Beverly
Tonopah,#2Author of original report
Mon, April 07, 2008
My son, on the first day had 4 transactions which put him in the hole by $.36 - that was on the 25th of March. That would have been a $35.00 charge. He made a $7.98 deposit that evening which did not hit until the next day but the pending chages of these 4 transactions is all that he had on the 25th of March. On the 26th, they did the $35 debit for the NSF funds. His items were still pending so because of their $35 debit they gave him $35 charge on the other 3 because now they were showing a negative balance X 3 even though they were submitted on the same day as the prior. Even the statement shows that there was $21.24 available before they took out the $35 X 4. Because they put their $35 through first the other 3 transactions were charged additional fees. And that is where I believe they are wrong. The other charges just compounded the problem. There would have only been $35.00 in NSF charges if the bank had put through the "pending" (unfinished) transactions before they put through their charge on the 4th transaction. I'm sorry I confused the initial report with both days transaction amounts. I was a bit upset when I wrote it. Nonetheless, I think this is all absurd.
Anonymous0364
Fort Worth,#3Consumer Comment
Fri, April 04, 2008
I have to agree with the above rebuttal. The math doesn't add up. Given it's possible that you were off on the beginning balance and the small charges did cause the NSF's then it doesn't matter. I understand your frustration on the fee issue. However I would be more frustrated with my son if I were you. He should consider this a lesson learned. I bet next time he will pay with cash for small charges. Did you try to call BOA and ask them for a courtesy refund? If he has never had an issue in the past they are very good at doing this. I had a mess up in my past also, I called and spoke to them and they were all for helping me out. Even though they are a huge corporation we as customers think our little 35.00 shouldn't matter to them and they should be nice to us and always refund it. But if we all thought that way people would take advantage of them. The NSF's aren't given by a single person sitting there deducting each one. It's all system generated, which means no one even has a change to waive those unless the customer calls and tries to beg for mercy....
Edgeman
Chico,#4Consumer Suggestion
Sat, March 29, 2008
Bad math. Using the transactions in your description: Starting balance: 21.24 Panda Express- $11.58: 9.66 Arby's- $7.71 1.95 TA Truck Stop- $1.59 0.36 Jack-In-The-Box- $1.04 (0.68) Drink purchase- $1.29 (1.97) So your son now has two transactions that put his balance in the negative and you say that there was another transaction. That makes three transactions that racked up O/D fees of $105. I have no idea how much this last transaction was for but you wrote that he woke up to a balance of negative 140.68, so I assume it was in the neighborhood of thirty dollars or more. By any chance, was it a gas purchase paid for at the pump? (Not that it makes any difference- just curious) He did a fund transfer on the EVENING of the 26th. The bank has already closed out for the day by that time so yes, the fund transfer is technically a transaction pending until the 27th. Since the account already showed a negative balance, the three pending transactions couldn't be covered and those NSF fees brought your son's balance to negative $250. I am sorry to say that the bank did nothing wrong here. This could have been avoided had your son simply kept a check register instead of relying on the online banking feature.