Complaint Review: Bank Of America - Tampa Florida

I am really surprised that none of your former buddies in the banking system couldn't fix all of this for you....it's tough when you're on the other side of the fence and no one will help...isn't it?

I still believe he means well and is trying in his own way to fight evil..

With that said, do I believe him stating "anyone can "google" this..TOYOTA engine sludge" when the poster is lodging a complaint that a bank charged them $1250 dollars in fees from a single overdraft offers any help?

No..I don't see the connection..agreed. But I feel he is on "the peoples" side..and maybe in his own way..he is opening some eyes. Distracting...yes..but sometimes that's what one needs to resort to in order to get attention.

Does anyone know who this Harvard Professor is? They tend to be a "little" biased to the left I must agree.

Did you 'Bing' this- DR MANDELSTAMM OF KIEFF, and click on- 'Controversy of Zion' and go to 'Page 95' of the passage entitled- 'THE TALMUD AND THE GHETTOES' and read those quotes yet?

Edward I am sorry you got grouped into that.  Your right with his nonsense it is hard to see the fire through the smoke.  My bad all is well and I am sorry.

This is so funny how obvious it is how Karl's tactics are working. With the ROR's new formatting, it's been a long time since I've had to shout. To Exemployee18, ONE MORE TIME!. I agree with you! Okay! Do you hear me now? Or is Karl blocking your view yet again?

I'm going to attempt this one more time. You may or may not see this post because of a long essays from Karl contemplating Global Warming. But if you don't have enough fortitude to fight through it like the rest of us, and continue glancing up the thread to see if there was actually a meaningful post from someone that got lost in translation, then I think that says as much about yourself as it does Karl. ONE MORE TIME, my exact post word for word from earlier, which you obviously missed:

To Exemployee18 here's a new conspiracy theory for you. Let's examine the evidence displayed beautifully by two of your quotes to our dear friend Karl:

''Certain individuals are here to help consumers understand the banking systems and how they work. Shoot even Ronnyg at least listens and tries to help people out.''

Not to sound presumptuous or anything like that, but I humbly place myself in that category as well, and I think many adversaries would place me there also, even if they disagree with many of my opinions. To your next quote to Karl:

''You on the other hand do nothing but pass on conspiracy theories that just look stupid.''

I don't think there's any disputing that many banks are aware of sites like the ROR and others. This is proven by the fact that some bank employees even come here and post under that title. Many consumers have alleged that some contributors are bank employees secretly working on behalf of the bank, because of their consistent posting patterns defending them. That would be one tactic the bank could use to fight wide spread negative PR.

But then there's another subtle but not often mentioned tactic. Whatever works, right? Cue the Internet Troll.

This is my final response.  Edward and Karl I have read your conspiracy theories and I agree that the financial system has some holes that need to be plugged up.  I am not saying there is no blame there, however my point was that neither one of you has helped the previous poster with her problem.  She has not learned anything else from you two except from a conspirator's point of view.  Meanwhile the posters who give her advice because they know how banks work are the ones trying to help.  You guys are just as bad as the posters who call OP idiots and stupid because you bring as much to the table as they do.  I can see that you both are so far from understanding the banking system from the inside that you both cannot bring anything helpful to the table I am done debating the political issues with you.  This will be my last post on this thread because I have done my best trying to help the OP with her issue.  If she takes my advice then I have done my job if not then that is ok too.  I was just trying to help not launch a political forum.  Good luck to the OP and to both of you.

To me, the evidence is overwhelming. To Exemployee18, Karl has taken the common 'divide and conquer' technique and modified it to 'distract and conquer'. Just look at how it may have even caused you to overlook my previous post where I gave you a new possible reason or 'conspiracy'.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it. :)

'THE TALMUD AND THE GHETTOES' yet? Here is that quote: "It was the perfect means of corralling a scattered congregation, imprisoning people's minds, and wielding power over them." - 'Page 95'. 'The Talmud And The Ghettoes'. Simply 'Bing' this- DR MANDELSTAMM OF KIEFF, and click on- 'Controversy of Zion', and that passage will appear. Go to 'Page 95' and read it, if you'd like.

