Complaint Review: Bank Of America Ken Lewis Jan Monterro Jennifer Kimbrew

appears in 'Consumer Comment #4' at this Ripoff Report.

Thank You

WELCOME TO THE PUBLICLY HELD BANKING SYSTEM IN AMERICA- ONE BIG LIE

Fair and seemingly genuine replies from you both. As far as the banks go..there are still some points we don't fully agree on..and I hear a lot here that all banks are the same..and Exemployee18 as a banker with experience states they are not all the same...which I know to be true since I am a banking and credit union customer..not an outsider looking in.

Most of us who feel people are being "victimized" by the banks..or have been ourselves..well it is hard to convince us otherwise..we were the ones on the phone or at the bankers desk explaining reason and logic..and getting a register handed to us..and usually treated very disrespectfully by the bank. I can understand they have pressure not to issue refunds..I can understand they have customers whining to them day in and day out that keep overdrafting and want refunds..but in some cases the circumstance were not caused by the customer..or the customer was not all at fault..or the banks deceptions were a big part of the problem. Either way..a customer deserves some respect..we pay their bills and salaries.

Things have to give eventually..no one can ride a gravy train forever..and the banks are realizing the curtain is coming down. Now whatever reasoning they are using to concede..vs. how they really feel is of not much concern to me. All that is of concern to me is fair treatment..no more misleading terms... and policies that better protect our money from fraud and error. And once again I ask..it any of this unreasonable?

Jim..as far as the secret life insurance policies..your reply has got me willing to learn more about this before jumping to conclusions. The articles I read were not only from the media..but from law firms..now I know how law firms work as well..they are EXTREME in the way they state things.and for good reason.the more they ask..the more they have a chance of getting if it doesn't all go in their favor..but until I find out more for myself..all I have to go on is what you are telling me..the media..the law firms..and Karl...and that's a toughie.

I defend life insurance policies placed on key people within a company because they serve a purpose:  they reinterate the value placed on a specific person running the company, and the 'rain' associated with their presence in a firm.  Let's understand the polices are:

1.  Placed only on the key members of the management team

2.  Premiums are not tax-deductible for the company, so they reap no bottom line benefit for placing the policy - only if the key person passes away.

3.  Are not placed on any other employee....

The media plays these as secret life insurance policies when they are in fact, not at all a secret.  They are disclosed in the 10-Q and 10-K statements submitted to the SEC, which means the information is public.  Banks are not the only companies who have these insurance policies placed - and they won't be the last.

As I've already indicated, I've placed such a policy for a very large commercial RE firm during the time I worked there; all of the VP's of the company made over $260K in commissions per year and 25% of all employees made over $110K per year in either commissions or salary.  None of the premiums were tax-deductible and the beneficiary was the company - should they pass away.  The benefit was not realized if they were to have left the firm for reasons other than death, nor was the policy placed on someone like you or I.  In fact, 3 months into placing the policy, one of our VP's in the Midwest died at his desk of a heart attack - and he played a lot of racquetball.  He was 53.  His family was well taken care of - by the employee who died.....

Now that you know what these policies are....I think you'll have a different idea as to what they are.  The media has messed up the reporting of the entire banking issue and I have to tell you - I don't blame the congress for not knowing what to really do about all of it.  They know the real story....the media does not.

