Complaint Review: Bank Of America

Rip Off Report no longer shows the exact 'time' of the Update or Rebuttal, as they used to.

There is no way for the bank to determine when the transactions occur; just as ROR doesn't put the time on communications any longer - neither does the bank.  So the only way for the bank to process is by dollar amount.  They have a choice - higher to lower, or vice-versa.  They choose higher to lower for reasons I've already stated...

Jim, I do not want the penalty to be light, I want it to be ACCURATE and not manipulated.

Edgeman, the analogy of getting paid $20 every time you walk into a bank is ridiculous.

Another thought... credit card companies (and banks that provide credit cards) can decline a transaction if there is not enough credit in the account, right? So why do banks allow for transaction after transaction to be processed if there is not enough funds? The same technology applies whether you swipe your credit card or debit card, so why should the rules be different?

Regarding my original post, the bank made an error (by their own admission, courtesy of the manager saying so) and they refunded the fees. It's great that the did this, however it is not so great that it took a painful fight, having to push through rude customer rep after customer rep and being disrespected on several counts, until finally there was one who would even just listen without prejudgment. There is a way to handle customer service and there is a way to totally fail at it.

This experience has shown us, and the people in my network, that Bank of America failed in this case - who knows, they could treat everyone else like royalty... but I doubt that our experience was an isolated incident. Under no circumstances should a customer service rep. ever dismiss you, raise their voice at you or yell at you. Although many times I felt like behaving that way towards them, I did not and acted appropriately and respectfully. Regardless of the issue you want a company to address, as long as you are respectful to them, they should do the same - and that did not happen in this case.

We could all argue about what is right and wrong regarding banking practices until we are blue in the face... but we can't argue about customer service - it's either good or bad. No where in the banking agreements does it say that the customer service reps can yell at you, hang up on you and dismiss you - especially if you treat them the same way you would want to be treated. 

Thus, I stand by my original statement of not banking with them. And no, the bank did not do "OK" by me.

And don't depend on "logical" "reasonable" "fairness" etc here. I do what you also do and try to state my case over and over through smoke screens and twists. Some people do not get it, I don't usually understand their motive for not getting it..and defending these banks with so much fervor and anger and many times in a condescending manner..I can only conject....

But... you don't have to worry about making your point to "them". Anyone with sense of decency and fairness and logic knows the deal. There are only a handful of bank defenders on this site. I see the same few over and over and over...with the same result.

But..look at the statistics here on rip off report. As of last I checked...

1650 rip off reports against Bank of America
765  rip off reports against Wachovia
1279 rip off reports against Wells Fargo... the bank that used part of the BILLIONS of bailout tax dollars to purchase Wachovia

And what??, half a dozen or so "defenders". I wouldn't lose too much sleep over it.

person's life, and then two other Bank of America employees DIE on the following Friday, (who also had 'SECRET LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES' on their lives), and Bank of America receives the 'DEATH BENEFIT' checks for each employee a month later after the 'DEATH SWEEP', for $1 MILLION on employee #1, $1 MILLION on employee #2, and $1 MILLION on employee #3, which check should be posted first to the account that Bank of America has set up for these 'DEATH BENEFIT CHECKS' that they receive?

Also, if a CEO of a Publicly Held bank uses his 'Black American Express Card' to purchase a piece of artwork in Paris for $1.4 MILLION on a Saturday, and then he purchases a sculpture the following day for $825,000.00 in Italy, which transaction should be posted to his account first?

And, if the CEO's of these banks who are allegedly receiving 'DEATH BENEFIT CHECKS' are using DEBIT CARDS that are linked to the bank where the 'DEATH BENEFIT CHECKS' are deposited, how long do they have to wait until the money is posted to their account after the 'DEATH BENEFIT' checks are deposited?

*I guess a $35 FEE for a $1.4 MILLION piece of artwork isn't that much to worry about for a CEO, right?

And what's another $35 FEE for an $825,000.00 sculpture, huh?

It's only MONEY, right? Just a piece of paper, isn't it?

Make sure to 'Google' this- BANK OF AMERICA COMPLAINTS SECRET LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES, and read that article.

