I originally got me and my sisters these cards mainly to get the 0% bt's for 12 mo. If anyone here doesn't already know that you can get free money for a year and make interest on it at the bank (5+%) then you don't belong on SD's in the first place. So please stop coming up with all of your stupid conspiracy theories as to why I am depositing the money into my account. My sisters let me use their cards and I will give them some of the profits.
<font color=white style="background-color: #3E3E3E;">I would like to say to all, that I appreciate the help of all the people who are actually trying to work with me and not against me.
EDIT: It's too late for me to get the checks back as the bank already processed(they all cleared on the 9th) all of them and has no way of reversing the transaction.
Can my bank really hold a whole $37,000 deposit just because I can't prove that one check for $5,529 was made out to my sisters business?
Hi everyone, I bank at Astoria Federal Savings. I recently made a deposit consisting of 4-5 checks totalling around $37,000. The bank was very busy. A lady anounced that everyone that just needed to make a deposit can bypass the line and come to see her at the customer service desk. I gave her my checks of which four were from citibank. Two of these were credit balnce refund checks from my own account, and the others were pre-filled balance transfer checks, $20,000 in my sisters name and $5,529 made out to my other sisters business. The lady took them all without a second glance even though none of them were double endorsed. All I did was signed my own name and account number on them. Three to four days later I get a call from the bank that they are holding all the funds untill I have my sisters come down to sign some affidavit that states that they won't sue the bank for letting me deposit the funds. I had my youngest sister go down for her $20,000 check but my other sisters check was made out from her business card as a balance transfer to the business. Guess what. It's not a registered business. We just use that name for our family business. So the branch manager said that they would need proof that my sister owns the company. I had a conference call with citibank and the bank manager in which the citi rep told her that they don't require documentation to open a business account and that even though I made a mistake by depositing a business check in a personal account, they should let it go through because it's being authorized by the owner of the card (my sister). The bank manager said she didin't know if that would be enough for the security dept. Anyhow the question is can I sue the bank for negligence in accepting the checks without telling me that I wasn't allowed to put them in my account? They never should have taken them in the first place as none of them were double endorsed(oops). Can they really actually process the checks and then make me nuts running around and trying to get everyone to come down to the bank and notarize stuff? Also the bank manager told me that the lady who took my deposits wasn't even a real teller and she shouldn't have taken the deposits. She said she had to write a report about the incident, and that the employee would never be taking deposits again(sounds like employee mistake to me).
To enter a coupon code in your post please enter the following info:
Coupon Code:
Coupon Offer:
Merchant:
Expires (optional):
Restrictions (optional):
saving...
Quick Summary is created and edited by users like you... Add FAQ's, Links and other Relevant Information by clicking the edit button in the lower right hand corner of this message.
1. I do not think that you have a case against the bank. They are just following their check-clearing regulations.
2. Yes, they can. If it was a mistake for them to take the checks, they can always correct their mistakes that way. They might apologize, but again, it is business, nothing personal.
Are you insane? You make a mistake by knowingly depositing checks that aren't properly endorsed and you want to sue the bank because they called you on it?
Whether it was a real teller, a sidewalk deposit box, an ATM or a left-handed mime carrying a sign that said 'please give me your deposits, you've got no chance.
Best bet, ask them to free up the funds that are now OK. Ask them to return the check that's in question. Take it to Citibank and have them re-issue it as a cashier's check.
BigFatCat said:Are you insane? You make a mistake by knowingly depositing checks that aren't properly endorsed and you want to sue the bank because they called you on it?
Uhh, I think you mean made a mistake by unknowingly deposited checks that were not properly endorsed. I automatically put my signature and acct# on the back of all my checks, I just forgot to ask my sisters to double endorse them.
Your main question: Can my bank really hold a whole $37,000 deposit just because I can't prove that one check for $5,529 was made out to my sisters business?
Short answer: NO. They can't hold properly payable instruments longer than regulations and your account agreement allow. Are you sure they are holding all of the deposit items? Not just the ones that you failed to have properly endorsed?
Your secondary, but I sense, more important to you question: can I sue the bank for negligence in accepting the checks without telling me that I wasn't allowed to put them in my account?
Short answer: NO. Absolutely not. Never in a million years. What if you had put them in the drop box? ATM? If the instruments were not properly endorsed, they are not properly payable, so they don't have to pay them. They also don't have to catch you BEFORE you try to deposit something that is not properly payable. Fundamentally, you should remember that they can ALWAYS refuse to honor any draft or deposit. Your only recourse is changing banks.
