Paying rent thru online bill pay??

Archived From: Finance
  • Text Only
I just wanted to add that the OP should warn his landlord that the check will look different than they might expect. Many of them come in a tear-open envelope like rebate checks (other than the rebates that come as postcards). Make sure they know to open it and not throw it away (I know it sounds stupid but some people might). You could even pay yourself $5 to get a check in the mail and have it to show them what to expect.


I used to pay my landlord with citibank online bill pay. No problem. Citibank sends out checks if the recipient can not be paid by electronic transfer. Now I pay my mortgage in the same way. I have saved all my mortgage bills that show previous payment and balances as the record for my payments.

Use online bill pay via citibank for almost a year now. Not a problem...at first used WA MU, but then signed up with Citi promotion and thus using citi now. My landlord has no problem for me suddenly converted bank checks. I did not notify her at all too.

I am paying the rent thru bill pay for last 2 years... no issues...

desichap said: [Q]Hi there,

Has anyone paid rent using online bill pay?

I usually send my rent to my landlady's home address and so there's no "account number" per se. Has anyone tried this in the past and had it work well for them?

I use Citibank to do my online bill pay for the $200 promo thing I signed up for.

Thanks in advance!

Cheers.

I am paying through bill pay for last 1 year and no issues. But in mycase the land lord has provided me an account number. I will always enter that.

citibank online banking mails a physical written check to the payee.

mets1986 said: [Q]Just my 2 cents....

I work for a law firm that represents mortgage companies in litigation matters. I give you this as a piece of advice...


ALWAYS PAY YOUR RENT OR MORTGAGE WITH A WRITTEN CHECK AND ALWAYS BE ABLE TO PRODUCE A COPY OF THAT CHECK IF YOU HAVE A DISPUTE.

Sorry for the caps, but mortgage companies a) keep horrible records of incoming money b) work on 1980 style databases c) have morons who work for them d) you get the picture.

I have seen tons of people get screwed out of tons of money because they could not produce proof of payment or even a check number. Remember, if you write a check, the check number is processed along with the money. Online bill pay is similar to check card purchase, where you essentially get a confirmation number, that many times, is invalid or incorrect. Most of the time, when you use a check card or credit card, the transaction number is a companies internal way of processing the money. It is NOT the way the credit card processes the money. Essentially, the store you use it in uses a third party to route your card information to the credit card company or bank.

I have seen both sides of the coin, so my advice is just to make sure you write a check and are able to produce a copy or proof of payment at any time. Confirmation numbers are not always good enough in proving a case if it were to be litigated.

Good luck

wow! you all are great... thanks for the replies folks... its given me enough motivation to at least try it and looking at all the successes, I don't see why it wouldn't work.

Now if we could live in a world where I could pay my rent with a credit card and rack up the miles... <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif" border=0>

desichap said: [Q]wow! you all are great... thanks for the replies folks... its given me enough motivation to at least try it and looking at all the successes, I don't see why it wouldn't work.

Now if we could live in a world where I could pay my rent with a credit card and rack up the miles... <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif" border=0>

We are <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif" border=0>

But, my apt management company charges $14 "convenience fee" for every credit card transaction..

Is it even legal? I just pay with a paper check.

billrubin said: [Q]I just wanted to add that the OP should warn his landlord that the check will look different than they might expect. Many of them come in a tear-open envelope like rebate checks (other than the rebates that come as postcards). Make sure they know to open it and not throw it away (I know it sounds stupid but some people might). You could even pay yourself $5 to get a check in the mail and have it to show them what to expect.

Chase sends it in a regular envelope.

Naw - they can't charge for the CC use but a lot of places do!


My apartment complex takes ATM cards but charges a $1

I figure for a $1 I can write a check

WhiteGuy said: [Q]Naw - they can't charge for the CC use but a lot of places do!