P.S. Make sure to 'Google' & watch all of the following on the web-

THE ASCENT OF MONEY PBS (You'll learn more from this documentary than you can believe!)

INSIDE THE MELTDOWN (It's all TRUE, and documented!)

FRONTLINE THE MADOFF AFFAIR (POOR Bernie!)

FRONTLINE BREAKING THE BANK (Hey, who are those CEO's?)

THE OBAMA DECEPTION (O-my!)

AMERICA: FREEDOM TO FASCISM (We're all 'FREE', aren't we?)

***You cannot apply for a 'Black American Express Card'. It is given to those who consistently spend over $150,000.00 per year on their AMEX cards, and who have MILLIONS upon MILLIONS of dollars, and plenty of assets, according to my sister whose husband has one of these cards. (He's a CEO!)

Domenic wrote: "The reason why banks reorder the transactions from highest to lowest is to maximize NSF fees, plain and simple. In today's economy, more and more people are living paycheck to paycheck and barely are getting by. These types of practices are designed to bleed accounts even further."

Response: Well, banks don't have much control over when merchants submit their charges. I've literally seen debits made on Tuesday clear before debits made on Sunday or Monday. Debits go from the merchant to their bank to the ACH and then finally to your bank. Banks receive batches of transactions and they may even get two or three batches a day. Since they can't guarantee the order in which they receive transactions, they disclose in the terms and conditions that they may process transactions in any order. Most often, that is highest to lowest and I don't have a problem with that. I'd be angry if my house payment wasn't processed because the bank is waiting on my debit from 7-11 for a cup of coffee and a pack of gum.

Unfortunately, this does mean that people who overdraft their accounts will face more fees but it is simply not an issue if one stays within their account balance. I'd wager that most people wouldn't even know the transactions were resequenced.

Domenic wrote: "Yes, if you had $1,000 in your account and spent $900 then obviously you are within your balance. However, based on your logic, a transaction that may have resulted in only one NSF fee can easily be manipulated by the banks to turn that one NSF fee into many. And in fact, that's what is usually done."

Response: A few months ago BofA changed their policies so that if one overdrafts by a very small amount (the total has to be under $5 or $10), then the fee is reduced to $10. That does help to keep a minor accounting error from avalanching into hundreds of dollars of fees.

There is absolutely no argument that a string of overdrafts results in multiple overdraft fees and I happen to think that people can do better things with their money than to pay those kinds of fees. According to the FDIC, nearly 75% of checking account holders do not pay overdraft fees. That suggests that overdraft fees are generated by a smaller number of account holders and that is where the focus should be if we want to see fewer people pay overdraft fees to the bank.

Domenic wrote: "So what I am getting out of both your comments, Christina and Edgeman, is that if you are ever in a situation where you would have incurred only one NSF fee, you deserve to pay for as many fees that the bank can squeeze out of you based on them reordering transactions on highest amount to lowest amount. That's not right, and you know it."

Response: What you should get out of my comment is that if I agree to let the bank process transactions in any order and I make a mistake, I accept the consequences of that mistake. I won't like it and I'd be angry with myself but in the end I would only have myself to blame. The bank is simply acting in accordance with our agreement. That's business. You don't have to like it but if you want to do business with a bank, you do so on their terms. If you don't like the terms, walk out.


Domenic wrote: "Again, it's simple, transactions should be processed as close to their date/time as possible."

That's between you and your bank. Did you and the bank agree that transactions will be processed that way? If so, then yes, the bank should honor that agreement though I doubt that's what the terms and conditions said.

If we're going to talk about what the banks "should" do, then my banks should pay me $20 every time I walk in simply because I'm so awesome. Unfortunately, the banks have chosen not to pay me that money and without a legal agreement between us, I can't really force them to.

In other words, what SHOULD happen is only in our heads. What WILL happen is in the legally binding agreement.

Domenic wrote: "If on day 1, I spend $50 and on day 2 I spend $100 dollars, the $50 transaction should be paid for first, after all, I made that purchase before the second transaction... and that obligation should be fulfilled first. But that would be too logical I suppose."

