HSBC HSBC 's "delayed payment posting policy" is patently fraudulent and actionable Salinas California

Since posting my original Report detailing what I believed to be HSBC'S predatory payment posting practice and policies, I am pleased to share with readers of this website that HSBC, on their own and without the initiation of the litigation to which I alluded in my previous posts, has retroactively adjusted my monthly credit card statements for the express purpose of reposting/recrediting the Moneygram electronic payments made by me over the entire length of time my account has been active -- and HSBC has unilaterally credited to my account all interest charges as well as all late payment charges previously debited/assessed.   The result is that more than $110.00 in interest and late payment assessments have now been reversed.

And all of this has been accomplished because my position regarding HSBC'S delayed payment posting practices was unsupportable and improper.

No class action was filed as none was needed.    Ashley, Robert and the other "naysayers" who chided me for my complaint will have to find someone else's consumer complaint to denigrate.  

You missed something. If you are so diligent to check a monthly statement, twice a month, then you would have notices a bank change.

HBSC could not stop being your creditor without notification. If you think they did, then sue them, but you better have all those statements as proof.

Ashley wrote:

"In your case it does not sound like they did anything illegal. 2007 is a long time ago, you very well could have missed the latter. That also means you don't check your statements monthly, or you would have noticed your card getting cancelled the first month it happened."... end qoute.

I check my statement(s) bi-weekly all the time, and I can read what it read now in my statement as of 07-30-2009: Credit limit $15000. ( about $6000 to use according to the statement).

AND here below you have the HSBC back to me answer when I asked them about why I could not use the card after me feeling kinda embarresed at the dealership that refused to use that card because they couldn't.

Quote:
"" Dear Valued Retail Services Customer,

Thank you for your email inquiry dated 07/21/2009.

Unfortunately, HSBC Retail Services is no longer the credit provider for your
account with this merchant. We cannot process your request at this time.

Any remaining balance on this account will continue to be the responsibility
of the account owner(s) until the balance is paid in full."" End qoute.

Not a word to me or hint what was going on with a statement as of 07-31-2009 that indicates that it is an active card with Suzuki!!

Anything else you want to know Ashley?

An experience that I had (before I started paying online and scheduling things ahead of time) was the fact that many financial institutions did in fact delay posting for several business days.

I sent in the check 5 days ahead of time (Madison, WI to somewhere in GA). It did not post for 8 business days. When I called, I was told they posted it "immediately upon receipt", but I had to give the mail 10 business days to get there. I pointed out that we were not in the middle ages and mail got there quicker than that. When I pointed out that if I was to assume it took 10 business days (14 days) for mail to get to their location, they must also assume the mail takes that long to get where I am (another 14 calendar days). It also takes them 5 business days (7 calendar days) to mail the bill, so therefore, they had invented the 35 day month. I was quickly corrected and told that they knew it did not take 10 business days for the mail to get to Madison.

Long story short, I paid off the bill and threw away the card.

Had posted before about buying a computer at best buy and put it on a 12 month no interest option through hsbc and how it took 12 or 13 days for a payment to get from TX to CA and get credited to my account and how they hit me with 2 late fees of $29 which they credited back after I bitched to hsbc and best buy's corp offices. WELL, I screwed up and bought a LCD TV from best buy and put it on a 12 month no interest option and the interesting thing is for the first 2 payments, it has taken TWO days for my check to get from TX to CA and get credited to my account and the third payment was mailed on a Friday and was credited on the following Monday, making it 3 days. I don't know what's up but they seem to have improved in that department. I signed up for their e-mail alert, so they e-mail me that my payment has arrived and been credited to my account so I don't know if that makes any difference.

I can schedule payments on the HSBC website and they always post on the day I select. They debit my checking account that night (or next morning).

From what I have read this is the only way to be assured of the posting date.

Now I will note that Citi, Chase, and others will all let me schedule a payment on the same day (at NO charge) until about 3pm. With HSBC the cutoff time is about the same, but I have to schedule for the next day (and after cutoff the day after next).

Yes HSBC got fined. But they got fined for not taking proper security measures with customers financial data. It had nothing to do with the OP's issue, or even what your issue appears to be. If they did not show proper management then they should(just as any other company should) be held accountable.