Good luck. It seems like you will have a no harm/no foul situation except for a few days lost time value. Frustrating, I'm sure, though.
Rodynus said:Your main question: Can my bank really hold a whole $37,000 deposit just because I can't prove that one check for $5,529 was made out to my sisters business?
Short answer: NO. They can't hold properly payable instruments longer than regulations and your account agreement allow. Are you sure they are holding all of the deposit items? Not just the ones that you failed to have properly endorsed?
Yes, they are holding all of the funds. Even the ones from the checks that were in my name. They are waiting to get all the paperwork together so that they can run it by their lawyers.
Your secondary, but I sense, more important to you question: can I sue the bank for negligence in accepting the checks without telling me that I wasn't allowed to put them in my account?
Short answer: NO. Absolutely not. Never in a million years. What if you had put them in the drop box? ATM? If the instruments were not properly endorsed, they are not properly payable, so they don't have to pay them. They also don't have to catch you BEFORE you try to deposit something that is not properly payable. Fundamentally, you should remember that they can ALWAYS refuse to honor any draft or deposit. Your only recourse is changing banks.
That takes the error only as far as accepting the physical checks. In this case they actually processed them and accepted the funds from the payee. It's not the same thing as taking unendorsed checks through an ATM Deposit which can be returned to the depositor to correct(before they are cleared through the banking system!).
You can't sue them since it was an overlook by a bank employee and not the banks policy to accept checks that were not double endorsed. Your best recourse at this stage would be to ask for the checks back and have your sisters deposit them OR you can deposit in a joint account. Many banks are no longer accepting double endorsed checks. It seems like you're wasting time dealing with this bank thats jittery about the whole transaction. Simply take your checks back and close the account.
why are u wasting everyones time? u keep saying they are holding ur funds, but they aren't ur funds. if i read it correctly, these were balance transfer checks. i see u edited the OP to say that u cannot get the checks back cuz the bank already processed them. if the bank still has the checks, which appears to be the case, since they want ur sisters to go down and notorize crap, then they weren't processed yet. meaning they haven't sent the checks to the clearing bank. just tell them to give the checks back, go to the bank and tear them up, or just tell them to forget about them and let them return them unpaid.
so maybe the most this will cost u is the returned check fee. but that may be yhe cost of this lesson. again, they arent holding ur money since it isnt ur money. if u feel like doing this again someplace else, have ur sisters write u another balance transfer check.
TheWiseGuy said:why are u wasting everyones time? u keep saying they are holding ur funds, but they aren't ur funds. if i read it correctly, these were balance transfer checks. i see u edited the OP to say that u cannot get the checks back cuz the bank already processed them. if the bank still has the checks, which appears to be the case, since they want ur sisters to go down and notorize crap, then they weren't processed yet. meaning they haven't sent the checks to the clearing bank. just tell them to give the checks back, go to the bank and tear them up, or just tell them to forget about them and let them return them unpaid.
so maybe the most this will cost u is the returned check fee. but that may be yhe cost of this lesson. again, they arent holding ur money since it isnt ur money. if u feel like doing this again someplace else, have ur sisters write u another balance transfer check.
Thank you for your advice WiseGuy. However I clearly stated that the checks have already cleared, and that the bank is holding the funds. I called up Citibank (They issued the checks) and they verified that the funds cleared on 01/09/07. That is why I'm not so sure that the bank is right for holdiong the funds if they were already cleared and they can't return them to me. The reason they want my sister to notarize a document for them is because they don't have the original checks anymore. The document states that my sister will not hold the bank liable for cashing her check into my account. They are pissed scared, because they made a mistake of letting the checks go through without having her endorsement on it.
why do people think things are written in stone? this transaction can still be reversed. if citibank transfered 20k to astoria, astoria can send it bank to citi and everyone is back to where they started. millions of transactions happen everyday, u think they can't reverse them? mistakes happen all he time, let's say u deposit a check for $100, but astoria tells citi u made a deposit for $1000. if citi has enuf to cover, they transfer $1000 to astoria. astoria finds it erred, calls citi to reverse. u dont notice a thing. now in this case, the error may be in accepting the deposit, doesn't matter who u try to blame, they still have the moeny they can reverse it. it seems to me they are trying to do u a favor by asking ur sister to come in and notorize crap. if u dont want them to do this, just tell them to forget about it, and send funds back to citi. what do u think, they are gonna keep the funds and both u or ur sister will still end up owing citi? not gonna happen in a million years.