Response: If that's the way you want it, then I suggest you negotiate a set of terms with your bank and get them to sign it. If you can do that, then the scenario you describe above is what should happen. If you sign the stock agreement that the rest of us sign, then that is what applies. That's the logical assessment.

and Bank of America has 'SECRET LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES' on all 1,000 of them, & each employee & former employee is insured for $1 MILLION, then Bank of America would receive $1 BILLION after the 'DEATH SWEEPS' are performed, correct?

*If you multiply 1,000 x $1 MILLION, you'll get $1 BILLION, right?

$1,000,000.00 x 1,000 = $1,000,000,000.00

WOW!

'Google' this- BANK OF AMERICA COMPLAINTS SECRET LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES, and read that article.

SPREAD THIS ALL OVER THE WEB AT SITES LIKE 'TWITTER', 'FACEBOOK', & any other popular site, okay?

*Just think, ANYONE could make multiple copies of that article & go into Bank of America branches all over the USA and pass them out to ALL of the EMPLOYEES, correct?

POWER TO THE PEOPLE

The practice you speak of was instituted well before people were living paycheck to paycheck; you seem to think this is a practice instituted recently. As the others have already indicated, the practice stemmed from the bank deciding it would pay larger bills first since these bills tend to be the most important bills needing to be paid. Consumer WANT their most important bills paid. The resulting chaos that would occur would end up having people not having their mortgages paid, no car payments processed, etc... and then the complaint would then go, "stupid bank wouldn't pay my mortgage - now in foreclosure."

What you simply dismiss ($1000 in the bank and $900 in debits) and say, well, it's within your account limit - shows you've missed the point. All of us as account holders of every bank out there face this processing day after day. The vast majority of customers never overdraft. It's only a minority of those who overdraft; you simply object to the gravity when an individual overdrafts. You want the penalty to be light; I assure you the penalty would mean nothing eventually and people would rack up the same amount in overdrafts long-term. When they get the cold water splashed in their face and see the amount of OD's, they should come face-to-face with what they did, and institute change. Many people do and it never happens again. Other folks don't and they keep racking up fees. The more the bank penalizes people, the more likely they will change their habits.

The higher the penalty, the better. The bank happens to be the beneficiary of this behavior (liken it to your mother-in-law going over a cliff in your sports car - a mixed blessing) which is unfortunate, but happens to be the case.

I am glad you got your money back - more than you should have by your own words. I guess the bank did OK by you.

money go into a special account, (like an offshore account), or is it deposited into Bank of America's main account at its corporate headquarters?

Do the SHAREHOLDERS of Bank of America realize any of the profits from the 'DEATH BENEFITS' that the bank might receive?

Also, is the CEO, COO, or CFO in charge of when the 'DEATH SWEEPS' are performed, so the bank knows when to collect the DEATH BENEFITS?

And WHO is the check made out to? Are the checks made out to Bank of America, or possibly another company, or maybe even a single individual?

How are TAXES paid on the DEATH BENEFITS?

'Google' this- BANK OF AMERICA COMPLAINTS SECRET LIFE NSURANCE POLICIES, and read all about it!

Thank you.

The reason why banks reorder the transactions from highest to lowest is to maximize NSF fees, plain and simple. In today's economy, more and more people are living paycheck to paycheck and barely are getting by. These types of practices are designed to bleed accounts even further.

Yes, if you had $1,000 in your account and spent $900 then obviously you are within your balance. However, based on your logic, a transaction that may have resulted in only one NSF fee can easily be manipulated by the banks to turn that one NSF fee into many. And in fact, that's what is usually done.

So what I am getting out of both your comments, Christina and Edgeman, is that if you are ever in a situation where you would have incurred only one NSF fee, you deserve to pay for as many fees that the bank can squeeze out of you based on them reordering transactions on highest amount to lowest amount. That's not right, and you know it.

Again, it's simple, transactions should be processed as close to their date/time as possible. If on day 1, I spend $50 and on day 2 I spend $100 dollars, the $50 transaction should be paid for first, after all, I made that purchase before the second transaction... and that obligation should be fulfilled first. But that would be too logical I suppose.

In fact, if the account holder had enough available funds to cover his or her transactions at the time they were made, then the order of posting doesn't matter. If you have an available balance of $1,000 and $900 in debits, the bank can change the order anyway it likes and you won't go negative.

