Tom
Houston,#2Consumer Comment
Tue, February 22, 2005
John reported he was right in that the FBI altered accounts, etc. Except even he says 'allegedly'. So, John was absolutely right in that the FBI ALLEGEDLY did some wrong doing. Alledgedly shows only that someone thinks something has happened. It, many times, has no basis in fact and more than likely is based on rumor.
Tom
Houston,#3Consumer Comment
Tue, February 22, 2005
John reported he was right in that the FBI altered accounts, etc. Except even he says 'allegedly'. So, John was absolutely right in that the FBI ALLEGEDLY did some wrong doing. Alledgedly shows only that someone thinks something has happened. It, many times, has no basis in fact and more than likely is based on rumor.
Tom
Houston,#4Consumer Comment
Tue, February 22, 2005
John reported he was right in that the FBI altered accounts, etc. Except even he says 'allegedly'. So, John was absolutely right in that the FBI ALLEGEDLY did some wrong doing. Alledgedly shows only that someone thinks something has happened. It, many times, has no basis in fact and more than likely is based on rumor.
Tom
Houston,#5Consumer Comment
Tue, February 22, 2005
John reported he was right in that the FBI altered accounts, etc. Except even he says 'allegedly'. So, John was absolutely right in that the FBI ALLEGEDLY did some wrong doing. Alledgedly shows only that someone thinks something has happened. It, many times, has no basis in fact and more than likely is based on rumor.
John
San Francisco,#6Author of original report
Fri, February 11, 2005
I thank the people who answered my complaint. BofA as a bank has some problem's it needs to straighten out. The was no.# 1 of my complaint against this bank. But on the other subject I was absolutely right about the incident that happened in 2002 and why it was. I didn't just out of the blue think this up I have inside information and witnesses regarding BofA's collusion with the FBI and other agencies. First of all, I know it is a smart thing to monitor accounts (the FBI and secret service and monitor any account ten Gs or more) and aggree it needs to be done to prevent all kinds of crime, including terrorism. What I wrote about the incident in 2002 was a crime against the people of the U.S. because the FBI allegedly created and/ or altered the accounts of people that companies (not national security) who didn't like their politics wanted harassed or jailed. These persons were from various political organizations....I know activist can commit acts of terrorism but in this case these people, are not harming anyone just putting pressure on certain companies and federal agencies on various subject. I don't have to prove my case just inform you of the glitch that occured and what the FBI ordered the bank to explain. Past victims of governmetn harassment told the activist community what happened and they told others who told me....so give the FBI and other agencies credit when the do their job not when the go after innocent people for politically motivated reasons.
John
San Francisco,#7Author of original report
Fri, February 11, 2005
I thank the people who answered my complaint. BofA as a bank has some problem's it needs to straighten out. The was no.# 1 of my complaint against this bank. But on the other subject I was absolutely right about the incident that happened in 2002 and why it was. I didn't just out of the blue think this up I have inside information and witnesses regarding BofA's collusion with the FBI and other agencies. First of all, I know it is a smart thing to monitor accounts (the FBI and secret service and monitor any account ten Gs or more) and aggree it needs to be done to prevent all kinds of crime, including terrorism. What I wrote about the incident in 2002 was a crime against the people of the U.S. because the FBI allegedly created and/ or altered the accounts of people that companies (not national security) who didn't like their politics wanted harassed or jailed. These persons were from various political organizations....I know activist can commit acts of terrorism but in this case these people, are not harming anyone just putting pressure on certain companies and federal agencies on various subject. I don't have to prove my case just inform you of the glitch that occured and what the FBI ordered the bank to explain. Past victims of governmetn harassment told the activist community what happened and they told others who told me....so give the FBI and other agencies credit when the do their job not when the go after innocent people for politically motivated reasons.
John
White,#8Consumer Comment
Tue, February 08, 2005
If the stores still had the checks after you paid them off you are the one who made the mistake. When you paid off the store you should have demanded the checks that were returned be given back to you so that you can destroy them. The bank had no way of knowing that you had paid off the store. Many businesses resubmit returned checks a second time. You are attacking the bank for ypour own negligence. You need to contact the stores and demand that they pay you the fees that they caused.
Jacob
Tarzana,#9Consumer Suggestion
Mon, February 07, 2005
John, just wanted to let you know that the bank sends the checks back to the payee, and their banks will often submit the checks again automatically. That is the big problem. It is all done electronically, and BofA should have cleaned up the fees in my opinion. As far as the second warning goes, you seem to be very paranoid. But your paranoia is not unfounded. They are watching, and they have an obligation to work with the government to report people. I am personally glad that people pulling "funny stuff" with their bank accounts get reported and watched. As far as the first thing goes, I would keep pushing to have any of those fees reversed. At the bank I worked for, they understood that checks would be processed twice causing fees sometimes, and they would reverse them. I would keep pushing for a manager to do this depending on your history with them.