My apartment complex takes ATM cards but charges a $1

I figure for a $1 I can write a checkuse a rewards debit card

mets1986 said: [Q]

I would not rely on bank records at all. For the most part, if you were to sue a mortgage company or even worse, you were to file bankruptcy, judges are more concerned with the person obligated on the underlying debt producing proof of payments, not necessarily the mortgage company.

What tends to happen is when there is a dispute, the court will order both the renter/owner/debtor to produce all proofs of payments they have made to the mortgage company since the loan originated. The court will also order the bank to do the same. However, if you are only relying on the bank records, what is to say they missed a whole years worth of payments, or something that is very common, you sent in $1100, when in fact your mortgage payment was only $1000, therefore putting $100 in suspense. The bank fails to credit you accurately because they are just concerned with that month's mortgage payment. The bank could care less about your payment from 4 months ago or 4 months from now or whether or not you sent in more money than you really had to. Banks and mortgage companies really do not really care about past or future payments, hence why they always get burned in court when they cannot produce accurate records and the renter/owner/debtor can.

definitely too much paranoia here. i've been using citibank online billpay for OVER 10 YEARS!!! if push came to shove and a court ordered me to produce documentation, then i will just present my monthly bank statements which detail the transactions. i look at my statement each month to make sure the correct amount is taken out, are u telling me that the courts won't accept that as proof?

I use Citibank's bill pay for everything except my monthly maintenance. The only reason I don't do that is because Citi can't figure out how to make it payable to one place with a different address, so I have to handwrite that one. Been using their bill pay for almost 10 years, too and only once did I ever have a problem. And that was because an account number changed and I didn't notice it to change in the billpay area.

My former landlord lived next door, so I never had to mail a check. However, if I did, I would do what I do with all new people unfamiliar with billpay. Explain what the check will look like and that it is still you covering your expenses, just generated from the bank directly.

didYOUsearch said: [Q]WhiteGuy said: [Q]Naw - they can't charge for the CC use but a lot of places do!


My apartment complex takes ATM cards but charges a $1

I figure for a $1 I can write a checkuse a rewards debit card

Rewards debit cards generally don't pay those rewards on ATM-style transactions, only on credit-style transactions.

citi gives rewards on PIN transactions

I pay my rent every month with USAA bill pay and I've never had any problems whatsoever. I just put my apartment number as the "account number."

Let me get this straight. Citibank currently has a $200 promo offer going on, but one requirement to waive the monthly checking account maintenance fee is you have to make 2 bill pays a month. Can I just send 2 $1 checks to myself each month and will that satisfy the requirements for 2 bill pays a month?

** Has anyone with a Citibank account done something like this and did it waive your account maintenance fee each month. Please advise.

Also, when you first open an account, they give you an automatic 90 day waiver so these said charges wouldn't even come into play until the fourth month statement cycle.

MrVietnam said: [Q]Let me get this straight. Citibank currently has a $200 promo offer going on, but one requirement to waive the monthly checking account maintenance fee is you have to make 2 bill pays a month. Can I just send 2 $1 checks to myself each month and will that satisfy the requirements for 2 bill pays a month?

** Has anyone with a Citibank account done something like this and did it waive your account maintenance fee each month. Please advise.

Also, when you first open an account, they give you an automatic 90 day waiver so these said charges wouldn't even come into play until the fourth month statement cycle.

I did the promo in October 2004. The first $100 is after 6 months, the second $100 is paid after 12 months from the first $100, or 18 months after the initial account is open. I did it because I needed a bank that had a local branch. So, it is my primary bank now. They waive monthly maintenance fee if you have $1500 in the account or have Direct deposit. But, I was told that if I wanted to make sure I get the second $100 bonus, I should just maintain $1500 monthly balance. No biggie, I usually have $2000 in checking, for "just in case," because tranfesrs from ING can take up to 3 days.

Thanks, blueiedgod, for your information...but now the offer has changed. Now it is open a regular checking account and get $100 within four months and link your Citibank credit card to your checking account and make at least one payment to your credit card using your checking account and get another $100.