I've read countless comments on here about banks putting through the highest amount first then going down to the smaller amounts. My question is, if the correct amount of money was in there to cover you in the first place, where is the rip-off? I read so many people screaming CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT and various other mantras, but it seems as though they are the ones who cannot keep simple ledgers in order. Where am I going wrong here? Why do assume the banks should be your babysitters?

as they once were, and now they're making up the difference of lost revenue by charging, & over-charging all these FEES that shouldn't apply & aren't necessary, correct?

If you 'Google' this- BANK OF AMERICA COMPLAINTS SECRET LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES, you'll see that Bank of America was named in that article, right?

It is possible that Bank of America is not realizing the PROFITS as they once were because Americans are living longer, wouldn't you agree?

*Also, if a Bank of America was taking out- 'SECRET LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES' on their own EMPLOYEES, isn't it safe to assume that they would do things against their own CUSTOMERS too?

SPREAD THIS ALL OVER THE WORLDWIDE WEB!

Thank you.

P.S. Domenic, Cancel your BofA account & open up an account with a local CREDIT UNION! Make sure to 'Google' this- BANK OF AMERICA COMPLAINTS SECRET LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES, and read it. You can make multiple copies of that article & hand them out to all of the Bank of America EMPLOYEES at the BofA branch where your account is, right?!

First let me say that I am very glad that you were able to get your fees refunded. Again, I am glad they did. You will find that just about everyone who posts here hate the fees as much as you do. Which in the end is why they post and attempt to educate. But the difference is that you have people who take the position that you are responsible for your own money. Then there are others that take the "victim mentality" position.

Now, I am sure the rest of this will fall on deaf ears, but perhaps you can take something from it. If they said it was an error and reversed the fees then I'll leave it at that. However, the rest of the advise that was given is good advise on how not to even put yourself in this situation in the first place. By your own admission your Mom did overdraft. Why are you so willing to just give money to the bank, that is it sounds like if they didn't refund it you would have accepted that. So what if they didn't? Had she taken one minute to write down the transactions, she would have known that she would overdraft and made arrangements to make sure that didn't happen. So a couple minutes of her time would have saved her $35, seems like a very good return on investment. Keep in mind banks in general will reverse fees the first time this happens, but if your mom ends up in this same situation again don't expect them to be as forgiving.

Banks are basically the same(large or small). If you do change banks remember to ask and make sure you understand and get their policies in writing.
Pending Transactions vs. Posted Transactions
Available Balance vs. Posted/Ledger Balance
Posting order - This not only includes highest to lowest, but do they do debits before credits.
Funds availablility policy including Cut-Off time for deposits.
Fee schedule

You may be surprised how similar the terms are when you do this.

Execitives had programmers alter access permissions for reps recently.

Bank of America has had a past history of problems with Reps removing legitimate fees and waiving service charges. (free cahiers checks and like) This became problematic in last year or so when they became so profiilific to such an extent that more fees and charges were waived/removed than actually collected.

Therefore when you feel you have a legit error or abuse issue theres little point calling customer service anymore, only certain level personnel can even remove those fees/charges. Just take your complaint straight to the bank since managers are the lowest level personnel I know who can actually remove them.

My local branch is a prime example. I was behind an elderly man who was disstressed at having to pay 7 dollars for a cahiers check when he had been getting them for years for free. The cashier stated that in past the cashier could just waive the fee but the computer would no longer allow them too.

One should note that not so long ago a cashiers check was 3 dollars if you had an acct but they were losing so much money on them that its now 7. I wonder why they were losing money on them?

@Jim, the auto-debit of $150 was for a bill that was due on 08/03... so you're telling me that the bank would have taken the money from the account days before?? That doesn't make sense.

The bottom line is, if someone had just dug a little deeper and looked at the actual timing of all of the transactions the bank would have recognized the error earlier but instead, every representative of the bank (except for the last one) did not do their due-diligence in the research.

Today I called the customer service number and when a rep answered I asked to speak with a manager before even explaining my whole issue. I was transferred to a very nice manager that actually took the time to listen, without prejudgment.

