18 comments
hahaba
hahaba

Let’s go back to good old 1800’s. The bank would not lend you unless born rich and you only have house if friends and family builds it.

Super. We can’t wait the year 1800 to arrive again.

ward.hillyer
ward.hillyer

These would be the same banks that the taxpayer bailed out to the tune of $700B. Tax payers that include taxes from people denied accounts. your problem with believing in capitalism and private industry is simply that it doesn't exist in the Majority of this country. There is a quasi-fascist relationship between huge cartels such as communications and airlines with the government. Get me back to a small government that only maintained competition and fairness....Please!

JoGo
JoGo

In most if not all Cases consumers should be dealing with Credit Unions  instead of entities run by the spawn of Satan



sean00
sean00

I am not seeing the problem here.  These banks/credit unions are private companies and they can accept or reject any customers they want for any reasons they want - just like a restaurant can refuse service to any customer for any reason.  Banking services are not a public good and are not required to be offered to everyone like landline telephone lines...

At the end of the day any person will be able to find one out of the several hundred banks to hold their money, even if you are on one of these lists.  That is the beauty of capitalism and competition.

If you think these policies are unfair then you, and enough other customers, are going to have to stop giving those banks your money.  Goodluck with that...

thecrud
thecrud

Because people who are not in law enforcement are trying to enforce the law sideways.

They should go to jail.

shane4free
shane4free

About 8 years ago I switched $96 from my savings to checking accounts more times than I was allotted in 1 month. I was unaware at that time there was a limit and even though the agent I opened the account with kept singing the praises of the account transfer, they never mentioned the limit. I'm sure it was in the small print and it was my fault for not reading the specifics, but my penalty was having my account closed (after paying the fees for going over my transfer limit) and Chexsystems put a hold on me opening a new account with any bank for 5 years. I did not know this until trying to open an account at another bank some time later. This was in 2007 right before the crash. Seemed odd to punish me for my behavior when the banks got bailed out for their "malfeasance".

BobShafer
BobShafer

Shortly after getting out of Collage and getting my first job I decided to take my first paycheck and open a Checking Account, I walked into a big bank and was told I needed two forms of ID; I pulled out my Driver’s License and Student ID Card. I was told by the lady; oh no you need a Credit Card. I told the lady that didn't have one, she then told me I'm sorry but our bank is picky about the kind of customers we sign up. As I left the bank I noticed a Credit Union across the street, I went in and asked the lady at the desk if they would take my money. She kind of looked baffled and said of course we would. I have now been with them for over 20 years, and having god only knows how much money in Fees.

eagle11772
eagle11772

A bout 2 years ago, I moved from New York to Albuquerque.  I opened a new checking account at a bank with a $ 10,000 cash deposit.  I had no problems until about 3 months later, when I tried to withdraw $20 from an ATM and could not do so, and the message said: "ACCOUNT NOT ACTIVE".  I KNEW I had more than $10k in the account and so was upset and mystified that I could not withdraw $20 from the ATM late at night.  I contacted the bank in the morning, and was told that my checking account was closed, and I had to contact another office to find out why.  I withdrew the $10k from the bank in the morning, and opened another checking account at another bank, but I never received a reason why my account was closed.  I never had this kind of problem before opening that account, nor after, with any other bank.  So I am still mystified.

robert3242
robert3242

I am no fan of banks or bankers, but I wonder how many people who made "one little mistake" are actually denied checking accounts as opposed to those who've habitually written bum checks.

Openminded1
Openminded1

I blame the federal govt for allowing the companies like checksytems  and banks for not be regulated closer in the interest of fairness to the consumer. If someone made a mistake 15 years ago checksystems is still given them a bad rating. Congress does nothing to help consumers unless it involved them personally or one of there family members. and the banks they love when a customer overdraws they get to make a 34.00 dollar fee even if the amount overdrawn is 5.00 what a racket. A loan shark would be better to deal with there vig would be less. companies like check systems have no one keeping an eye on them and to get something rectified with them is like trying to pass a bill thru congress.

KentR
KentR

Banks take money all the time   they call it  transaction costs  or fees   interest  expense  it makes a person want to  stick his cash in a savings and loan for better returns.

notLostInSpace
notLostInSpace

Banks are just like casinos.  They want all the rules in their favor.  Author mentions customers trying to game the system; that is hilarious.  The banks, and their powerful lobbies, have created the most user unfriendly atmosphere for bank customers.  Although they know money transfers electronically super fast, they still put holds on certain checks.  They have taken away the float to us, but not them.  They still play games like making your own direct deposits unavailable for a period of time.  How about the encouragement of businesses converting your check into an ach transfer....no float at all.  People live hand to mouth, but not the banks, huge beneficiaries of loans and bailouts.  I mention the casinos because if you start to win in a casino they throw you out, and if you win a lot they ban you.  And how about the fees?  I have an overdraft line with one bank; I over drafted by $2.15 and they advanced it, with a $12.50 fee to do so!  Jimmy the Shark might have better rates than that!

ClintonWeir
ClintonWeir

@BobShafer  Just think, somewhere there's a person repeating the story about the time you said or did something stupid.

RekkaRiley
RekkaRiley

@robert3242 Oh, you'd be surprised...

The actual percentage of criminals in any given group is usually pretty small, so policies like this end up tagging way more innocents than criminals.

postingonline42
postingonline42

@notLostInSpace You have good points, but their 'holds' on checks might not be as sinister as you think. I worked at a bank in I.T. and whatever bank you go to, whatever name they have, they use several of existing financial services providers like Fidelity Information Systems or a few others to process their checks and other transactions. These system are Batch systems with monochrome terminals. Our bank used a system that used a system that had screen-scrappers for these terminals to get data, and displayed the data in nice SOAP services and nice web sites. When you put a check in, you "had" the money right away. the bank counted it and showed it to you. but the bank didn't have the money until the next day, after they put a Tab-delimited file on some prehistoric FTP machine, fed it via COBOL batch service and read the output the next day from a series of automated queries to the thing that used the thing that read from monochrome terminal output, or BATCH "get" request to said COBOL machines. No one today and duplicate the functioning of the COBOL batch terminals because they are too big and we just don't have the millions or billions to compete with them!!! Any "real time" transactions are lies because they only pretend they happened in real time for your benefit while in the back end they go 'round 24 hour file-batch cycles with COBOL terminal machines owned by one of 5 or so financial services providers all banks use.

DeweySayenoff
DeweySayenoff

@postingonline42@notLostInSpace Given the level of tech available today, there is no reason on earth why depositing a check can't have that money transferred immediately from the checking account of whoever wrote the check.


BTW, your explanation above was tediously detailed.  As an IT professional myself, you should know our jobs aren't to sound techy and geeky.  We're supposed to translate the "monochrome terminal output" to something like "information on a screen" or "BATCH" as "do a lot of things at once".  

And let's face it, COBOL is SO 70's.

Your whole post could have been summed up in one sentence: We had really old equipment because the banks are too cheap to upgrade and because of that, it took a day to get the money for a processed check from the other banks.

 I know COmmon Business Oriented Language is obsolete these days.  I know batch processing is inefficient because it's a redundant action once the check is taken and processed at the teller's station, in effect processing it twice.  I know that it had to be done that way because the bank had obsolete equipment and methods.  The thing is, no one else who ISN'T in IT would have really understood what you posted.   So for the sake of the non-geeks out there, next time try to have less techy detail, fewer method descriptions and more point.  

That way other people can understand yours.