Ronny it is refereshing to read your opinions to be honest.  It seems very unbiased and I appreciate that.  As for the unbiased response you requested here it is.  I worked for a bank previously that had huge sales quotas and is reported on this site numerous times.  I truly believe that bank just does not care about their customers and is very fee happy.  They have no cut off amounts on fees and have very shady hold practices on debit card transactions.  With that being said I now currently work at a bank that still has fees pop up but will always listen to what happened to the customer and try to assist them so that is does not happen again.  We educate them in how debit card transactions work, tutor them on how to use a check register and even walk them through reviewing their accounts online.  We have investment services available to help plan retirements, gather rate information on CDs, Money Markets and Annuity products.  In summary it depends on the bank and how they conduct business.   The reports I have read mostly by the original posters for Bank of America seem to be for the most part all the same.  "I went in on this date and used my debit card and I knew that I would get 1 overdraft fee but then the bannk charged me 5 fees because of transactions holding against their accounts."  More than likely this customer is living beyond their means and cannot grasp how a bank can charge fees.  To me this is silly logic.  Pending transactions count against your balance and charges will occur.  Now the first time this happens the bank should educate you and give you some waivers on at least some of the fees, but most of the clients I know will consistently do this and the bank will profit from it.  By law banks have to honor debit card transactions that are pending they cannot send them back.  Also they must be paid first even before checks.  That is why checks can bounce even if they are higher in amount than debit card transactions.  I sympathize with the customer because I know that times are tough and each bank does things differently but I am just being honest by what I read.

Hmmm......let's see......will FRAUD, DECEPTION, MANIPULATION, LIES, GREED, EVIL, TRICKERY, DEEP CORRUPTION, & the CONSTANT PURSUIT TO FINANCIALLY INJURE THE INNOCENT PEOPLE of America, & the innocent people all over the world someday take-down the U.S. economy & other economies?

Calling Ashley a d****e bag - very inappropriate - she has every right to voice her opinion period - So OP - how was your debt (debit) card used in order to overdraft your account (I am not reading all the other replies because your original report does not state the reason the debit card made you OD)

This is the question - You are unempolyed (?) - unemployed so where is your money coming from?? Unemployment?? Stop spending money you do not have - If you cannot reconcile your monthly bank statement then keep whatever monies you have under your mattress and stop your "poor me" pity party

I have been with the same bank for 20 plus years and have had my share of overdrafts (all my FAULT) - learned my lesson and have had not one OD in 9 years! ( and NO I do not work for any bank period)

Oh BTW - if you get sued and you cannot be found then guess what?? They will find you idiot

I agree with your statements regarding the media..if you consider all of the information available online or on TV as factual, based on bias, personal opinion, delusion, or outright deception and slander.

I guess it is up to the viewer to determine what they believe to be legitimate and based on true investigative journalism..or not..regardless many will believe anything..and many would not notice the truth if it was tied to a cinder block and smashed in their face. We live in a time of sound bites..video clips..and where any moron can post "news"... their only qualification being they can type and press "enter".

The "media" and this includes the mainstream..do have advertisers and their dollars to be concerned with..their bosses can tell them what they can and can not report. That is in itself a crime in my opinion..but it is the reality..so sometimes we do need to do our own investigating..and draw our own conclusions.

To get my news I read various newspapers and attempt to weed out bias..it is not that easy. I also will watch fox news..they tend to be biased the other way..but generally allow debate..you don't see much of that with NBC. The problem with fox generally is they do not allow the "other side" to always get enough of their side in..or they mock them..but at least I can form an opinion without ONLY seeing one side..be it impartial.

As far as yourself being a financial manager, it is nice to hear that you don't force sell products that can hurt someones finances. So let me ask you..and see if you can answer this with integrity, honesty and without bias...

If, for example Bank of America is making it mandatory that their customers must enroll and participate in their overdraft protection service....hence implying that not only can and will overdrafts occur..but it must be acceptable since they offer "protection"..and then by their practice of transaction manipulations and other tactics..cause many additional fees to occur..even on some transactions the did have the funds "available" and clear at the time of the transactions. And when the customer disputes the 20 quintillion additional overdrafts..are handed a register..which in it's very nature is to imply it will always prevent an overdraft..yet the bank in contradiction "forces" the deceptive overdraft protection onto it's loyal customers.

As well the banks do encourage ALL their customers to sign up for online banking..knowing full well many will utilize this service in lieu of a register. Then the customer is often deceived..since not only did they make the mistake of trusting the bank..but they also trusted what the word "available" means..as the bank must also assume they understand (or not) what the word "protection" means.