Karl does not mean well.  Sorry it comes off as being overbearish and a know it all.  He brings up knowing Harvard professors and people in the medical industry as credible sources.  True that these individuals are intelligent and bring knowledge to the table, but to say they are not biased in their opinions is just plain ignorant.  The medical industry should be very thankful their is a strong financial system that can be lenders for the updated equipment and supplies that are needed.  Do you think medical professionals are excited about the universal health care reform the government is currently trying to propose?  Yea I think not, so for him to say they are credible sources is very misleading.  Ronny my problem is that he takes a report and spins it off into millions of different avenues and uses ROR as a political forum when it should be used as advice and help for consumers that have been done wrong.  How is it supposed to help the OP of this thread to know that the government is going in the toilet?  It doesnt!  I came on here to try and help consumers and what happened to them in their original posts, I do not try and be argumentative like a lot of other responses on here.  I try and be helpful and give some insight.  Look at all the financial threads for all the banks.  He is everywhere telling people to google this and google that when none of it has any direct usefulness the the original posts.  It comes across as if he is trying to run for office or something.  It is empty knowledge and biased opinions.  That is my point.

..but he does mean well..he is exposing what he believes is going on..and it could help bring change..or... people have the "freedom of choice" to ignore his posts..he does have a right to criticize this country..without being told to get out. Yes he comes off as an extremist..which is apparently what he is..but he is against evil..not for it so I can't criticize him for what he does.

Now at the risk of veering way off topic of this particular report..you have to admit..well perhaps the economy is not based on "fraud" per say..that is debatable..but as money keeps being printed..and we fall deeper and deeper into debt as a nation..there is going to be big problems ahead.

The monetary system is backed by nothing really..and instead of our money stating in it "this note is backed by gold/silver etc".. it simply states "this note is legal tender for all DEBTS, public and private".

So perhaps we can pay back China with BofAs counterfeit hundreds...or better yet just send them toilet paper..as the way things are headed...toilet paper may become very valuable in the future.

Why do I always have to explain or "prove" to you the implications of my posts..the answers are already in the post itself..but once again..I guess I have to simplify and break it down into baby bites...



"If you keep track of your money properly you can use it for every day purchases. If you look at my bank statement 90% of my transactions are 10$ or less. Most being between 3-6$ "

We are talking about ways the register does not always help so this is irrelevant. As well..it is just stating the obvious..it is as useless as stating "I know how you can become a millionaire...first...get a million dollars". The reason I mentioned about the bank encouraging using the card instead of "fumbling for change" is because the majority of the BANK DEFENDERS tell us we are using the card wrong..and abusing it..and we are dopes for using the card for small purchases..but the BANKS themselves encourage this.

Then I use the example of the airline tickets..and am told NOT to use the debit card for large purchases. So it is wrong to use it for large and small purchases? I guess we need to decide what a "medium" purchase is so we can advise people on what they can use the card for..since the bank wants us to use it for everything regardless.

"It IS convenient to not have to fumble around with change. The bank is trying to illustrate how convenient their product is. They can't control your spending habits, they aren't your mommy."

Yes..they use the word "convenience" as liberally as they use the words "protection" and "available balance" and "courtesy" etc. Some of us notice a pattern. That EVERY term they use, regardless of what the bank means by it..versus what the words literally mean by definition have one thing in common..they ALL encourage overdrafting..or am I a crazy "truther" because I notice and expose the OBVIOUS?

The bank is certainly not our "mommy"..but back in the days when my mommy started banking..the banks actually wanted to protect our money..and wanted happy customers..these days it seems not so much.

"As for the online balance, you CAN use it for your balance as long as you understand how holds work and clear off your pending transaction section. Additionally you have to remember items that are not on the sheet yet such as checks or bill pays. Unless my bank just has a strange online register, I use it quite effectively to keep track of my money. Is this the best way? Of course not, but I understand it well enough that it does work for me."

Online banking could work for everyone as well..but judging by these reports..many of them report inconsistencies with the online statement, and it is stated again and again by the BANK DEFENDERS not to trust the online statement..as it is inaccurate and should NOT be relied on. The bank seems to imply differently. Now yes it would be nice if the bank better explained this to their customers rather then using terms like "jump online 24 hours a day to view your account activity"..but to wit by the thousands of reports here..too many are not finding out until it is too late. Hence the lawsuits and legislation will fix this..eventually, mark my words.

