Complaint Review: Wachovia - Pace Florida, Internet

No, I meant what I put in my post. Wachovia, and all others banks that I know of, can either pay the item causing a OD fee or return the item causing a NSF fee. This is indeed at the bank's descretion. Most of the time the customer would complain that the item was returned unpaid. I am sorry that the decision made was not the one that you wanted to be made. But the decision was within company policies as presented to you in your Terms & Conditions. And in rereading your OP, I see that you claim all other items including the ATM withdrawal were returned. Sorry but that's wrong. Since the ATM withdrawal had already been done, there is no way that we could have returned it unpaid. Additionally if your other debits were done with your DBC and approved then they would have been paid as well. Sounds like you got overdraft fees from items being paid which put your account into the negative, not Non Sufficient Funds fees which means the item was returned unpaid. Meaning it could be presented again and would probably cause fees from the merchant as well. As to the mistake you made, I understand that you feel it should have been only $35, however reality is different and you had seven $35 fees. The billpay should not have been authorized without the balance to pay it.

You didn't read all of my report did you? You picked out tidbits and just felt the need to call me a loser, which is childish. If you don't have something useful to say in rebuttal don't use this website. This is a place where people of genuine reports that deservce genuine attention. Ty - about the bad check writing comment (if you read my comments or even know what bad check writing is you would understand)... the check was a bill-pay... which means it was set up the previous week to pay out on Monday (which is when all this occurred). I found out I can't do a stop-payment inside 24 hrs of paydate (when they will get the check). So, it wasn't a bad check. I just make 1 too many debits after the fact to cover all charges. To simplify this whole thing. My greivance is: (1) Wachovia instructed me that I did not have funds to cover the $300 and it will represent up to 2 more times since it won't clear. There, they told me it wasn't going to clear, obviously I made a mistake and see I didn't have enough in the account to cover it. (2) Wachovia paid it anyway and gave me a -$5 balance. Then, NSFs the other "pending" debits. Wachovia shouldn't have cleared the $300. That is simple and that is my complain. Their "courtesy" was just another way to get more NSFs.

You didn't read all of my report did you? You picked out tidbits and just felt the need to call me a loser, which is childish. If you don't have something useful to say in rebuttal don't use this website. This is a place where people of genuine reports that deservce genuine attention. Ty - about the bad check writing comment (if you read my comments or even know what bad check writing is you would understand)... the check was a bill-pay... which means it was set up the previous week to pay out on Monday (which is when all this occurred). I found out I can't do a stop-payment inside 24 hrs of paydate (when they will get the check). So, it wasn't a bad check. I just make 1 too many debits after the fact to cover all charges. To simplify this whole thing. My greivance is: (1) Wachovia instructed me that I did not have funds to cover the $300 and it will represent up to 2 more times since it won't clear. There, they told me it wasn't going to clear, obviously I made a mistake and see I didn't have enough in the account to cover it. (2) Wachovia paid it anyway and gave me a -$5 balance. Then, NSFs the other "pending" debits. Wachovia shouldn't have cleared the $300. That is simple and that is my complain. Their "courtesy" was just another way to get more NSFs.

You didn't read all of my report did you? You picked out tidbits and just felt the need to call me a loser, which is childish. If you don't have something useful to say in rebuttal don't use this website. This is a place where people of genuine reports that deservce genuine attention. Ty - about the bad check writing comment (if you read my comments or even know what bad check writing is you would understand)... the check was a bill-pay... which means it was set up the previous week to pay out on Monday (which is when all this occurred). I found out I can't do a stop-payment inside 24 hrs of paydate (when they will get the check). So, it wasn't a bad check. I just make 1 too many debits after the fact to cover all charges. To simplify this whole thing. My greivance is: (1) Wachovia instructed me that I did not have funds to cover the $300 and it will represent up to 2 more times since it won't clear. There, they told me it wasn't going to clear, obviously I made a mistake and see I didn't have enough in the account to cover it. (2) Wachovia paid it anyway and gave me a -$5 balance. Then, NSFs the other "pending" debits. Wachovia shouldn't have cleared the $300. That is simple and that is my complain. Their "courtesy" was just another way to get more NSFs.

