Complaint Review: Charter One Bank - Nationwide

Steve, I've already answered your question in a different ROR. When you pose a question to someone in a ROR are you not thorough enough to go back to see if they've posted a response before you ask the same question in a different ROR? In deference to each of these authors, I'm not going to keep posting the same information over and over again when it's there for your own eyes, if you RESEARCH THOROUGHLY, especially since they're so recent. You are correct to say you have never seen THE BANK post anything, much less an apology. C'mon let's keep it real, do you expect them to? But in each of the ROR's I'm referring to, ALL NAMES and DETAILS are given by the author for the record. Furthermore, actual bank employees HAVE POSTED, confirming that the customer WAS WRONGED. And if you read these entire ROR's you'll see and understand how the sequence of events make sense. After all, why would they lie, knowing they can be held liable for it?

There should be no wonder why the old timers don't trust banks. There is still in some business circles something called 'customer service'. Ken, in a perfect world none of us would ever make a mistake. However, none of us live in utopia. There is a difference between habitually negligent customers and ones who on a rare occaision make an honest mistake. Using your logic Ken, I should have been able to keep the $10,000 deposit error in my favor Chase made,right? (BTW- it's true, they did make that error.) I mean if it's ok to penalize my error than I should be able to penalize Chase for their error as well, right Ken? Or at least keep the interest made on that error. The bank will have none of that. Let's not play games here Ken you know as well as I that all 'major' banks handle 'paper' checks electronically. They could prevent their client's overdraft errors, just as they do with with check cards. I think a better arguement could be made for a 3 strike policy against the client, Also, it's interesting no one rebuttaled the 5 day check 'hold' scam either.

There should be no wonder why the old timers don't trust banks. There is still in some business circles something called 'customer service'. Ken, in a perfect world none of us would ever make a mistake. However, none of us live in utopia. There is a difference between habitually negligent customers and ones who on a rare occaision make an honest mistake. Using your logic Ken, I should have been able to keep the $10,000 deposit error in my favor Chase made,right? (BTW- it's true, they did make that error.) I mean if it's ok to penalize my error than I should be able to penalize Chase for their error as well, right Ken? Or at least keep the interest made on that error. The bank will have none of that. Let's not play games here Ken you know as well as I that all 'major' banks handle 'paper' checks electronically. They could prevent their client's overdraft errors, just as they do with with check cards. I think a better arguement could be made for a 3 strike policy against the client, Also, it's interesting no one rebuttaled the 5 day check 'hold' scam either.

There should be no wonder why the old timers don't trust banks. There is still in some business circles something called 'customer service'. Ken, in a perfect world none of us would ever make a mistake. However, none of us live in utopia. There is a difference between habitually negligent customers and ones who on a rare occaision make an honest mistake. Using your logic Ken, I should have been able to keep the $10,000 deposit error in my favor Chase made,right? (BTW- it's true, they did make that error.) I mean if it's ok to penalize my error than I should be able to penalize Chase for their error as well, right Ken? Or at least keep the interest made on that error. The bank will have none of that. Let's not play games here Ken you know as well as I that all 'major' banks handle 'paper' checks electronically. They could prevent their client's overdraft errors, just as they do with with check cards. I think a better arguement could be made for a 3 strike policy against the client, Also, it's interesting no one rebuttaled the 5 day check 'hold' scam either.

There should be no wonder why the old timers don't trust banks. There is still in some business circles something called 'customer service'. Ken, in a perfect world none of us would ever make a mistake. However, none of us live in utopia. There is a difference between habitually negligent customers and ones who on a rare occaision make an honest mistake. Using your logic Ken, I should have been able to keep the $10,000 deposit error in my favor Chase made,right? (BTW- it's true, they did make that error.) I mean if it's ok to penalize my error than I should be able to penalize Chase for their error as well, right Ken? Or at least keep the interest made on that error. The bank will have none of that. Let's not play games here Ken you know as well as I that all 'major' banks handle 'paper' checks electronically. They could prevent their client's overdraft errors, just as they do with with check cards. I think a better arguement could be made for a 3 strike policy against the client, Also, it's interesting no one rebuttaled the 5 day check 'hold' scam either.