"If you wish to be ignorant and use your card for every little purchase, then don't keep track of them and look online, I could see someone getting confused. The online statement is hard to understand unless you know what you are looking at."

The problem has nothing to do with knowing what you are looking at. It is what you are "not" looking at that encourages overdrafting. The other problem is many do not know that the re-sequencing will cause additional fees in the event of an OD until it is too late. As has been my experience when I have called the bank regarding this..and by what many other reporters have stated,,that whomever they spoke with from the bank..could not explain it either..what does that tell us Ashley?

Karl you have every right to believe what you want to believe but I have to disagree with you on many points.  One is that Americans as a whole have become lazy and very unhealthy.  I mean good lord this whole rip off thread basically boils down to taking initiative and balancing a checkbook.  It has nothing to do with America rippin off consumers.  If the original Op had just balanced their checkbook and done basic addition and subtraction everything would have been fine.  Your rambling has nothing and I mean nothing to do with the original complaint by the OP.  The complaint is in regards to a Bank of America transaction not about the American financial system as a whole.  Seriously your quote says it all "America in fraud we trust".  To me that sounds like America is based on a fraudulent system.  Again I will reiterate if you dont like it then get out!

To Exemployee18 here's a new conspiracy theory for you. Let's examine the evidence displayed beautifully by two of your quotes to our dear friend Karl:

''Certain individuals are here to help consumers understand the banking systems and how they work. Shoot even Ronnyg at least listens and tries to help people out.''

Not to sound presumptuous or anything like that, but I humbly place myself in that category as well, and I think many adversaries would place me there also, even if they disagree with many of my opinions. To your next quote to Karl:

''You on the other hand do nothing but pass on conspiracy theories that just look stupid.''

I don't think there's any disputing that many banks are aware of sites like the ROR and others. This is proven by the fact that some bank employees even come here and post under that title. Many consumers have alleged that some contributors are bank employees secretly working on behalf of the bank, because of their consistent posting patterns defending them. That would be one tactic the bank could use to fight wide spread negative PR.

But then there's another subtle but not often mentioned tactic. Whatever works, right? Cue the Internet Troll.

was 100% CORRECT in what he stated to his class of EXECUTIVES back in late 2004. MY brother in-law, who is a CEO, was in that class & I have the notes from that class. You can read some of them, if you'd like, by simply 'Google' the following-

'FACT' (definition) - A THING DONE: AS A- CRIME.

Karl I just dont know what to say to you.  It is obvious that you cannot stand the financial systems we have in place here in the USA.  Here is what i suggest you do.  Move and become a citizen of another country somehwere else.  It is so apparent that you get your information from junk one sided sources that you have no idea about the banking systems at all.  Certain individuals are here to help consumers understand the banking systems and how they work.  Shoot even Ronnyg at least listens and tries to help people out.  You on the other hand do nothing but pass on conspiracy theories that just look stupid.  The banking systems are for profit business.  If you want to keep your money inside your mattress then do it.  No one is saying it is a law to put your money in a bank.  Nor is it a law to utilize the services that banks can give you.  Do banks want you to use their services?  Of course they do for two main reasons....it draws in large fee income as well as retain their customer base.  What blows my mind is that if you think banks are a rip off or just your bank is a rip off then move banks or dont use them all together.  But to march on a bank with signs saying criminals and con artists is just stupid.  I at one point had an account with BOA.  I was 19 years old and was stupid.  I racked up over 300 dollars in charges because I did not keep a good register.  Guess what?  I asked my parents for help to pay off my debt and moved on.  It is called taking responsibility for ones actions.  Here is the thing about America that pisses me off Karl.  It is that as a society we have become lazy.  We eat crappy food that is bad for us, we become fat, we dont spend 5 minutes and read the literature that is presented to us from companies when we should, and we complain that nothing is our fault when we all know better. 

If you keep track of your money properly you can use it for every day purchases. If you look at my bank statement 90% of my transactions are 10$ or less. Most being between 3-6$

It IS convenient to not have to fumble around with change. The bank is trying to illustrate how convenient their product is. They can't control your spending habits, they aren't your mommy.