But, my real question comes from the option Citibank gives you to waive the monthly $9.50 maintenance charge. They say you can make two bill pays a month and have that $9.50 monthly charge waived. FROM EXPERIENCE, DOES ANYONE KNOW IF YOU CAN JUST SEND A SMALL AMOUNT OF MONEY (SAY $1) TO YOURSELF TWICE A MONTH VIA BILL PAY AND HAVE THAT WAIVE YOUR MONTHLY ACCOUNT MAINTENANCE FEES?

TheWiseGuy said: [Q]mets1986 said: [Q]

I would not rely on bank records at all. For the most part, if you were to sue a mortgage company or even worse, you were to file bankruptcy, judges are more concerned with the person obligated on the underlying debt producing proof of payments, not necessarily the mortgage company.

What tends to happen is when there is a dispute, the court will order both the renter/owner/debtor to produce all proofs of payments they have made to the mortgage company since the loan originated. The court will also order the bank to do the same. However, if you are only relying on the bank records, what is to say they missed a whole years worth of payments, or something that is very common, you sent in $1100, when in fact your mortgage payment was only $1000, therefore putting $100 in suspense. The bank fails to credit you accurately because they are just concerned with that month's mortgage payment. The bank could care less about your payment from 4 months ago or 4 months from now or whether or not you sent in more money than you really had to. Banks and mortgage companies really do not really care about past or future payments, hence why they always get burned in court when they cannot produce accurate records and the renter/owner/debtor can.

definitely too much paranoia here. i've been using citibank online billpay for OVER 10 YEARS!!! if push came to shove and a court ordered me to produce documentation, then i will just present my monthly bank statements which detail the transactions. i look at my statement each month to make sure the correct amount is taken out, are u telling me that the courts won't accept that as proof?


Once again, I said that many people do online bill pay, have for years, and love it. I have no problem with it at all, but I am trying to inform people that do not have any background into these type of matters if a problem were to arise.

Secondly, yes, the bank statement you provide could show you have made every single payment for ten years. Here is a common dispute. You, the plaintiff, sue the bank, the defendant, for not crediting your account for a rent/mortgage payment. So you present all of your records to the court and your bank provides totally contradictory statements to what you have in your hands. The banks states, "We incorrectly credited the account with more payments and have updated our system accordingly." So your next argument would be, "Well, why was I not informed of this error?" The bank would merely state, "When paying with online bill pay, you essentially signed a contract that states any and all transactions you make through online bill pay are subject to verification by our bank, yada yada yada. We noticed an error after an internal audit." Then, as I have seen in about 892834937438 cases, the judge will state: "Since there seems to be a dispute in banking records, would the plaintiff (you) please provide this court with a secondary record of proof of payments, such as copies of checks, etc." .....What do you say at this point? "Well sir, I paid everything through online bill pay, so the only records I have are the ones I printed out and was provided by the bank. I do have confirmation numbers as well for each transaction." The defendants attorney, which is very commonly argued, would say: "If there is no secondary proof of payments that the plaintiff can provide, other than transactions number which are also verified by our bank, how are we to know that he has not made an error as well in his finances? How do we know he actually authorized those transactions and not his 5 year old son who decided to click OK on the computer while not under the supervision of his parents? Can the plaintiff provide documented evidence that he made each and every single transaction for the last ten years? We have admitted to our error and it has been promptly fixed. The plaintiff has failed to provide this court with any evidence that can prove he authorized every single transaction." The judge then would tend to go with caution in his ruling, stating that since you were unable to provide any further evidence of proof of payments, your case is dismissed and each party is responsible for their own attorney fees.

The point of the above story is not to make everyone pay with paper checks or for anyone to change what they are currently doing. If you are comfortable with doing online bill pay, then please continue to do it. I am just trying to let the FW community know from a bank/creditor attorney what types of things can arise when a dispute happens such as this. My advice to everyone is just be able to provide a secondary option if you were to argue your case. I have seen it too many times and would hate for anyone to have to lose money because a bank screwed up their account. I can see why people might think I am paranoid, but the reality is if it were to happen to you, try and prove your case. In almost every court I have argued in or have been present in during these types of lawsuits, the bank's attorney wins if there is no back up proof to bank records. To each his own though....

srns said: [Q]Is it even legal? I just pay with a paper check.