Edward, I have never seena bank post anything on here, much less admit fault for a customers NSF problems. You wrote>> Is their memory so short sighted to forget all of the ROR's where the BANK ADMITTED FAULT? How is that? Edward - Dallas, Texas U.S.A. >> Did you mean a post by an NSF fee paying customer that alleged that the bank admitted fault?

My first response to Mike only addressed the unfair grouping of all overdraft complaints as the customers fault. Now let me address the different issue of MANY complaints about the posting order. Just because a bank adapts a policy like posting transactions in order of largest to smallest and yes the courts have deemed it legal.....for now...this does not preclude the customer from FEELING ripped off, even though LEGALLY they were not. They have a right to voice their opinion about it in an effort to inform others who may not be aware, with the idea that they and others might choose to take their business elsewhere. I think it's a very long list of policies that have been changed voluntarily by many companies throughout history, even though the policies were legal. Image is everything and what do you think boycotts are for? But no company is going to move an inch and change anything if everyone just blindly accept everything they do. Sure the banks are in business to make profits for their shareholders but what happens if ALL of the UNHAPPY customers take their business elsewhere because of feeling ripped off by unfair policies. How happy will those shareholders be then, when the bank makes $0 in profits with 0 customers?

Mike, Thanks for the clarification. I was fairly certain that "I" understood what you MEANT from your original statement but it can be misleading. Had you added the clause about "bank error" in your original statement earlier, I would not have had a problem with it. But on it's own, it makes it seem as though you're saying that every single ROR related overdraft fees is the customer's fault. This generalization is what angers so many authors and contributors, when some fail to add these exclusions and exceptions as you have now done - but only after I questioned your original statement.

Mike, Thanks for the clarification. I was fairly certain that "I" understood what you MEANT from your original statement but it can be misleading. Had you added the clause about "bank error" in your original statement earlier, I would not have had a problem with it. But on it's own, it makes it seem as though you're saying that every single ROR related overdraft fees is the customer's fault. This generalization is what angers so many authors and contributors, when some fail to add these exclusions and exceptions as you have now done - but only after I questioned your original statement.

Mike, Thanks for the clarification. I was fairly certain that "I" understood what you MEANT from your original statement but it can be misleading. Had you added the clause about "bank error" in your original statement earlier, I would not have had a problem with it. But on it's own, it makes it seem as though you're saying that every single ROR related overdraft fees is the customer's fault. This generalization is what angers so many authors and contributors, when some fail to add these exclusions and exceptions as you have now done - but only after I questioned your original statement.

Mike, Thanks for the clarification. I was fairly certain that "I" understood what you MEANT from your original statement but it can be misleading. Had you added the clause about "bank error" in your original statement earlier, I would not have had a problem with it. But on it's own, it makes it seem as though you're saying that every single ROR related overdraft fees is the customer's fault. This generalization is what angers so many authors and contributors, when some fail to add these exclusions and exceptions as you have now done - but only after I questioned your original statement.

Every Overdraft post I have responded due was due to the original poster spending more money they have, or not being aware of fee structure causeing them to overdraft, etc. Besides a bank losing a deposit or processing a withdrawl or charge multiple times, which I've had happen to me and reversed, every post on here is about people who don't understand how it works and think the banks are wrong even though they've been taken to court numerous times and there posting order has been deemed ok by the courts. The end story is this: if you know your banks fee structures, keep a vigilant check register, monitor your account frequently and don't spend money you don't have, you can't get an overdraft without bank error. And if it's bank error, andyou can prove it is, and isn't due to any of the above, than I would be willing to bet (as long as you aren't a chronic overdrafter) that the bank will reverse the fees

Let me start by saying I am in no way familiar with Charter One and how they do things but since the recent comments are related to general banking procedures, I couldn't pass it up. Whenever a customer complains about overdraft fees after verifying their balance by calling the automated phone system, checking the ATM, and checking online on the internet, EVERYONE repeats the same phrase - "It's the check register stupid!". So to Mike of New Jersey, had you only mentioned the check register in your counter point to John and not included the part about "monitor their account vigilantly electronically", then I would be right behind you as well. But, this is yet again another CONTRADICTION of ADVICE. Whenever there is a ROR where the customer appears to be at fault as Erickson non-biasedly pointed out, how is that Mike of New Jersey and Steve of Florida seem to find it convenient to seize the moment and say that ALL complaints and ROR's about overdraft fees are ALWAYS the customer's fault. Mike's quote - "The problem here is as with every post here about overdrafts...." Steve's quote - "Banks do not cause NSF fees." Is their memory so short sighted to forget all of the ROR's where the BANK ADMITTED FAULT? How is that?