As for the online balance, you CAN use it for your balance as long as you understand how holds work and clear off your pending transaction section. Additionally you have to remember items that are not on the sheet yet such as checks or bill pays. Unless my bank just has a strange online register, I use it quite effectively to keep track of my money. Is this the best way? Of course not, but I understand it well enough that it does work for me.

If you wish to be ignorant and use your card for every little purchase, then don't keep track of them and look online, I could see someone getting confused. The online statement is hard to understand unless you know what you are looking at.

The possible scenario I used as an example to demonstrate that a register does not always help prevent overdrafting..was in that case regarding the event of an emergency.

Now I couldn't agree more with the replies..as well..I don't trust using my debit card anymore for ANY purchases made online..or over the phone..way too risky these days and the banks will do nothing to assist with recourse in the event of error, fraud or double posts. As a matter of fact..not only will the bank not assist..but they cause further harm by not forgiving or refunding any excessive fees THEY CHARGE not of the fault of their customer for occurring.

The thing that bothers me most however..is WHY doesn't the bank warn their customers about this? I mean don't they care about helping us keep our money? For example I am holding in front of me a fresh debit card that has not even been activated yet. It is attached to paper that states things such as..and I quote.."using your debit card is faster then writing a check or fumbling for change"  and..."just jump online to review your activity"

This to me implies to use this card for lots of small transactions..and to trust the online statement...both of which have been highly advised AGAINST doing so by the bank defenders here.

Now THIS example is what happens to the banks customers..and unfortunately for them...once they realize what has happened..it is too late..and they end up at a loss..angry..and sometimes here to lodge their report..which in my opinion should be posted here, as a rip off DID occur and possibly a scam by deception.

Definition

"A ripoff (or rip-off) is a bad deal. Usually it refers to an incident in which a person pays too much for something. A ripoff is distinguished from a scam in that a scam involves wrongdoing such as fraud; a ripoff, on the other hand, is in the eye of the beholder."

That's what the head Bandit of America, Ken Lewis is saying as he rides off into the sunset with all of his stolen loot.

It was under the watch of Lewis that the direction of BofA changed in 2001, with all of their predatory, customer unfriendly policies, such as the Unavailable Funds Fee in this OP.

Let this be a lesson to you. This is very big. There's something to be said when the chief of the largest bank in America steps aside. He realizes all of the (B)illions that have been stolen in overdraft fees over the past years, all while interest rates were at record lows. Interest rates won't rising any time soon. And now it's obvious to anyone with half a brain, the cover is blown on all of these criminal and ripoff overdraft fee policies. So now where will the stolen profits come from?

Ken Lewis smartly decides to get while the gettin is good.

America's take-over of Merrill Lynch, right? Everyone can see BofA's CEO in that documentary too. And everyone can watch how the Merrill Lynch CEO wanted a $10 MILLION bonus in the transaction between BofA & Merrill Lynch, correct? Too bad he didn't get the $10 MILLION he wanted, but his executives at Merrill Lynch all made-out very well, didn't they? It must be nice to get BILLIONS of dollars in BONUSES when the company you're working for is COLLAPSING and going down the drain, huh?

Ashley is correct in the fact that if you are living on a close balance to the bottom the last thing you want to do is use a debit card for large purchases, to be honest you should not use a debit card when making any purchases when money is tight.  Also if you can afford to pay for the airline tickets and the only way you can purchase them is through a credit or debit card then use a credit card and pay off the balance when the bill comes that way you will not pay the interest. 

For Jim I never said it was the merchants fault I said that the double posting had to do with the merchant systems fault.  That means unfortunately the fault falls into a grey area.  Such popular systems are Paymentech and First Data to name a few.  They would be the ones at fault here.  Unfortunately they will not reimburse error fees to accounts so it is the banks or merchants responsibility to refund fees.  Merchants rarely if never will refund those fees since they pay out of pocket per transaction to those merchant services anyway so the bank will be the ones to make the final call.  If you have a good relationship with your bank and they do not look at you as just a number then your chances will be pretty good to get the fee back.