I am not here to place all the blame on the banks..nor say some or many customers are always responsible with their money...but is it not apparent the bank not only encourages overdrafting..but is engaging in some unethical tactics to cause as many to overdraft as possible, and to maximize the number or OD fees...and has you even stated...will most likely have the most detrimental effect..and occur mostly to customers with low balances?

As far as people who live beyond their means...

I would agree many do..I was one of them at one time. I owned a business at a very young age and when the $7,000 credit cards came pouring in...lets just say I was livin like a rock star. I eventually realized I would be paying interest the rest of my natural life if I did not make a change..so I decided to sell the sports cars..purchased a modest beater..and started paying off my debt. I did not blame anyone else for my debt (although the credit card companies liked to keep em coming), I did need to borrow any money to pay my debts (like the banks do), nor deceive my customers to increase profit. What I did was make wise decisions..and work very hard..and sacrifice.

Now I am 100% debt free..and much happier. Do I have less toys and eat out less? Certainly. But I also can do whatever I want..I am not trapped into anything..and I am truly the king of my domain..be it humble. I own my possessions..they do not own me.

With that said..this is a free country..and many people are brainwashed by society and the media that their worth as a person is based on what kind of sneakers they wear..what kind of car they drive..and does it have big giant ridiculous rims on it. Me, I'd rather have piece of mind and be judged on my character..no one who only cares about money and is so superficial is going to do any good for me..so I don't care to be like them either nor associate. I am working hard and saving and doing the right things to secure my future..especially since the economic compass is not pointing to easy times ahead, I don't need a BMW..I need to know I will have income tomorrow.

But with this said..I can not agree that everyone who may be driving an expensive car that is perhaps costing more then they should be spending..or that occurs an occasional overdraft ,are necessarily irresponsible and poor money managers. Many of them as witnessed by some of the reports here..were simply duped by the bank. We may not see eye to eye on this..and both have the right to agree to disagree..but the banks part in this all is very apparent to me..and I can understand why these people feel ripped off..why they are angry and disappointed with their banks..and how a register would not have made a bit of difference either way in every case.

I am sorry but I have to agree with Jim on this.  The media is a huge problem with society today.  Most people are getting there inside info through places like television, google, youtube, twitter.  The media needs to shock and awe their viewers or readers to sell their information.  The main problem with todays society is that they wont even listen to licensed educational investors at financial institutions, brokerages or even tax offices because they think we are all out to get them due to media over sensationalism.  As a manager of a financial institution I can honestly tell you I never try and force sell products that are going to hurt or handicap an individual's financial future.  I ask questions that diagnose a persons financial situation and present them with realistic options.  But thanks to millions of individuals who live outside their means, which means most people on this site since it is obvious they live paycheck to paycheck since they incur numerous overdraft fees the media has targeted financial institutions that are businesses and made tons of profits due to those people.  Listen there should be no one who owns a BMW and works a 25K job, but there are.  It just pains me to see that money management has taken a back seat to those who place blame at the financial instittuion.

Jim..I am actually kind of surprised by your take on the secret life insurance policies.

I would have nothing against it if...

1) it really was ONLY key officers and...

2) the employee was aware they had a life insurance policy taken out on them...OR their families would benefit in some way as well in the event of death...and

3) If the bank was not benefiting from the death of ex employees who were fired, laid off..or no longer work for the bank...UNLESS said ex employee was aware they had a policy taken out on them by their ex employer.

John...

I actually though Karl was a crazy left wing nutjob. But I do think he means well..I just think he goes about it in a way that does more to annoy people then actually teach them anything. I find some of the stuff he requests to google is factual and reported by legitimate news agencies ("legitimate news agency" is almost an oxymoron these days..but it is what it is)...some are questionable..but he has a right to post here and I have not seem him be near as rude as some bank defenders have been.

With that said..I wish he would stick to the topics of the reports he responds too..I know he believes there is a giant conspiracy and it's all connected to Toyota engine sludge and the 9/11 attacks...the problem with his posts is that although I feel he means well..he ends up side tracking the matter at hand..and hence doing the same thing the bank defenders are trying to do..which is discredit ANYONE who wholeheartedly believes the banks are ripping their customer off, and smoke screen the truth and reality.

