than you had. Even if it was a mistake, the fact is that you still did this. As to some of your comments.

"...For example, how difficult is it to program a web page to simply display balance, net of unposted transactions....."
- That is fine for transactions that the bank has received, but what about ones that they do not even have yet. For example you make a purchase at a Gas Station. They may only authorize a small amount like $1, it may take 1-2 days before they actually post the real amount. There is no way your bank would know that there is a bigger charge coming in because the Gas station has not transmitted it yet, but you did spend it. With a register you know you spent that amount.

"..."But the bank by design purposefully OBSCURES transaction data such that it makes it extremely difficult to ascertain a balance. If you are manually balancing everyday, I challenge you to 'get a life'! My example was the *first time* I have ever overdrafted my account with Bank of America...."
- Again if you keep a register you DO NOT need to check your balance every day because your register shows what you have. It takes 30 seconds to write a transaction in your register. If you don't want to take 30 seconds away from your life to do that then don't be surprised if your first time was not your last.

"....If an account holder in the good old days were presented with an OD situation, the account holder could go into the bank and simply make a deposit to avoid further fees. In our modern banking world, the 'crime is committed' at the instant the purchase is made...."
-What you are refering to was called "Float" and there is NO float anymore. So you have to change the way you do things or you will continue to run into problems. Now you may say that this goes against the Gas Station example, but it really does not. There is no float because you have NO control of when the debit is actually transmitted to the bank from the business so you always have to assume that it is immediate.

"...Let me ask you this: then WHY ON EARTH will the banks not permit you to instruct it to disallow/decline any transaction that would create an overdraft situation.."
- This is actually an interesting question. But instead of asking us this, have you asked your bank?

If you feel that you don't have the time to keep a proper accounting you may want to look at setting up Overdraft protection. This is usually a very low cost, usually less than the cost of one overdraft.

I am the original poster and would like to comment on the various replies which suggest, essentially that the account holder is responsible for improperly balancing the account, which is directly or indirectly a cause of these excessive overdrafts. Therefore, some food for thought:

1. Technology. With the technology currently available, if one were to have open, honest access to straightforward information concerning the account, one would be less likely to overdraft the account. For example, how difficult is it to program a web page to simply display balance, net of unposted transactions. What I am saying here is that, sure if you are living in an antiquated world (who has time to manually balance an account from day to day and why on earth should they have to?) then ideally you would never overdraft. But the bank by design purposefully OBSCURES transaction data such that it makes it extremely difficult to ascertain a balance. If you are manually balancing everyday, I challenge you to "get a life"! My example was the *first time* I have ever overdrafted my account with Bank of America.

2. Amount of the Penalty is Grossly Disproportionate to the Offense. When I get billed approximately $300 +/- for a "one time error", does the penalty in all fairness and reality "fit the crime". I hardly think so. Three hundred dollars will do such things as buy groceries for a month, pay a utility bill or two for an entire month. So in *fairness* a single error should not result in such a stiff penalty. There is not a $35 risk to the bank when the transaction is a $4.00 charge to McDonalds! Give me a break!

3. The Bank Permits the Overdraft in the First Place. In the old world of writing checks, the bank did not know what was coming its way. It was simply presented a check and forced to pay it or return NSF. In *MODERN TIMES* the bank knows what the balance of the account is, and may decline the charge! Therefore it is criminal on the part of the bank if they do not permit the customer to at least elect to have their transactions declined if the transaction would create an NSF situation. This is particularly offensive when one considers that the bank acts in its *own interest* to purposefully allow a transaction to go through, knowing in advance that it will benefit from $35.00 in its coffers.

4. There is no Remediation. If an account holder in the good old days were presented with an OD situation, the account holder could go into the bank and simply make a deposit to avoid further fees. In our modern banking world, the "crime is committed" at the instant the purchase is made. Therefore there is no opportunity to mitigate loss by making a deposit. As in my case, I kept purchasing and purchasing and purchasing without awareness that I had a negative balance. And as I pointed out in my original post, aside from overdraft fees, my account NEVER had a negative balance (the two response posts conveniently ignore this fact). As I kept charging without declinations, I was racking up $35 each time-- $4.00 here $8.00 there, at all times making the bank more money with very little, if any risk on their part (if they had determined I was a risk by god they would have cut the account off). Now that I realize the situation, I cannot go into the branch to make a deposit (I did anyway, of course), but I am waiting day by day to see the $35 charges accrue, as each "pre-authorized charge" is paid (which in turn retroactively activates the $35 fee).

Bottom line is, one can say bad account management, but there is too much complicity on the part of the bank, with no real reward or benefit for the consumer. I have read arguments such that, "it would embarrass the account holder if the transaction or declined," or "our customers would rather pay the $35 than have a charge declined, say at a restaurant." In truth these are transparent arguments that only the profiteer would make. In truth, in HONEST TRUTH, 99% of the time, no rational person would ever agree to a $35 fee for a $4.00 McDonald's hamburger. Such an argument is asinine.

The complicity on the part of the bank is scandalous. Let's review: total control on the part of the bank to establish the amount of the fee ($35.00) - no control for the account holder; zero liability for the bank (if there were risk, the charge would be declined) - 100%+ liability for the account holder; a perceived punitive measure for doing some wrong to legitimize the fee by the bank (oops borrow spent too much) - innocent act by the account holder; total power by the financial institution - no fairness to the account holder.

Therefore, you have people who will argue that the consumer is wrong and needs to pay for it (likely people who work for banks such as Bank of America), just the same as people will defend communism. Ironically, I am for the free market, subject to controls. But reality tells us this is simply a money making monster that is anti-consumer. My message to banks is that if you are not making enough money the fair way, then change the fee structure in a fair way. But bilking people out of hundreds or thousands of dollars in constructed mechanical artifice is unconscionable. Your actions are criminal and they should be treated as such.


Sure, so it is the account holder's fault. Let me ask you this: then WHY ON EARTH will the banks not permit you to instruct it to disallow/decline any transaction that would create an overdraft situation?

No ripoff here. Just another case of poor account management. I was with BofA for over 14+ years and never paid one NSF fee.

You are obviously not properly maintaining a checkbook register.
You are admittedly attempting to "float" transactions.

You must have the money posted and available to your account before making a purchase.

Your transaction is "made" at rthe time you transact it, NOT when it posts.

TIME of tranaction os the rule for debit card purchases.

The BEST and probably the ONLY way to avoid NSF fees is to keep a check register, even if you have a software program like Peachtree, it is better than nothing. Save your receipts and mark them in the register. YOu might think it is a "bother" but it only take s few minutes and it si far better than paying all that money. My mother is 88 years old, she ahs had a checking account for eons, and mostly uses her debit card now, but occationaly she writes a check. She NEVER overdrafts. WHY? BECAUSE SHE writes it down and actually does the math each time. AND she reconcilles her bank statement each month. I'llb et a lot of you don't even do that.

Oh you mean when you don't watch your account activity closely (example: mark the transactions you make with a checkcard or writing a check) or by not waiting for deposits to clear/funds to become available. First off, Bank of America is a great Bank. I've been with them twice. This is my second turn with them and in the 7 months that i've been back with them, i've never overdrafted. Even when my partial direct deposits were under $100. I'd use the account on multiple occasions and guess what? No overdraft. Gee, how can that be? Well, I watch my accounts and mark my transactions very carefully. It only takes a couple seconds. Try it, you will save money this way.

Good luck