Ronnie:

You illustrate exactly why you should NOT use a debit card for major purchases such as airline tickets. You should always use a traditional credit card if you have one available for major purchases. If only for the reason of higher security on a credit vs a debit card. Go over to clark howard's website, he has plenty of information on junk visa debit cards.

I recently helped out a friend. She needed to purchase plane tickets because her mother is struck ill. So she asked if she could have funds wired to my paypal account so the funds will be available instantly for plane tickets...which is the case.

For some reason, the plane ticket for one way had 2 charges..and the return ticket showed 2 charges as well. Now this didn't cause any financial problems since I had plenty in the account..but it was suspect.

So we called the airlines and they said they know NOTHING about the double charges and to call paypal, the error is on their end. I could not call paypal because their office was closed at the time.

Long story short..at first paypal said the charges were not applied...but I knew they were..unlike the idiot on the phone..I can add. So he double checked and said they were applied. Turns out in around 5 days later, 2 of the charges were "completed" the double charges were "pending"..then the funds were credited back to my account..no harm no foul...other then no one knew what the hell is going on. or was willing to accept any responsibility.

So I thought about this. What if a person with a low balance in an emergency would have purchased the tickets with their debit card and entered it in their register. Now they are off on a plane and do not have internet access for a while. So, they are using the debit card..right? To eat ..maybe buy something on the plane..maybe for cab fare when they get off the plane.

Now how would this person have known the airlines double posted the account? So even though the funds for the double "pending" transaction would eventually be returned..the person unbeknownst to them is incurring overdrafts left and right, the register is NOT accurate..it is toilet paper now. 

I wonder what the bank would do for their customer in this situation?

Exemployee18, the last two sentences of your post are exactly right and that's my segway into Myth #1:

Myth #1: The robo response of ''check register'' is not a valid, end all solution to the prevention of any and all overdraft fees. The classic example is the double or duplicate transaction hold or post by the merchant. Of course the customer is not expecting to overdraft because they only enter one transaction in the check register. That's my segway into Myth #2.

Myth #2: If the merchant caused the error then go after the merchant. You know, I find it hard to believe that some of you actually believe some of the things you say yourself. Let's think about this commonly issued advice. Let's say you give an envelope full of cash to your brother, sister, or friend and ask them to hold it for you. Then they have a stranger approach them and ask them for the money, and they willingly oblige. How idiotic does it sound for themn to say go after the stranger, they caused it. Remember, the stranger didn't steal it or rob the person at gunpoint. It was happily given to them, from a mere request. Of course you go after the person who stupdily, and foolishly gave up your money without justification. It was their responsibility. And that's my segway to Myth #3.

Myth #3: Merchant double holds. In those cases where a charge actually posts twice, the bank is certainly justified in going after the merchant to recoup any fees that resulted. But in those instances where there's a double hold, and then only one of them posts, the merchant is absolutely correct that they should not be expected to repay any overdraft fees. Although they placed a double hold on the account, they only requested money physically from the account for one single transaction. It's not like the merchant received twice the payment. They received only one payment which they were rightfully due. They didn't actually receive any physical cash for the duplicate payment, from the customer's account.

First let me apologize for the confusion.  The bank should have taken better care of you in this situation.  Jim I agree with most of your posts, but here is the difference between debit cards and checks.  Because debit cards are electronic they can have electronic issues such as the one mentioned by Jen.  In this case the merchant system or the merchant placed a hold on the original posted amount.  What i have seen happen in my experience (which rarely occurs) is that the merchant authorization code does not match up to the preauthorized amount.  When this happens it places a double hold so to speak on the amount.  One amount is authorized to post and the other amount stays holding normally for another 72 hours until it is reales out of the system.  Checks never could do that all checks could do was float until it came through the banks for payment.  In Jens case she does have a gripe but more than likely it is with the actual merchants system and not specifically with the merchant.  And unfortunately she cannot dispute the item since both items actually did not pay against the account.  The manager should have compensated her for the charges in this case.  Even if she had a check regisetr it would not have prevented the charges in this case.  just a bank manager trying to help out.

Jim..you stated....



"Then Ronny, your issue is with the merchant - isn't it?  You confront the merchant and go from there.  Now most merchants (over 90%) are honest, so if there is a charge put through twice, the merchant will refund you through the debit process (putting a credit on your debit card) or simply give you cash, credit in the store, or whatever the merchant's policy happens to be.  The issue is that if a duplicate debit is processed, it's because the merchant approved the duplicate - and not the bank."