I defend any company who invests in a key-man life insurance policy for the key officers of a company.  The premiums on the policy are non-tax-deductible for the company and if the key officer happens to die unexpectedly, the company should be able to benefit until they get a new key-man in place.  It's a way for any company to maintain some level of revenue until a new person is put into place.  If you think banks are the only companies who do this - think again!

Ronny, the media likes to toss out things like this as a way to garner outrage; with a media that engages in 'gotcha' moments without understanding anything behind why things like this exist is why we have a society with no knowledge or understanding.  For example, we're so quick to villify health insurance companies for what some people call excessive profits, except that the profit margins on even the best run firms are less than 4% and some less than 2%.  The media doesn't even report that there are some insurance companies that are not-for-profit, yet their policies are even more expensive than for-profit companies.  Does anyone report this?  NO.  If the media is how and where we learn things, then no wonder we're all numbskulls!

I told you exactly the reasons why they're necessary not simply from a theoretical perspective, but a real-life one as well.  Don't let the media, google, Karl, or anyone else tell you that has never lived it tell you how awful it is.  The media and Karl are both preying on your fears; in Karl's case - he's also preying on what remains of your sanity since he's already off the deep end.  He's only had one lucid post on ROR.

Don't encourage him, read Karl's posts,   Honestly read his posts, simply  parrots what he is told by the latest youtube wackjob.
   With Karl its always "watch this on Youtube" or "read this article at crazyrightwingnutjob.com. 

  Hey Karl, just curious, what do you have to say?  I mean your opinion, not the opinion you are told to have, but what do you think?   Oh yeah, meant to tell you, the moon is made of green cheese.

(future update on moon of green cheese will be made by Karl), must be true, he read it on the internet.


John

Robert, Flynrider, I honestly don't understand why you guys try to reason with a "true believer".  

Ashley, you go ahead and respond, everybody already knows you are a d****e bag.

In a nutshell..(and I know it is hard to put all this in a nutshell), but I think what you are saying is whether or not I believe all that is true or not..as long as I "choose" to believe it all..that will lead to a solution?

I am not so sure..although I have read plenty throughout my life about some of whom you mention,,great men..and there is something to it....I think you would have to agree that most people will never accept or "choose" to believe anything that could possibly prove them wrong..and will always choose to believe what they want to be the truth..not what "actually" is..most people live in denial...that is a fact of life..always has been..and might always be.

I am a firm believer however..such as stated in Micheal Jacksons song "man in the mirror" that "if you want to make the world a better place..take a look at yourself...and then make a change". Simple pop song lyrics...but it can actually work.

Problem is most people resist change..hence we get bogged down in these messes.

The REASON there are WARS is simple. It makes SOME people a lot of MONEY.

We may not see eye to eye on everything..but you have always been respectful..so I have no reason to disrespect you, your views, or your opinions.

I have watched the 9/11 "googles" and I also have seen the Moore film "Fahrenheit 911"..and it still has not convinced me to become a "truther"...and the reason is these "documentaries" only show edited clips..and no rebuttal..I can never pick a side when I only see one side..but I have formed my own opinion that we had a president that was an inept puppet (not that Obama is much different), as publically viewed when he was informed we were under attack..and sat there like a bag of hammers for 7 minutes..a true leader would have told the classroom of children they had to take care of business..and without delay or hesitation got on top of the issue..he was helpless...and probably scared half to death. Yes I agree there are some suspicious things about the whole ordeal..and the gov is hiding information..but I believe they are just trying to protect their legacies and reputations..as well as future positions of power..they fell asleep at the wheel and the attacks although maybe could not have been prevented,,why wasn't the military coming to our defense? I mean what do we have them for? And why did we attack and take over a country that did not threaten us..have no real place in the attacks..and didn't even find a pea shooter when we were told they had WMD's? And why are we allowed to have them but pick and choose who can or can not? Why are we the self appointed world police?