She quickly looked at the account and said that everything looked normal - the fees should be there.

So I asked her to actually look at each transaction individually to verify the timing of the transactions. As she was looking through everything in greater detail, she said "oh, well this doesn't look right." She put me on hold for a few and when she came back she asked if she could call me back while she spent some more time researching this.

About 20 minutes later she called back and told me that the bank would be refunding all 5 NSF fees - even though one of them was a valid NSF fee! She was very sweet and deeply apologized for the bank's error.

It's a shame it took so much effort to get the bank to admit their error and refund the money but all I can say is, if you are unjustly treated by your bank, DO NOT GIVE UP and keep escalating your issue!

Regardless of this positive outcome, I still recommend NOT banking with Bank of America and banking with a smaller bank - where they actually care about your business.

To those that showed support, thank you! And to those that didn't, well....

Today I called the customer service number and when a rep answered I asked to speak with a manager before even explaining my whole issue. I was transferred to a very nice manager that actually took the time to listen, without prejudgment.

She quickly looked at the account and said that everything looked normal - the fees should be there.

So I asked her to actually look at each transaction individually to verify the timing of the transactions. As she was looking through everything in greater detail, she said "oh, well this doesn't look right." She put me on hold for a few and when she came back she asked if she could call me back while she spent some more time researching this.

About 20 minutes later she called back and told me that the bank would be refunding all 5 NSF fees - even though one of them was a valid NSF fee! She was very sweet and deeply apologized for the bank's error.

It's a shame it took so much effort to get the bank to admit their error and refund the money but all I can say is, if you are unjustly treated by your bank, DO NOT GIVE UP and keep escalating your issue!

Regardless of this positive outcome, I still recommend NOT banking with Bank of America and banking with a smaller bank - where they actually care about your business.

To those that showed support, thank you! And to those that didn't, well....

Today I called the customer service number and when a rep answered I asked to speak with a manager before even explaining my whole issue. I was transferred to a very nice manager that actually took the time to listen, without prejudgment.

She quickly looked at the account and said that everything looked normal - the fees should be there.

So I asked her to actually look at each transaction individually to verify the timing of the transactions. As she was looking through everything in greater detail, she said "oh, well this doesn't look right." She put me on hold for a few and when she came back she asked if she could call me back while she spent some more time researching this.

About 20 minutes later she called back and told me that the bank would be refunding all 5 NSF fees - even though one of them was a valid NSF fee! She was very sweet and deeply apologized for the bank's error.

It's a shame it took so much effort to get the bank to admit their error and refund the money but all I can say is, if you are unjustly treated by your bank, DO NOT GIVE UP and keep escalating your issue!

Regardless of this positive outcome, I still recommend NOT banking with Bank of America and banking with a smaller bank - where they actually care about your business.

To those that showed support, thank you! And to those that didn't, well....

Today I called the customer service number and when a rep answered I asked to speak with a manager before even explaining my whole issue. I was transferred to a very nice manager that actually took the time to listen, without prejudgment.

She quickly looked at the account and said that everything looked normal - the fees should be there.

So I asked her to actually look at each transaction individually to verify the timing of the transactions. As she was looking through everything in greater detail, she said "oh, well this doesn't look right." She put me on hold for a few and when she came back she asked if she could call me back while she spent some more time researching this.

About 20 minutes later she called back and told me that the bank would be refunding all 5 NSF fees - even though one of them was a valid NSF fee! She was very sweet and deeply apologized for the bank's error.

It's a shame it took so much effort to get the bank to admit their error and refund the money but all I can say is, if you are unjustly treated by your bank, DO NOT GIVE UP and keep escalating your issue!

Regardless of this positive outcome, I still recommend NOT banking with Bank of America and banking with a smaller bank - where they actually care about your business.

To those that showed support, thank you! And to those that didn't, well....

Along with the ACH you have a basic misunderstanding of a POSTED transaction. Banks POST transactions in a batches not as they occur. They also don't post transaction on Non-Banking days. A Non-Banking day is considered a weekend or Bank Holiday. So in your case all your transactions up to and including Monday the 3rd posted on the evening of the 3rd(going into the 4th). This in addition to what was explained to you about how an ACH works appears will show that the fees, while you think they are unfair or fradulent, are actually correct.