Again..I really think you do not comprehend or you do read but something else goes to your brain.

It seems the issue is "sorted out" and the bank is charging her excessive fees..nothing new..but lets take an example of what could have happened..and does happen a lot...

If a merchant overcharges out of negligence..error..or fraud...the bank doesn't know..right? So..if it causes and overdraft...a register would not help..and it could cause additional overdraft fees besides the fraud or merchant error overdraft due to manipulation and holds etc..correct??

Now the bank is not going to refund squat..if you beg them and tell them it was error or fraud..they will tell you to either file a dispute..or work it out with the merchant..correct? So the customer would call the merchant..any one of many possibilities can result..but lets assume the merchant is honest..and it was an error or oversight..and the merchant refunds the money to the customers account.

Now..should the bank refund the overdraft and associated additional fees caused by the merchant error? I know my bank did..because this EXACT scenario happened to me.

If the bank does not return the fees due to merchant error and that were not due to the fault or neglect of the customers..they are bigger thieves then they already are..bottom line, no possible rebuttal..all I hear are clicking noises when you speak.

This is an update to my previous post....

So, it seems like Bank of America's new fee policy is if you don't deposit money within 5 days, you will receive another $35 OD fee for the item that over drafted the account. 

Looks like the $10 over draft fee charge is just for the first occurrence.  After that, then it's 2 over draft fees of $35 for 1 charge!!!  So, my check is direct deposited on 9/16/09, and I receive the second OD fee on the same day as the deposit, because the deposit was on the 6th day.  

Again, associates are not willing to work with the customer in refunding the fee even though the bank is literally stealing $70 of my money. 

I've already opened another account with another bank that has the standard OD fee policy.  Bank of America is getting ridiculous.  Not only are they charging fees for items that don't even post to the account, then they're charging an additional $35 if a deposit isn't made within 5 business days.  They call the second charge of $35 an "Extended Overdrawn Balance Charge."

CNNMoney.com article on the web.

Ronnie, the merchant never charged 2 transactions of the same amount on the account.  Pending transactions doesn't mean they were paid at all.  It just tells the bank that you did business with that particular merchant.  The merchant did everything right.  They sent in only ONE sales ticket, and dropped the second pending authorization.  Prior to this new fee policy that Bend Over America has initiated, customers were only charged if a transaction actually POSTED to the account.  In my case, the second pending authorization never actually POSTED to the account, and only 1 charge posted....leaving me with a positive balance. 

I spoke with a Rep and her supervisor and they told me that they charged overdraft fees for pending authorizations REGARDLESS of whether or not they post to the account.  Since the second transaction overdrew my account while it was in pending status, I will still be charged an overdraft fee even though it dropped off of my account and my balance went back into the positive. 

Apparently, this is a new policy, because they have added something to their online banking showing authorization holds that were (PAST tense) on the account, and apparently, Bend Over America is charging fees for authorizations as well as posted transactions. 

This is a new policy.  If it happened to me....It WILL happen to you. 

I know of your circumstance, because I have had to deal with similar problems with the customers I have had to help.  In those instances, it WAS the merchants fault, because both items POSTED to the account.  Since both items posted to the account, the customer will be able to file a claim against the merchant with the claims department, and they would give the customer a temporary credit.  Then, the claims department will send the customer an affidavit they would have to fill out within 30 days to start the claims process. 

The Rep and her supervisor refused to refund the overdraft fee, and tried to talk me into thinking that this was a legitimate policy change.  The supervisor said she was going to connect me to a banking center, but since I have worked there before, I knew that the banking center would not be able to help me over the phone.  I hung up and went to the banking center in person, and the manager told me the same old bull about the new fee policy and why I "deserved" the fee.  Then, she called the 800 number and spoke with a rep who also refused to refund the fee. 

When I worked for Bend Over America, we had a tool that made the decision for us on whether or not we should waive a fee.  If the tool said not to refund the fee, then we were supposed to abide by the tools decision and standby the decision.  Right before I left Bend Over America, they became very strict regarding how many fees we could refund, and if we refunded too many fees, then you faced expulsion from your job. 