I would love to call my apartment management on this. As it is, the "convenience fee" management charges for using credit cards to pay the rent just barely nullifies the Cash Back rewards of my cards. Should I just walk into the office and tell them to stop charging the fee since it's in violation of their merchant agreement with credit card companies? (Probably not, because I like not getting kicked out and having repairs done in a timely manner.)

mets1986 said: [Q]
Once again, I said that many people do online bill pay, have for years, and love it. I have no problem with it at all, but I am trying to inform people that do not have any background into these type of matters if a problem were to arise.

Secondly, yes, the bank statement you provide could show you have made every single payment for ten years. Here is a common dispute. You, the plaintiff, sue the bank, the defendant, for not crediting your account for a rent/mortgage payment. So you present all of your records to the court and your bank provides totally contradictory statements to what you have in your hands. The banks states, "We incorrectly credited the account with more payments and have updated our system accordingly." So your next argument would be, "Well, why was I not informed of this error?" The bank would merely state, "When paying with online bill pay, you essentially signed a contract that states any and all transactions you make through online bill pay are subject to verification by our bank, yada yada yada. We noticed an error after an internal audit." Then, as I have seen in about 892834937438 cases, the judge will state: "Since there seems to be a dispute in banking records, would the plaintiff (you) please provide this court with a secondary record of proof of payments, such as copies of checks, etc." .....What do you say at this point? "Well sir, I paid everything through online bill pay, so the only records I have are the ones I printed out and was provided by the bank. I do have confirmation numbers as well for each transaction." The defendants attorney, which is very commonly argued, would say: "If there is no secondary proof of payments that the plaintiff can provide, other than transactions number which are also verified by our bank, how are we to know that he has not made an error as well in his finances? How do we know he actually authorized those transactions and not his 5 year old son who decided to click OK on the computer while not under the supervision of his parents? Can the plaintiff provide documented evidence that he made each and every single transaction for the last ten years? We have admitted to our error and it has been promptly fixed. The plaintiff has failed to provide this court with any evidence that can prove he authorized every single transaction." The judge then would tend to go with caution in his ruling, stating that since you were unable to provide any further evidence of proof of payments, your case is dismissed and each party is responsible for their own attorney fees.

The point of the above story is not to make everyone pay with paper checks or for anyone to change what they are currently doing. If you are comfortable with doing online bill pay, then please continue to do it. I am just trying to let the FW community know from a bank/creditor attorney what types of things can arise when a dispute happens such as this. My advice to everyone is just be able to provide a secondary option if you were to argue your case. I have seen it too many times and would hate for anyone to have to lose money because a bank screwed up their account. I can see why people might think I am paranoid, but the reality is if it were to happen to you, try and prove your case. In almost every court I have argued in or have been present in during these types of lawsuits, the bank's attorney wins if there is no back up proof to bank records. To each his own though....

Even if you did provide paper copies of checks, what's to stop the bank from saying the same thing? ("those checks were in error and have since been corrected")

makeinu said:

Even if you did provide paper copies of checks, what's to stop the bank from saying the same thing? ("those checks were in error and have since been corrected")


You are providing hard copy evidence contrary to the banks records that is proof you actually authorized those payments in those amounts with your signature. The only way the check would be in "error", would be if it was returned NSF or you wrote either the wrong account or loan number on your check. If the bank refused the check, you would then have a different type of lawsuit on your hands depending on if you were in bankruptcy or not. Banks and landlords cannot refuse a payment unless, as with a mortgage, you are paying too far in advance, and therefore, readjusting the amortization of the loan by paying off interest too quickly.