For a company that has been around a while and worldwide has over 125 Million customers Hundreds(or even Thousands) is statistically insignifcant. No matter what they do they are not going to satisfy every one of those 125 Million people. For example in your case, should they have notified you that they closed the account. Yes but how can you be 100% sure that in the last 2 years that they didn't? However, they did extend you credit and have the right to no longer extend that to you.

As was brought up previously, if the OP was a lawyer and they think they have a great case. Then they need to file the case and post it so everyone can follow it. But since it was pointed out that the person claimed to be a lawyer and that did not make sense with the rest of their report they have been very silent in posting additional information.

They are no different than any other credit card company.

Pick one, and punch it in to a complaint site and you will find hundreds of complaints on that company too.

HSBC, is not any worse than Chase, or Captiol One, or bank of america... you name a credit card issuer.

They all have these same policies that tick customers off.

In the case on this complaint, we are waiting for him to file his court case to prove that what HSBC is illegal.

In your case it does not sound like they did anything illegal. 2007 is a long time ago, you very well could have missed the latter. That also means you don't check your statements monthly, or you would have noticed your card getting cancelled the first month it happened.

It' pointless to indicate all of the lawsuits against this company because there are serious lunatics all over the country without a shred of intelligece trying to file lawsuits against all kinds of solid companies in order to get money from them. If there are hundreds of lawsuits filed, but only a few win, what should be taken from that. It should be that companies, for the most part, operate within the law.

Citing past lawsuits, even if the lawsuits were successful, is a pointless operation because the past success, like all things in the world, don't mean future success in your situation. In the case of the OP, there is no case because he couldn't supply payment within the time period allowed - accounting for posting delays made clear by the company. I'm not certain you have a case either based on what you posted either.

It's not like 'A' complaint about HSBC.

Did you read the links under that page and then the OTHER 100:'eds of complaints and the NEWS link ( at the top, among other links there) if you click on it, you'll see that HSBC was fined, July 22 2009, the highest fine ever in GB for leaking out customers personal info. ( I think it was $4.9million)

Have you investigated all the other links, link after link about HSBC. I doubt it!

In my case: I went to the dealership in June, 2009 to do service on my bike. Suddenly I find out that the Suzuki credit card, ( through HSBC) is not valid anymore and they can't take payment with it. I have a line $6000 above what I owe and NO late mayments ever. Well, not a word from HSBC that in 2007, yes 2007, Suzuki cancelled their corporation with HSBC ,so I guess I have a worthless card, but the good side of it is that never HSBC again and I'm refinancing right now.

Again, really read that page about HSBC, the things about HSBC is not a coincident.

The point of that being?

Its another complaint. i don't work for HSBC, nor am I a customer, so I cannot verify their polices.

This looks to be a simliar, but different issue than this gentleman is having.

As I said, I will wait and see where his lawsuit goes. People can complain, but the courts decide if what they are doing is legal under the contract they have with their customers.

You're credibility just went down the toilette.

""More than 20 years of my working career was spent as an attorney championing the rights of those who were wronged civilly. I made new law on the appellate level when necessary, patiently wading through the pointless and endless challenges from my clients' opponents; I clarified existing law that defendants chose to misinterpret because they felt that the expense and time consumed in litigation would cause us to give up.""

Sorry, but I"m having a lot of trouble believing this claim.

It's hard for me to believe that an attorney with over 20 years experience would wait untill the last minute and pay her bills via moneygram, over and over.

Most of us simply mail a check to pay credit card bills-ON TIME. Total cost: 44 cent stamp (the credit card company provides the envelope with the mailed billing statement.)

As an attorney who professes to be so competent, why bother with all the complaints to agencies and on the internet? Why not simply file a LAWSUIT against them? Seems to me that if your claim had even a slim chance of being successful in court, the company would very likely offer you a reasonable "out of court settlement" shortly after you file your complaint.

But you haven't done this. Why not?

DO post the case/docket number and the full name of the court that will hear your complaint after you file your lawsuit so we may follow the procedings via PACER or other judicial websites.

You're credibility just went down the toilette.

""More than 20 years of my working career was spent as an attorney championing the rights of those who were wronged civilly. I made new law on the appellate level when necessary, patiently wading through the pointless and endless challenges from my clients' opponents; I clarified existing law that defendants chose to misinterpret because they felt that the expense and time consumed in litigation would cause us to give up.""