One other misconception you have is that Bank of America is the exception to banks posting Highest to Lowest. This is also incorrect, while I can't speak for every Bank or Credit Union, I can tell you that every major bank and the few CU's I have actually delt with all post transactions this way. If you have a bank that claims otherwise you better get the proof in writing from them.

But again this could have been avoided if she recorded that the ACH was going to come out and either not use the Debit Card or put money into the account to make sure it was Available and would cover not only the ACH but the debits before the weekend.

Along with the ACH you have a basic misunderstanding of a POSTED transaction. Banks POST transactions in a batches not as they occur. They also don't post transaction on Non-Banking days. A Non-Banking day is considered a weekend or Bank Holiday. So in your case all your transactions up to and including Monday the 3rd posted on the evening of the 3rd(going into the 4th). This in addition to what was explained to you about how an ACH works appears will show that the fees, while you think they are unfair or fradulent, are actually correct.

One other misconception you have is that Bank of America is the exception to banks posting Highest to Lowest. This is also incorrect, while I can't speak for every Bank or Credit Union, I can tell you that every major bank and the few CU's I have actually delt with all post transactions this way. If you have a bank that claims otherwise you better get the proof in writing from them.

But again this could have been avoided if she recorded that the ACH was going to come out and either not use the Debit Card or put money into the account to make sure it was Available and would cover not only the ACH but the debits before the weekend.

Along with the ACH you have a basic misunderstanding of a POSTED transaction. Banks POST transactions in a batches not as they occur. They also don't post transaction on Non-Banking days. A Non-Banking day is considered a weekend or Bank Holiday. So in your case all your transactions up to and including Monday the 3rd posted on the evening of the 3rd(going into the 4th). This in addition to what was explained to you about how an ACH works appears will show that the fees, while you think they are unfair or fradulent, are actually correct.

One other misconception you have is that Bank of America is the exception to banks posting Highest to Lowest. This is also incorrect, while I can't speak for every Bank or Credit Union, I can tell you that every major bank and the few CU's I have actually delt with all post transactions this way. If you have a bank that claims otherwise you better get the proof in writing from them.

But again this could have been avoided if she recorded that the ACH was going to come out and either not use the Debit Card or put money into the account to make sure it was Available and would cover not only the ACH but the debits before the weekend.

Along with the ACH you have a basic misunderstanding of a POSTED transaction. Banks POST transactions in a batches not as they occur. They also don't post transaction on Non-Banking days. A Non-Banking day is considered a weekend or Bank Holiday. So in your case all your transactions up to and including Monday the 3rd posted on the evening of the 3rd(going into the 4th). This in addition to what was explained to you about how an ACH works appears will show that the fees, while you think they are unfair or fradulent, are actually correct.

One other misconception you have is that Bank of America is the exception to banks posting Highest to Lowest. This is also incorrect, while I can't speak for every Bank or Credit Union, I can tell you that every major bank and the few CU's I have actually delt with all post transactions this way. If you have a bank that claims otherwise you better get the proof in writing from them.

But again this could have been avoided if she recorded that the ACH was going to come out and either not use the Debit Card or put money into the account to make sure it was Available and would cover not only the ACH but the debits before the weekend.

What you aren't aware of (and the OP isn't either) is that the auto-debit was processed by the bank well before the other transactions go through. I have an auto-debit that comes out on the 21st of every month, but it is first taken from my available balance days before that. The transaction would have been processed on the 30th (as the bank indicated) making the available balance $0. Therefore, all transactions after that point caused an overdraft.

So when you try to keep repeating the $150 posted before the other transactions did - that's correct because it was processed by the bank before any of the other debit transactions. Since it was, the lady incurred all of the overdrafts. Had she kept a register, she would have known she didn't have the money to buy the other things she did without making a deposit. No due care was exercised by her. As a result, she incurred overdrafts.

Domenic, auto-debits will always be processed before other transactions are because they have documented evidence that the debit is authorized. That's the answer to your question.