As far as the doomsday report you posted for me...I do agree things are looking bad..and the economy can go either way. But this country does have money..I go to work every day..and I am out every day..and people are still spending albeit not as much as they were a few years ago. Actually it seems after the 9/11 attacks we have been on an economic spiral downwards..perhaps it does need looking into..I will stop at that on the issue for now.

I feel if the banks and businesses (GM for example) were allowed to take their natural courses and fail..if the Government would have done the exact opposite with "easing" up on the mortgages...if the government regulated the "hedgers" which I know without doubt caused the gas hikes..and if the Government better regulated the banks to protect the "little people" that not only could this mess have been avoided..but if it did happen would not have been to this degree.

As far as what the future holds..anyone's guess..but we need to get some trust back..and faith and confidence..and the little guys money back in circulation..if we can't trust the banks and the auto industry and our government..then yes..I can't see things going anywhere but downhill. We can make a difference..well "we the people" are the only ones who can..and will apparently..as long as we don't get discouraged to the point we give up and just take it.

Through the legal system (which is all we have unless helter skelter happens) and voting with our minds instead of hearts (maybe get a libertarian in the white house?)..there is a good chance to turn this around. But no one can say it's going to be easy.

mentioned in that article, which can be 'Googled', entitled- BANK OF AMERICA COMPLAINTS SECRET LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES, received well over $100 BILLION in 'TARP' money, which is TAXPAYER'S money? Think about it, if these banks hadn't received TAXPAYER'S money, then some of them, most of them, & maybe even all of them would have gone under, right? That WOULD have put us into another Depression, correct? Because we all know that the Depression in the early 1930's was a result of the FAILURE of a large bank in Europe, right? That's what Ben Bernanke told a group at a Town Hall meeting a few months ago, which also aired on- 'The News Hour with Jim Lehrer' (which I watched), & can be seen on your PBS station Monday thru Friday.

I know the defense is "insurable interest"..which is nothing more then a loophole at best..and how do you know the bank is doing this only with "key" employees or GM's or officers. And what constitutes a "key" employee?

Now this has nothing to do with defending Karl per say..and I don't want to get too involved with this particular scandal at this time as my plate is full..but there is something to this...this is copied from a law firms website...

"Many of the world's largest banks have purchased "bank-owned life insurance" or "BOLI" for years, including Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Bear Stearns, Citigroup, Wachovia, Washington Mutual, Wells Fargo and many others.

"We are investigating banks that insure the lives of employees without their knowledge or consent," says class-action attorney Scott Clearman of The Clearman Law Firm. "These types of policies benefit only the banks, not their employees."

In a BOLI program, a bank designates itself as the beneficiary of life insurance policies covering its employees. Nearly half of all U.S. banks have reported owning BOLI policies at an estimated value of $120 billion.

A bank purchasing a BOLI policy must provide the insurer with personal information belonging to each covered employee, including his or her name, sex, age and Social Security number. Employees' Social Security numbers are then used to conduct "death sweeps" where banks typically hire outside brokers to sweep public records in order to learn if an employee or former employee has died.

A person whose life a bank insured without consent may have a right to sue for the bank's misappropriation of their identity (name, sex, age and Social Security number). Employees may be able to recover profits made by the bank, broker and insurer.

"It is ironic that thousands of bank employees have been laid off, and yet the banks still stand to benefit financially when those employees die," says Mr. Clearman.

Since the early 1990s, Mr. Clearman has been a pioneer in class-action lawsuits against employers for wrongfully insuring employees' lives for the employers' benefit. Following several individual lawsuits for the families of deceased employees, Mr. Clearman pursued landmark class-action claims against Wal-Mart and Fina that resulted in major settlements for his clients."

IF..and it is an "if", the bank will let you opt out of overdrafting..it is the best thing for many people who can not afford a financial cushion. True it can not stop any or some overdrafts from occurring..and we all know the merchants systems..or customer carelessness contributes..but bottom line is the card will be declined once the funds are not available..period.