Wachovia shouldn't have paid the $300 - it is clear I didn't have the money to begin with. I've found other account holders that had the same problem, the customer service agents they talked to called it "A courtesy overdraft payment". Meaning, Wachovia just decided to "go ahead and pay for the check that should go NSF" and not charge a NSF fee. Yet, if you look at my statement I provided above the "courtesy" is not a courtesy. Had YOU, Wachovia, followed your NSF policy then I would have only been assessed ONE NSF of $35 for making the mistake on the $300 check. How is it a courtesy if YOU, Wachovia, give me a "free" or "courtesy waiver of one NSF" and pay the check but turn around and charge me 7 NSFs!? Is it really a courtesy or robbery? YOU, Wachovia, say "Sorry this has happened to you." but what you really are saying is "Oh, thank you for the tip but I'm going to screw you anyway." I mean, since you have full and complete access to take and give me money in my acct at whim then when do any of us even bother to SAVE money? Wachovia makes over 90 million dollars a year in NSFs BY ITSELF! I'm sure that is a heck of a lot more money than someone saving hundreds of dollars a week in a savings account that you yeild 8-12% through you own re-investments... Wachovia you forget that you are in business for the customer, your account holders. NOT We, the customer, is in business for Wachovia. At this point, it doesn't matter that Wachovia doesn't guarantee a stop-payment inside 24 hours of requesting one. The funds were not there. So, return the $300 check, charge me $35 and then clear the rest of the debits pending. If I wanted to screw with Wachovia and try get one over on them I would have taken all my funds, at the time of this transaction, of $285! So, together we documentation of my numerous call ins to Wachovia and my open letter to Wachovia, and the dispute I filed, it is clear - as the customer - I left funds in there to cover my 1 mistake. I haven't even got into how my account was frozen all day Sunday (so I can make adequate arrangements for stop-payment) and I couldn't view my account - then on early Monday AM I finally got access to it just to see that all the debits from Walgreens were posted in my transaction summary (meaning no longer on hold) and show up there as "purchase", then finally after midnight Monday the system updated and put them back to the bottom of the stack of recent transactions and decided to pay the $300 first (when, again there wasn't enough funds). My online past history couldn't view that page since it is a secure connection so I couldn't get a screen shot to prove it. That is a win for Wachovia! I know why they say the system will pay the highest amount first: "That payment could be your mortgage or car payment and its better to pay it first and not pay the rest so you don't lose your house or car." That is so full of it. Someone sat down in the board meeting to see how much more overdrafts can we get from someone that make 1 mistake. This would happen for someone that even was short dollar or less. The system pays the highest amount first and then NSFs the rest smaller charges. But this only works if there is a balance to pay for the higher check... right??? WHAT A POINT!! If lets say, me, has $285 in the account available which includes 5 debits that total $10 - my posted balance is $295 but only $285 available with 5 pending debits (which mind you that debits are confirmed and verified at the debit terminal) and 1 outstanding $300 check. The Wachovia system sees the highest check and debits but is designed to pay the highest amount first. Ok. Available balance is $285 but the system pushes the 5 debits aside sees only the posted balance of $295 and wants to pay the $300 but literally it can't - but it is designed to "pay" the highest amount and get more NSFs. So, guess what - it breaks the rules (again) and pays the highest amount, that is how it is designed, EVEN THOUGH THERE IS NOT ENOUGH FUNDS TO BEGIN WITH. Now, it waives the overdraft fee for the $300 because it just did me, customer, a favor to paid for my mistake. Yet, oh my! The 5 other debits haven't got paid. Hmmmm they are only $10 total (which were drinks for work), oh well - they are NSF now. Seven separate NSFs assessed. Now, Wachovia's system makes money even without batting an eye. Simply put. Wachovia is stealing my money! If Wachovia was a friend and loaned me $5 to pay for the difference of the transactions (balance of $295 and a check for $300) then charge me interest on the deal of $245 and automatically took it from my account - lets just say there would be no judge in the US that would side with him. That judge would award me my $245 back and probably damages and attorney/court fees. What makes this situation different? Accept that Wachovia is a snake and their business practices or predoctoral... Listen - Wachovia - I caught you - give up! Pay me back my money!

Whose fault is it? You wrote a check, you didnt have enough money in the account, and how is the banks fault? Do a better job balancing your checkbook and THANK the bank they didnt return all that stuff. By the way, writing a bad check is fraud. When you dont have money dont write it. Also, after you write a check, putting a stop payment on it is fraud. You are still screwing whomever you wrote it to. be thankful they dont ask for charges to be filed. Loser.

but your terms & conditions say if an item comes in and the money is not available that it will be returned unpaid causing a NSF fee OR paid causing an OD fee. In this case it was paid and that put everything else posting into the negative. Unfortunately not a bank error. Again I'm sorry to hear this happened and that you were not qualified for a courtesy refund.

Did you receive any type of confirmation that your stop check payment was authorized? If not then it makes since that they continued to process the check and in turn , charge you an NSF. Your wife should not have withdrawn money if the stop check payment had not been confirmed.