Sorry, but I"m having a lot of trouble believing this claim.

It's hard for me to believe that an attorney with over 20 years experience would wait untill the last minute and pay her bills via moneygram, over and over.

Most of us simply mail a check to pay credit card bills-ON TIME. Total cost: 44 cent stamp (the credit card company provides the envelope with the mailed billing statement.)

As an attorney who professes to be so competent, why bother with all the complaints to agencies and on the internet? Why not simply file a LAWSUIT against them? Seems to me that if your claim had even a slim chance of being successful in court, the company would very likely offer you a reasonable "out of court settlement" shortly after you file your complaint.

But you haven't done this. Why not?

DO post the case/docket number and the full name of the court that will hear your complaint after you file your lawsuit so we may follow the procedings via PACER or other judicial websites.

Ashley,,you should go to this webpage and read a little.....http://householdwatch.com/news/interactive/273

Actually you have been given appropriate advise and suggestions by Ashley and others. If you think this is too rough, just wait until you get to court. But her last comment did bring up a good point. For someone who is a lawyer(hopefully successful), why do you a) have a sub-prime card, and b) need to pay that by a MoneyGram. This really does not have anything to do with the actual issues you are claiming, but it brings up a good question as to if you are telling the entire story or exagerating some of your qualifications.

As for you filing a suit, if I had a penny for everytime someone on this site claimed that they are going to file a Class Action Lawsuit, I would have a room full of pennies. Now, if I had a $100 bill for each time someone not only actually did follow through and their case wasn't thrown out at the first step for lack of merrit...well I would at least still have my pennies.

You may be surprised about how many people would actually love to hear about the result, especially if you can come up with some new and unique arguments that have not been brought up before. So please when you do actually file the suit post the Court Location and Docket Number so we can all follow it.

Ashley IS disdainful of some of us who post on this website; ...and as others on RipOff report have commented, "her" "consumer comments" not infrequently are dismissive and disrespectful, and often sound more like an apologist for the offending company about which the complaint has been posted.

I'm sure "Ashley" is not someone who works for RipOff report in any way, but instead is just someone with lots of time on "her" hands who scans the postings on this site and makes comments which makes her feel better about herself.

I look forward to you coming back and telling us you won. That would be amazing.

odds are it will be like every other person on this site that threatens a lawsuit, and never does anything about it.

If you are such an amazing lawyer, why are you paying for a sub-prime credit card with moneygram anyways? Lots of things in this story just do not make sense to me.

When you do win your case, please post us the case # for review.

I've browsed through many other posted complaints on this site and have yet to come across another post where such effort has been made by those offering "consumer comments" so strident in their efforts to convince me that I should be satisfied with the result I obtained on my own, or that my position is legallty wrong, or that even if it's correct that HSBC would simply pay for their wrongdoing with their insurance "Errors and Omission's" coverage.

More than 20 years of my working career was spent as an attorney championing the rights of those who were wronged civilly. I made new law on the appellate level when necessary, patiently wading through the pointless and endless challenges from my clients' opponents; I clarified existing law that defendants chose to misinterpret because they felt that the expense and time consumed in litigation would cause us to give up.

My position as expressed in my previous posts couldn' be more correct or jusitified. When litigation is concluded, Ashley and others who have taken so much time to persuade me to accept the status quo can read about the results obtained - not only in the print media, but I'll make a point to post the results here as well.

and very sensible. I have seen these warnings as well. I don't know why you are fighting this? Nobody here has a dog in the fight - we simply provide advice. The other more important fact I would point out is that your other institutions post things immediately means nothing - because they may eventually do the same as HSBC does. They all provide the warnings as a way to cover themselves in just such a situation. Just do it and stop the arguing.

Finally, there is nothing illegal being done here and the parallel you're trying to draw in the Mastercard and Visa case doesn't exist. The policy is plain and clear and nobody is being defrauded. However, if you're going to pursue this, be warned that this process takes YEARS, will result in a class action settlement of about $10 (roughly), and HSBC won't be out $$ because this would be handled by their insurance company under their E&O policy.