I still do not understand this one dollar gas thing you always use an an example..but I know when my account is low..or I use another debit card with a low balance..the slider on the pump declines use and I need to go inside. Since I opted out of overdraft protection..for the first time in a long time..I truly feel protected. And until some laws and policies change..no one will be protected at all..so yes I agree to use a register is part of the defense..but not having the false sense of security FRAUD some banks have the audacity to call overdraft protection service, will absolutely unequivocally cut down or eliminate not only "AN" overdraft fee..but the consequential avalanche due to re-sequencing, holds  and other gobbledy g**k they can throw at us.

And do you not read these reports... but just comment??? There are times and circumstances where a register is not 100%..it is not foolproof..just an additional technique to hedge your bets.

I never suggested anyone not use a register..but I am sick of this being the defense of the bank and bank defenders..when if the card was declined when funds were not available..or the customer had the option to opt out once they understand how it really works and protects NOTHING but the bank..how can you say it is bad advice? Your advice does nothing to help the customers since the advice is a day late and a dollar short. And most of these customers reporting knew and admit to an overdraft..they knew they did so they had to have track of thier account..right?

The complaint of many is the additional fees...apparently most of the reports state it was unknown that the bank was re-sequencing and manipulating and holding and authorizing and confusing and hiding transactions and delaying..it goes on and on..all in favor of the bank..all to encourage overdrafting and all to make it easier to overdraft.

If you do not see this fine..then don't see it..but please..try to not "don't see it" here.

It is a bigger disservice to lay all the blame on the customer then to give them a defense that actually can work for them. At least until things change..and trust me they are going to.

CNNMoney.com article on the web.

life insurance companies taken out on their key employees and the company is the beneficiary of the policy.  There is nothing illegal about it and nothing that has to be disclosed about it in an SEC report.  Years ago when I worked for a Fortune 500 company, I worked with an insurance company to place life insurance policies held in a rabbi trust on all of the General Managers of the company (there were 68 of them in total).  The premiums on the policies are not tax deductible to the company, and if any of them do die, the proceeds (sometimes exceeding $1 million) come to the company tax-free.  I should know - 3 months after the trust was established, one of the GM's dropped dead in his office at 51 years of age and the insurance company paid out the $1 million...tax-free.

Insofar as lying, the measure of a lie from a financial perspective is materiality.  Most companies either misstate, misrepresent, or otherwise cover themselves on their 10-Q or 10-K.  What you or someone else believes is a lie, generally isn't.  Even if BofA told the public that people at Lehman weren't getting bonuses, only to find out they did, isn't a lie.  If the bonus is part of their employment agreement, then it really isn't a bonus (it is to the press and it is to anyone who doesn't know what in the world they're talking about).  It's just additional compensation.  Some amateur-hour fool (like someone who posts here) then listens to another amateur-hour drunk trying to convince you that the bank lied because they paid 'bonuses' when they said they didn't is somehow lying....all of us are then forced to suffer through your drivel.

Do us all a favor and please get a job.  If you're retired - Walmart has jobs as Greeters.  Go find some other hobby that doesn't involve watching anything on Google, Toyota, Bank of America, or anything involving a conspiracy.  All of the stuff you post has already been discredited; you're wasting your time convincing anyone.  BTW - my next car will be a Toyota and I urge everyone to buy one.  How's that?

"For now..you can go to the bank and do what I did. Request IN WRITING that you wish to OPT OUT or decline overdraft protection. This way if you are at an ATM, point of sale..of some unexpected charge comes in..it will be declined..saving you a potential bundle in fees."

   Why do you keep telling people this?  They'll be awfully upset with you when it doesn't work the way you say it does.

   I've explained before how the debit system works.  When you swipe your card, it may be for the actual amount of the transaction, or it may be for a different amount.  The gas stations I use only put a $1 hold for a purchase.  If I spent $50 there, my card now thinks I have $49 more than I actually have.  If I only had $50 in the account, the card will let me keep swiping, even though I am overdrawn.  That's just one scenario.  There are many others, particularly if you throw checks into the mix.