They told me that they can't send the funds back to the issuing bank. It would be great if they could though. Maybe the branch manager doesn't know what she's talking about. What do you guys think?
Lebowski said:TheWiseGuy said:why are u wasting everyones time? u keep saying they are holding ur funds, but they aren't ur funds. if i read it correctly, these were balance transfer checks. i see u edited the OP to say that u cannot get the checks back cuz the bank already processed them. if the bank still has the checks, which appears to be the case, since they want ur sisters to go down and notorize crap, then they weren't processed yet. meaning they haven't sent the checks to the clearing bank. just tell them to give the checks back, go to the bank and tear them up, or just tell them to forget about them and let them return them unpaid.
so maybe the most this will cost u is the returned check fee. but that may be yhe cost of this lesson. again, they arent holding ur money since it isnt ur money. if u feel like doing this again someplace else, have ur sisters write u another balance transfer check.
Thank you for your advice WiseGuy. However I clearly stated that the checks have already cleared, and that the bank is holding the funds. I called up Citibank (They issued the checks) and they verified that the funds cleared on 01/09/07. That is why I'm not so sure that the bank is right for holdiong the funds if they were already cleared and they can't return them to me. The reason they want my sister to notarize a document for them is because they don't have the original checks anymore. The document states that my sister will not hold the bank liable for cashing her check into my account. They are pissed scared, because they made a mistake of letting the checks go through without having her endorsement on it.
If I were you, I would try to pull all my money out of the account with another bank account like GMAC or Citibank, then close my account at Astoria. See if that works. Hopefully it does, and you won't have to deal with their incompetence. If not, ask for them to release the funds not in question. If they don't, then you might be able to litigate, though I doubt it's worth it, since it would be much easier to just put a stop payment and reissue the check in question. I don't see why they would be allowed to hold funds that cleared just because you have another check in question.
Lebowski said:Thanks all for your replies. And keep those ideas coming!
If I'm understanding the situation right, then I think you do have a reason for concern (although at first I thought you were just being ridiculous).
I've deposited checks before that have 'cleared' the next day, yet a week later they've been debited to my account as having been returned unpaid. This may be the case - the 'questionable' deposit is being held something like 15 days to verify the checks will not be returned unpaid (especially if you dont routinely keep a $37,000+ balance in that account), and the manager/bank employees do not understand what is really happening (typical, in my experience). Since it was all in the family, maybe taking in a statement showing the checks having been paid from each respective account would clear it all up.
Or, why doesnt your sister just sign the statement? What would be the difference between that and endorsing the check made out to a fake business in the first place? If it ever became an issue, she'd be in just as much hot water either way....
those who screwup BT games keep it going for the rest of us
First of all, if you are the only person on your account, you should deposit checks made out to YOU. Not someone elses business. And if it was a BT check why wasnt it just made payable to YOU? makes no sense.
This bank would be happy as clams not to have you as a customer anymore, so why dont you just refuse to sign anything and demand your money and accounts closed. THEN if they refuse to give you funds which have already been sent for processing and cleared, you can revisit whether you have grounds to sue them.
Sure, you can sue them. But even in the off-chance you have a legitimate claim, you are gonna need to prove damages. Doesn't sound like you lost much more than a few days of interest. Is that really worth the hassle of a lawsuit?
talk to the bank manager, they will verify the check-21 process has cleared and release the funds. Unless there is fraud involved this should not be a problem. It is common for me to have large deposits held like over $5000 per item, but with the super fast check-21 system, i can usually get the hold off in less than 2 business days.
my points I always argue: 1. i have enough overdraft to cover the check 2. I have enough savings to cover the check
This never works. I keep the argument up. It is ridiculous because if it is fraud check then it will take a couple of weeks to come back, thus the check-21 clearing release they work with is a flawed policy. which my points #1 and #2 are with.
Having a CU is good, because you can talk to the manager. They are super flexible. Traditional banks i guess get alot more fruad by volume and have much stricter policies with less flexibility.
You deposited five checks, some (all) for relatively large amounts of money, two of which were obviously suspicious. Why are you surprised the bank is holding the entire deposit? If two out of five checks are obviously suspicious, do you think the bank isn't suspicious of the other 3 now too?
Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.