@Robert in CA... you are missing one blatant fact. Which is: the smaller transactions were all subtracted (authorized) from the available balance as soon as they were swiped. They also POSTED and CLEARED before the last transaction for $150 was even initiated. So I'll explain this in simple terms for you... the five small transactions were already paid for and done with before the last transaction (for $150) came through.

And actually, keeping a register would have provided absolutely no help because her online banking showed the pending transactions immediately after they were initiated thus lowering the available balance immediately. And I will restate this again for you since apparently I wasn't clear the first time around... the five small transactions were posted and cleared and paid for before the last transaction was first initiated.

By the way, reordering transactions based on their amount as opposed to the date and time they came in is not new for Bank of America... but it is not a standard practice of most banks. What is new for Bank of America is claiming they are processing a transaction before other transactions (which have already cleared).

So again I ask you, how is it ok for the bank to say that they've paid the $150 transaction first, when infact, their records show that they posted and cleared the smaller transactions BEFORE the last transaction of $150 was even initiated?

Robert has valid points..but that does not make it right. When the funds were available for those other 4 transactions, and then were cleared...the only overdraft should have been on the $150...which is the way things should be.

Now all the bank defending in the world...being told to use a register (which is what the banks always tell you when this happens) and regardless of the terms and agreements I feel this practice is wrong. I do not need to state much more as you did already very clearly.

You may be able to get some money back but be prepared for battle..keep calling the bank..going to the bank, calling the bank..at least with this similar experience I had with Wachovia I got almost all the money back..actually this happened to me twice..I won't get into the reasons because no matter what reasons I give,,the responses by the bank defenders will always be "registers..terms and conditions", there is no reasoning with animals.

Myself and some other people are working together with some lawyers on another class action suit regarding this practice. We can't promise all or any of your money back..but it will cost the bank. The main purpose of the suit however is to change the law..or determine if any laws are currently being broken..so if someone does overdraft..they are only to be charged an overdraft fee for the specific transaction that caused the fee...no re arranging big to small..no re-sequencing the times of transactions...that viciously targets those most vulnerable...people on pensions..SS...disability..or financially struggling due to the recession, I know my hours were cut and sometimes it is tight when bills come due.

Best of luck and once again I am sorry for your bad experience with this bank..I wish there was a way to get your money back without such a fight but it takes a fight or just roll over with your register if you accept that.

And also..go public with this with all you have and write your congressmen.

It's obvious Robert in California works for the bank by the looks of his Unproductive criticism and should really keep his ignorant remarks/comments to himself.

Domenic, I understand your frustration. I just read another situation like this and this may help......

The average novice individual wouldn't understand how the bank was scamming them and the bank would say 'it's your fault for not watching your balance'. The consumer would feel guilty and agree. However, even if a person watched their balance, they would expect one overdraft fee. But the scam worked by creating multiple overdrafts on one overdraft error. Consumers didn't understand this and it was easy to throw them off and cheat them out of multiple overdraft fees on a single overdraft error.

Wachovia and other banks engaged in bad faith banking practices that are illegal. A federal judge in White v. Wachovia refused to dismiss the complaint against Wachovia on this bad faith banking practice. Wachovia settled the claim.

You can read a letter from the U.S. Congress demanding the Banks stop this practice. Also, read an FDIC report released in November 2008 uncovering this scam: Badisse.com

This was from David in New York.

It's obvious Robert in California works for the bank by the looks of his Unproductive criticism and should really keep his ignorant remarks/comments to himself.

Domenic, I understand your frustration. I just read another situation like this and this may help......

The average novice individual wouldn't understand how the bank was scamming them and the bank would say 'it's your fault for not watching your balance'. The consumer would feel guilty and agree. However, even if a person watched their balance, they would expect one overdraft fee. But the scam worked by creating multiple overdrafts on one overdraft error. Consumers didn't understand this and it was easy to throw them off and cheat them out of multiple overdraft fees on a single overdraft error.

Wachovia and other banks engaged in bad faith banking practices that are illegal. A federal judge in White v. Wachovia refused to dismiss the complaint against Wachovia on this bad faith banking practice. Wachovia settled the claim.

You can read a letter from the U.S. Congress demanding the Banks stop this practice. Also, read an FDIC report released in November 2008 uncovering this scam: Badisse.com

This was from David in New York.