I have no personal stake in this. You also assume I have something against sub-prime lenders, I didn't even realize they were a sub-prime lender.

I wish you luck in your mad quest, but know that they are not the ONLY lender to have this rule. Obviously other lenders do or moneygram would not warn you that there may be a delay in posting your funds.

I am a bit confused why you would pay 10$ through moneygram to pay a bill and be upset that the credit card charged you a fee.

I myself pay all my credit cards, for free and on time every month. Its not a hard thing to do.

I gues what YOU have to do is prove that the posting of your funds 24 hours later is "unconscionable" under the courts and that the fees are egregious to the consumer. Adhesion contracts are perfectly legal contracts, unless they are so unfair to the weaker party that the court will not enforce that contract.

So let us know how your action against this bank goes, and while you're at it start a crusade against the other banks that do this practice also.

Or easier still, pay your bill a day earlier. Due on the 26th? Make sure the transfer is sent by the start of business on the 25th.

It's not my responsiblity to educate you, Ashley, as to what is unlawful about HSBC'S conduct. A class action, if one is ever filed, will set forth the various alternative legal bases in support of the damage cliam.

(As an aside, it did not take "weeks" to solve my problem with HSBC in this case....it took three days of concreted and persistent email efforts).

What I am willing to share with you is this: It's settled law in California, as in virtually all jurisdictions, that a "TOS" (which is no more and no less than a contract provision) is unlawful if it is the product of an "adhesion contract", which is one that is illusory because it borne out of unequal bargaining positions/strengths. HSBC can put whatever they want in their Terms of Service - that does not equate to such provisions being lawful or enforcable. Courts have long held that provisions in an adhesion contract are more often than not void as against public policy because, in some cases, they unfairly attempt to impose conditions that no REASONABLE person would ever agree to if they were bargaining on a level playing field.

Your attitude, Ashley, towards my post feels very much like you either are personally interested in the outcome of litigation against HSBC, OR, as is more likely, you hold in disdain those whose credit problems force them to accept "sub-prime" credit cards. Accepting a sub-prime credit card does not mean thatr the law will not frown upon predatory or unfair practices which HAVE AS THEIR SOLE INTENT the assessment of late charges WHEN NO SUCH CHARGES SHOULD BE IMPOSED when viewed under long-standing prinicples of contract law.

The fact that HSBC thinks (and saysin its TOS) that it can delay the posting of electronic payments WILL NOT MATTER IF AND WHEN HSBC'S practice is challenged and judged in the appropriate forum. One thing is clear, however - the INDUSTRY PRACTICE among other sub-primie credit cards is to NOT engage in HSBC'S artificial delayed payment posting shenanigans.

You may think it's tilting at windmills a la Don Quixote -- I prefer to view it as vigorously upholding the consumer's right not to be preyed upon.

You throw that term around a lot. What law is it breaking?

if the 24-48 hour to post is in your banking contract with the credit card, then it doesn't MATTER what moneygram says.

All it matters is what the agreement you have with the bank says. If your bank has it in your payment schedule that it can take 24-48 hours to post a moneygram payment, then its perfectly legal. If you don't like it, you can close your account and move to another bank.

My suggestion was give it space, why? Do you enjoy fighting with them over this? Do you enjoy the endless hours on the phone and the weeks it took to get it straightened out? Why push the issue and just follow what they state?

If you will do a google search, this is not the only bank that has the "up to 2 days" rule on moneygrams. If this was illegal, then someone would have sued the banks over it long ago.

Note, this is from moneygram's TOS:

"MoneyGram ExpressPayment service is a cash payment service that sends notification of payment to your biller company within minutes.* "

the asterisk small print reads:

"*Payment notification is made available to your biller within 10 minutes. Check with your biller for actual payment posting time and availability. "


So on moneygram's own WEBSITE they say that the biller can set posting time and availability of funds. All moneygram promises is that the money is sent instantly.

but by all means, keep doing it your way. Keep fighting with the bank every month. Let me know when you find what law they've broken.

Although I suspect Ashley's "consumer comment" is meant to be helpful, it couldn't be more misguided. Let me highlight, again, the salient issue here:

Consumers pay Moneygram a fee to instantaneously electronically transmit payments to credit card companies which, in turn, contract with Moneygram so that those credit card companies can also benefit from the payment service.