Yes, Bend Over America will fire it's employees if they refund too many fees. 

Then Ronny, your issue is with the merchant - isn't it?  You confront the merchant and go from there.  Now most merchants (over 90%) are honest, so if there is a charge put through twice, the merchant will refund you through the debit process (putting a credit on your debit card) or simply give you cash, credit in the store, or whatever the merchant's policy happens to be.  The issue is that if a duplicate debit is processed, it's because the merchant approved the duplicate - and not the bank.

The bank is only the administrator in this transaction and they will process whatever the customer and the merchant agree to - and the agreement is essentially the existence of the electronic transaction.  If the customer eventually doesn't agree with the merchant on the transaction, involving the bank is pointless because the bank's ONLY verification is the customer's use of the debit card (with PIN number used) for the transaction.

How does having the transacton pending protect the consumer?  If the merchant and customer perform a transaction that the customer ultimately doesn't agree to, or decides to submit payment in some other form subsequently within a 72 hour period.  It is possible the merchant can cancel the debit transaction for the customer within that period.  Or if the item the merchant sells is faulty and the customer returns it; if the transaction were to clear immediately, it would yield little incentive for the merchant to make right the transaction.  Either way - the customer is protected until the customer is satisfied....

FRAUD, GREED, TRICKERY, DEEP CORRUPTION, & the CONSTANT PURSUIT TO FINANCIALLY INJURE THE INNOCENT PEOPLE LIVING IN AMERICA, & the INNOCENT PEOPLE LIVING ALL OVER THE WORLD.

I had a similar situation with a rent a car business. They put through a charge (which was a deposit) that I was told, in writing, that would not post to my account for 28 days. They put it through early..and it caused a mountainous volume of overdraft fees on my account. No register in the world could prevent this..it was a merchant error or neglect.

So I actually drove to the bank which was not close to me..in LA traffic mid day in a busy business district..and brought the documentation. I spoke to a bank officer and explained what happened. What I was told is if the merchant refunds (thereby removing) the funds, that they would refund all fees caused by and associated with that overdraft. I was also told if the merchant did not refund the money..that I should lodge a dispute and would have the money back in 30 days or so if they can prove merchant error or fraud.

So the problem was the rent a car place turned out to be pretty ruthless and uncaring..they would not refund the money (it was $300.00) unless I came in and paid them cash..which I reluctantly did. The rent a car place refunded the 300 dollars to my bank visa card and the bank in turn refunded all associated fees due to the overdraft caused by the merchant error.

If this bank will not work with you..I don't know what to tell you..they are not being fair since this was apparently not your fault and the merchant did remove the charge..right?  So you need to be persistent as this really is a case of the bank stealing from you if they will not cooperate and do the right thing.

Both charges of $14.44 were pending.  I understand that they were not paid.  The next day, one of the authorizations actually "hard posted" to my account (which means it was paid, and the other authorization disappeared (meaning the second authorization was NOT paid)....leaving me with a positive balance.  The Rep, her supervisor, and the Bank Manager at my local bank all said that charging OD fees for canceled authorizations were totally legitimate, and they even insulted me by saying that I needed to keep a record using a check register. 

This is a new tactic.  I understand how it works.  I should not have to be punished for the mistake of a merchant (actually, it wasn't the merchant's mistake....they dropped the second authorization, and I was only charged once).  If the authorizations "hard Posted" twice, then yea, I would definitely have been overdrawn, and I would have had to contact the merchant to give me a refund on the second amount. 

But, I didn't have to contact the merchant, because the merchant never sent in the second ticket, so that second authorization was not "hard posted" to my account.

Basically speaking, BoA has changed their OD fee policy to include authorizations that have never been presented to the bank.  This will allow them to charge OD fees even though you have a positive balance after all of the transactions "hard post." 

BoA only charges you the $10 charge for your first occurrence of fees.  After that, they will charge you $35 per transaction that "hard post" to the account.....and apparently, transactions that NEVER posts to the account.  

I think the $10 first occurrence was to distract the customer from realizing that he will be charged OD fees for transactions that has never been presented to the bank.