   The only way to prevent this is to keep an accurate register.  Period.  You cannot depend on a bank to know how much you've spent.  By telling people to let their debit card decide when to decline a purchase, you are doing them a disservice.

OVERDRAFT POEM

...it does how "overdraft protection" works. Several things about this wonderful "service" the bank gives us "free" of charge in most cases..

It can give customers a false sense of security...the only thing it really protects..is that the banks will earn billions of dollars off the fees it generates.

Also..because of many things the banks do...fees, holding (aka: delaying) deposits..manipulating withdrawals (aka: altering time)..all contribute to the maximum dollar amounts the bank can and will fleece from it's customers, which overdraft protection does nothing more then not only recover all the funds they "protected"..but you get a 35 dollar fee for each one, thank you mr. banker.

When you first joined that bank..I don't think they asked you to "sign up" for overdraft protection..or offered you to "opt out" of it. This is because it is in the banks best interest that their customers have this "protection"..hence they can make the billions.

I know my current bank has another service you can enroll in called "overdraft transfer service"..which will allow your savings account to cover overdrafts. There is a $12.00 fee however if the account is $10,000 or under..but it is free if your account balance is over $10,000. If interested in a protection such has this check with your bank..as regardless of what many people think..NOT all banks are the same..you must read all the literature..and the fine print..but good luck understanding it if you are not a bank attorney. Also many people these days do not have a savings account so they are living tight..need to be extra careful..and best protect themselves by opting out of overdraft protection all together..or using a credit union..many do not practice some of the schemes some banks do..and are much less of a rip off and a much safer bet...do a little research and you will see for yourself..ask around.

Anyhow, many of us feel some of the terms and disclosures of some banks are unfair and misleading, and encourage overdrafting. We have tired to pass legislation but it failed..not surprising as how many politicians have their hands in the banks pockets..but this is America..and we can change things if we don't give up..here are the specifics...

H.R. 946, introduced in the US House of Representatives on February 8, 2007, would increase regulation of overdraft loan programs. The proposed legislation would Amend the Truth in Lending Act (Regulation Z) to clarify that overdraft fees are covered, require written consent before enrollment in the overdraft loan program, require financial institutions to warn the customer when an ATM withdrawal will trigger a fee, and prohibit financial institutions from changing the order of check clearing or delaying the posting of deposits solely to increase overdraft fees. This bill was referred to committee in April 2007 and died in committee. As of February 2009, the FDIC was taking comments on the issue.

For now..you can go to the bank and do what I did. Request IN WRITING that you wish to OPT OUT or decline overdraft protection. This way if you are at an ATM, point of sale..of some unexpected charge comes in..it will be declined..saving you a potential bundle in fees. The bank does not like this and may fight it. But if they refuse..or tell you they opted you out and it happens again..the best thing to do would be leave that bank at once and never go back.

Lying to the shareholders isn't a good thing, isn't that correct? And taking out- 'SECRET LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES' on your own employees (without their knowledge or consent), isn't a very nice thing to do either, right?

The dent on your credit report is or will be.  That's not a mark you can easily explain away to anyone because it is your fault that you incurred the charge to begin with.  It's obvious from the beginning you don't know how debit cards work - the cards do not decline if you don't have money in the account.  If you don't know how a debit card works, you should not be using it - period.  If you're unemployed - stop using a debit card.  Stick to checks and cash.

BTW - your account will really never close.  It will remain as an open account until you pay the outstanding balance on the account.  It will remain as an open account on your credit report.  I won't even get into the collection agency garbage that will start somewhere down the line.  It will cost you far more than $70 in aggravation.

Finally, by trashing your credit - there are some jobs you would not be eligible for since employers not only do background checks but credit checks as well.  Do what you want, but there is a consequence to your defiance.  Remember that.