Moneygram gets a fee; the consumer bargains for instantaneous (and, at times, a "last minute" payment service, and the credit card company contracts with Moneygram EXPRESSLY so that they can get their hands on the consumer's money instantaneously. That's what everyone involved pays for - and that's what everyone involved -WITH THE SOLE EXCEPTION OF HSBC CARD SERVICES - gets.

All other credit card companies that contract with Moneygram to pariticipate in the electoronic payment service ACKNOWLEDGE RECEI+PT OF THE CONUSMER'S P+AYMENT ON THE DAY IT IS SENT AND RECEIVED (whiich in all cases is the SAME DAY).

HSBC arbitrarily and unlwfully chooses to simultaneously avail itself of the benfefit of the Moneygram service BUT REFUSES TO ACKNOWLEDGE that it has received the money sent by the consumer (EVEN THOUGH IT IS INDISPUTABLE THAT HSBC HAS IN FACT RECEIVED THE MONEY).

If the co-nsumer were to follow Ashley's suggestions, HSBC would be rewarded for unlawful and predatory conduct. That may be acceptable to Ashley. IT SHOULD NEVER BE ACCEPTABLE TO FAIR-MINDED CONSUMERS or the regulatory and prosecutorial agencies that represent those consumers.

You got it back this time, but I wouldn't push it in the future. They may have done it as a courtesy.

Just pay an additional 24 hours earlier and make sure its outside that 24-48 hour window they keep quoting you.

Never hurts to play it safe.

After reporting HSBC to the California Department of Justice and the FTC and various other agencies, and after obtaining an email verification from Moneygram that noted that HSBC in fact had received ON MARCH 29th the Moneygram payment I had sent on March 29th, the "customer care" outsourced emloyee notified me by email that HSBC would reverse the $30 late charge, ALTHOUGH oddly enough the same email stated "that Moneygram payments take 24-48 hours to post", a statement which, in combination with HSBC'S reversal of the late charge, suggests that HSBC still believes it can artificially delay the posting of such payments. And I still firmly believe that for HSBC to do so is a corporate policy which is actionable at law since it is designed SOLELY to assess late fees when such fees should not accrue.

SO, to Ashley and to anyone else reviewing this post with updates, consider that, as has been suggested by many others who have posted on this website, if you are persistent and are correct in your position, you MAY prevail without your head exploding out of frustration. But then again, you may NOT prevail, and that is why I think that only litigation will cure the HSBC illegal practice of "delayed payment posting".

With all due respect, Ahsley's suggestion, while obviously well-intentioned, misses not only the reason for my RipOff post, but also ignores what so mnay other HSBC customers have complained about on this website: It matters not how far in advance an HSBC customer sends or transmits to HSBC their monthly payment, and it matters not what form that payment takes -- HSBC systematically and arbitrarily delays the posting of customer payments month after month. For those familisr with HSBC'S "customer care" phone and email responses to its customers when complaints are filed over delayed posting and late fee assessments, we have become used to HSBC'S inconsistent replies: some HSBC email replies recite that Moneygram payments can take 10 to 14 days to post, some state up to 48 hours to post, and others tell us not to expect posting of our payments for 7 days.

In other words, it is HSBC'S intent to manipulate the posting of payments, whether they be by check, money order, Western Union, or Moneygram, in order to artificially and improperly create a late payment status.

And Yes, I have contacted HSBC repeatedly to request that they review this "second" delay in posting incident and to ask for reversal of the late fee, and HSBC has repeatedly declined to reconsider, JUST AS THEY HAVE DONE in response to the many other complaints posted by HSBC on this website by customers whose payments have been arbitrarily delayed by HSBC.

There is a simple fix for this. Don't pay your credit card payment right at the due date. You knew ahead of time that they could take up to 2 days to post yoru payment, My credit card even warns me of a 24-48 hour post time to post the payment. If you would just pay a day earlier then you would be fine.

I'm amazed you are crying about these late fees, and not for the huge fee you pay every month through moneygram to transfer funds. Why not use a checking account? They are free, and the transfers are free.

Anyhow, have you contacted them yet about the second fee? Or did you just run screaming here to post a report before seeing if they would fix it?