"The only thing the bank waits for before disbursing the funds is the merchant's verification of the transaction (Ronny - that should answer your question as well).  That's a good practice that protects you from bad merchants."

How does this protect us? Once a card is swiped..the bank knows about it. If a merchant is holding anything back..then yes..I can't blame the bank and the merchant needs a kick in the pants...but I still don't see how waiting for the merchant to verify anything protect us..if the merchant is dishonest..he will verify it anyhow.

To the OP - the bank has ALWAYS based overdrafts on available balance.  In the days before debit cards - available balance and account balance were generally the same.  There were no pending transactions and there was such a thing as float.  Now there is no float and there are pending transactions.  This is HARDLY new - it has been around for more years than you can possibly imagine.

Debit cards represent the use of cash without the transaction being removed from your account until the merchant affirms the transaction.  Using a debit card is sort of like writing a check - except that you're letting the bank know you used the card and spent cash.  Accordingly, the money is removed from your account and is unavailable for you to use.  Accordingly, pending authorizations are transactions the bank considers as paid since YOU authorized the transaction.  The only thing the bank waits for before disbursing the funds is the merchant's verification of the transaction (Ronny - that should answer your question as well).  That's a good practice that protects you from bad merchants.

In the end, keeping a register is more important than ever and for someone who worked at a bank that doesn't keep one is silly.  I would not bother with getting the policy reversed; it's a policy that is not only industry-wide, but the courts recently ruled the practice as legal (May 2009).  Also, if you worked at a bank, then you understand the consequences associated with debit cards.  They cost you a lot of money so stop using them.  Stick to checks and cash.  Learn the rules and stop giving banks more money than they should.

THESE BANKS NEED TO GENERATE MASSIVE PROFITS IN ORDER TO STAVE-OFF ANOTHER COLLAPSE?

Since you worked for this bank maybe you can help me, yourself and others understand...

It seems many banks, not just BofA are charging overdraft fees for transactions that had funds at the time of transaction. This is typically due to the fact that many banks choose to manipulate and re-sequence the transactions, which in effect cause a maximum of fees, not just the single legitimate overdraft fee. Part of the cause will be blamed on you for "not using a register" and trusting the online statement..which many learn in time is not reliable or trustworthy.

The thing is...regardless of how they "post" or "list" the "order" of the transactions...how is it legal that it can change the time of the transaction? This is an important question and I have yet to receive a satisfactory answer. Since regardless of in what order the bank "lists" the transactions...a register would always have the transactions listed in the sequence, time and order in which the transactions occurred..unless you physically erased the order and altered the register.

I have read on occasion that the banks can get away with this by disguising the act as a courtesy..in other words if they manipulate the transaction order from highest to lowest..that the larger transactions are better "protected"..such as if it were a mortgage payment...which is certainly more important then a cup of coffee. But if the customers were aware of this..would they have purchased the coffee if it was going to cause the overdraft?..I can answer that..no. And regardless of a register or not..there is no way for a customer to know the coffee money was not there if they are not aware at the TIME they purchased the coffee..that they were overdrafted..or that in the FUTURE if an overdraft occurs...even though the funds were there for the cup of coffee..that the bank could manipulate time...hence making it seem to be the customers fault for purchasing the coffee when they did not have funds...see the confusion and the easy ripoff potential?

Now the idea that the bank is protecting the $1000 mortgage by docking you for the $1.50 coffee argument fails to hold water at all. You have "overdraft protection," which is really another name for "unlike the old days when hitting your limit would stop the transaction and keep your finances safe, we're going to let you think you have enough money until you get the NSF notice from us at which point you owe us a squillion dollars." If that big transaction at the end of the day would overdraw your account by $50, they're going to cover it just as they would cover a smaller transaction that would overdraw your account by $50. Claiming they're protecting large transactions by processing them first is just playing smoke and mirrors with numbers.

Now, you state you had two charges from the printer ink company..and were only supposed to have one. I am assuming this is what you were concerned would overdraft you?  I am having a little trouble understanding what happened.

I can tell you this. If the printer company messed up and caused this..simply have them refund the invalid charge if they haven't already..then explain to the bank what happened. They should remove the fee from that transaction..and all related fees which were the result. If they do not..you have a case.