It's obvious Robert in California works for the bank by the looks of his Unproductive criticism and should really keep his ignorant remarks/comments to himself.

Domenic, I understand your frustration. I just read another situation like this and this may help......

The average novice individual wouldn't understand how the bank was scamming them and the bank would say 'it's your fault for not watching your balance'. The consumer would feel guilty and agree. However, even if a person watched their balance, they would expect one overdraft fee. But the scam worked by creating multiple overdrafts on one overdraft error. Consumers didn't understand this and it was easy to throw them off and cheat them out of multiple overdraft fees on a single overdraft error.

Wachovia and other banks engaged in bad faith banking practices that are illegal. A federal judge in White v. Wachovia refused to dismiss the complaint against Wachovia on this bad faith banking practice. Wachovia settled the claim.

You can read a letter from the U.S. Congress demanding the Banks stop this practice. Also, read an FDIC report released in November 2008 uncovering this scam: Badisse.com

This was from David in New York.

It's obvious Robert in California works for the bank by the looks of his Unproductive criticism and should really keep his ignorant remarks/comments to himself.

Domenic, I understand your frustration. I just read another situation like this and this may help......

The average novice individual wouldn't understand how the bank was scamming them and the bank would say 'it's your fault for not watching your balance'. The consumer would feel guilty and agree. However, even if a person watched their balance, they would expect one overdraft fee. But the scam worked by creating multiple overdrafts on one overdraft error. Consumers didn't understand this and it was easy to throw them off and cheat them out of multiple overdraft fees on a single overdraft error.

Wachovia and other banks engaged in bad faith banking practices that are illegal. A federal judge in White v. Wachovia refused to dismiss the complaint against Wachovia on this bad faith banking practice. Wachovia settled the claim.

You can read a letter from the U.S. Congress demanding the Banks stop this practice. Also, read an FDIC report released in November 2008 uncovering this scam: Badisse.com

This was from David in New York.

If you feel that BofA stole your Mom's money where is the police report?..Oh there isn't one because the money wasn't stolen.

But let's hit your points as we go along....

"I realize that Bank of America's policy is: when there are multiple transactions pending, they process them from the highest amount to the lowest amount (regardless of the day the transactions where initiated)"
- Yes and this is how every other bank does it and is NOTHING new.

"which of course is a way for them to maximize NSF charges"
- Actually posting order does not matter if you don't overdraw in the first place.

"This woman was also terrible and condescending stating "maybe if you kept a register of your transactions this wouldn't have happened" (my mom keeps track of her account online, which is just as good)."
- The woman was right and you are wrong. This situation proves why you must keep a register and can not rely on on-line banking. Which by the way was NEVER meant to replace a register. The ACH did not get submited to the 3rd, until that time the bank has no way of knowing it is coming in. So the on-line banking will lead your mom to believe that she has $150 more than she actually had. Where if she had put that ACH in the register, she would have known. There are other situations where the bank will report an inaccurate amount, but that is because of the merchant. When you go to a Gas Station the station authorized $1, and that is what will show up on-line until the Gas Stations submits the actual amount 1-3 days later. So if you rely on the $1 instead of what was actually pumped you will again be off.

"At this point, I am FURIOUS that Bank of America has stolen money from my mom's account. They are essentially raping customers of their money and manipulating their own system."
- Please loose the drama and quit using terms like "stolen" and "rape". Because to the real victims of rape it can be seen as you are trying to compare(and lessen) the true crime of rape has on its victims.

"why would you not just operate off of cash - or at the very least, go with a smaller bank where they actually care about you and you are not just a dollar sign to them."
- Every bank follows the same basic guidelines. Do some have lower fees..Yes, but even a $1 is $1 too much to pay in OD fees because they can be avoided.

"I will continue to call the branch and customer service every day until this is resolved. The ridiculous thing is... the amount of time (in terms of salary) the bank employees spend talking to me will far outweigh the NSFs that they owe my mom."
- And the amount of time you are spending is way above and beyond any time it would have taken your mom to manage her account using a register. Oh and by the way the cost of those calls have to come from somewhere so think where that may be?