American schools simply Do Not, Cannot, or Will not teach basic math to American students. They do good with sports, though! This results in MANY math-challenged people wandering about completely unsupervised. I was visiting with the Buyer's Broker I use several years back when they commented about how they had noticed the list I carried and how I wrote a number next to each entry as I looked at a property. I showed them a copy of my EXCEL Pugh Matrix and noted how everybody could avoid bad real estate purchases if they also used a Pugh Matrix. Their answer: Most people are simply too math-challenged to do that! Too math-challenged to use a Pugh Matrix? Really? So.... Learn your math and balance your accounts, people, or its "Burn, Baby, Burn!"

Patrick, Keeping an ACCURATE checkbook register AND balancing your account are the first steps to avoiding NSF. Then waiting until deposits are AVAILABLE before drawing against deposited funds. If you do these things consistently, you will NEVER pay an NSF fee. Guaranteed. Banks do not cause NSF fees. Irresponsible customers do. This is an undisputable fact. The NSF fees are a result of violating your contract with the bank. These charges are clearly spelled out in your account agreement, along with the funds availability policies. If you put as much time into balancing your checkbook as you do writing rip off reports, the problem would be solved already. No rip off here.

You asked.. "How in this electronic day and age can the bank 'STILL' have over drafts?" ***It's easy, how does the bank know what checks you've written and will be presented in the future for cashing? Now, had you written this... "How in this electronic day and age can a BANK ACCOUNT OWNER 'STILL' have over drafts as long as they keep a check register and monitor their account vigilantly electronically" I'd be right behind you. The problem here is as with every post here about overdrafts is people go to the last penny in their accounts and cause overdrafts, and since they don't understand the order of processing (highest to lowest, which is provedlegal in the courts already) they get angry. But only YOU can prevent overdrafts

You asked, "How in this electronic day and age can the bank 'STILL' have over drafts?" I answer: through a customer's mismanagement of his/her funds and his/her refusal to keep an accurate account register. This customer wondered how the bank could "seem bent on assessing overdraft fees at every opportunity." I promise, if you don't spend money that you don't have, the bank will NEVER be able to charge you an overdraft fee. I am a serious advocate for customers who have actually been wronged, but this seems to be a case of irresponsibility and crying after the fact. No ripoff here..

Ok Ken- How in this electronic day and age can the bank 'STILL' have over drafts? Wal-Mart can haul off a woman / man on the spot who doesn't have the funds from a paper check to pay for something, but the bank can't prevent an over draft? Specially the eigth largest in the world? This also gets into the banks phony 5 day hold on checks. Why don't you tell them Ken how much money on interest the banks make during that 5 days. While the customer gets zero of it. Hmmmmmmmm I guess there really is a reason ALL the banks put out suckers in the lobby.

and live in Indiana. I've NEVER had a problem with any of my accounts. They're open until 7 pm, which I like, and I think they're extremely fair. Last week my mortgage payment was made via online banking. Those are debited from your account first thing in the morning. I also had a check electronically presented and debited from my account first thing in the morning. Though I had a check to deposit into my account, I wasn't aware my check would clear that quickly, which brought my account negative. I went in around noon and deposited several hundred dollars, but was irked that I was negative (VERY rare for me) and thought I incurred an NSF fee. But because they post the day's credits first then debits at the end of the day, I didn't incur an NSF fee even though my account was negative for a few hours in the morning. I thought that was fair. I'm not sure what your issue is with them, but I have had 2 accounts with them for 3 years, and have not had a single problem.

How does the bank overdraft your account? Only you can overdraft your account.

Could you let us all know when you find that new bank that doesn't charge you for your overdrafts?

Could you let us all know when you find that new bank that doesn't charge you for your overdrafts?