If the bank, for instance, says "You were actually paying the wrong amount for your loan," that is a whole other field of play. If the bank notified you of a payment change or escrow change to your loan and you decided to ignore it, then you are the one is to blame, not the bank. If they failed to notify you, then that is their fault and they must honor the payment amount that was specified to you. The same goes with a landlord. He cannot raise the rent on you unless it is in writing that he is doing so. Even if a conversation took place where he told you the rent would be raised, you would not have to pay the increased rate unless it is provided to you in writing. Most standard leases have those clauses. IF they don't, you should be questioning that when you sign the lease. (Note: This most often happens when your lease expires or if you continue to live in your place on a month to month basis.)

Hope I explained that well. If anyone has any other questions, let me know. Thanks and good luck.

Mets1986

mets1986 said: [Q]

Secondly, yes, the bank statement you provide could show you have made every single payment for ten years. Here is a common dispute. You, the plaintiff, sue the bank, the defendant, for not crediting your account for a rent/mortgage payment. So you present all of your records to the court and your bank provides totally contradictory statements to what you have in your hands.


Not sure if I follow you here. The mortgage is held by the same bank that you using online pay?

Wouldn't the solution here be to pay your mortgage from different bank? So you would have statments from both banks and records from both banks and if something doesn't match you know whos changed.


mhesidence said: [Q]mets1986 said: [Q]

Secondly, yes, the bank statement you provide could show you have made every single payment for ten years. Here is a common dispute. You, the plaintiff, sue the bank, the defendant, for not crediting your account for a rent/mortgage payment. So you present all of your records to the court and your bank provides totally contradictory statements to what you have in your hands.


Not sure if I follow you here. The mortgage is held by the same bank that you using online pay?

Wouldn't the solution here be to pay your mortgage from different bank? So you would have statments from both banks and records from both banks and if something doesn't match you know whos changed.yes i have seen the "automatic payment/debit" and "billpay " systems being discussed here, when they are 2 diferent aninmals. See the First Horizon lawsuit I linked on a priro page, which involved autopay.

MrVietnam said: [Q]Thanks, blueiedgod, for your information...but now the offer has changed. Now it is open a regular checking account and get $100 within four months and link your Citibank credit card to your checking account and make at least one payment to your credit card using your checking account and get another $100.

But, my real question comes from the option Citibank gives you to waive the monthly $9.50 maintenance charge. They say you can make two bill pays a month and have that $9.50 monthly charge waived. FROM EXPERIENCE, DOES ANYONE KNOW IF YOU CAN JUST SEND A SMALL AMOUNT OF MONEY (SAY $1) TO YOURSELF TWICE A MONTH VIA BILL PAY AND HAVE THAT WAIVE YOUR MONTHLY ACCOUNT MAINTENANCE FEES?

That would be awesome, please let us know.

mhesidence said: [Q]mets1986 said: [Q]

Secondly, yes, the bank statement you provide could show you have made every single payment for ten years. Here is a common dispute. You, the plaintiff, sue the bank, the defendant, for not crediting your account for a rent/mortgage payment. So you present all of your records to the court and your bank provides totally contradictory statements to what you have in your hands.


Not sure if I follow you here. The mortgage is held by the same bank that you using online pay?

Wouldn't the solution here be to pay your mortgage from different bank? So you would have statments from both banks and records from both banks and if something doesn't match you know whos changed.

In many instances, people do use autopay with the same bank they have their mortgage with. I have been told many times that it is out of "convenience" they used the same bank, rather than security. And, even in some instances, I have heard the argument that there is MORE security if your loan is with the same bank you autopay with. I totally disagree with this, but as you have stated, using 2 separate banks could be a good start. Part of the problem is that banks do horrible business between each other for a number of reasons: a) usually the people who are communicating with each other at the banks have no clue what or how they are to do things (everyone here would be very surprised as to the mistakes they make) b) banks are always trying to "one-up" each other (think "high interest rates savings accounts") c) their banking systems are run on, I kid you not, 1980-style databases (think MS-DOS) which keep horribly inaccurate and confusing records (I actually get to try and sift through lots of these payment histories and accounting reports that literally read like another language)....The list could go on.

The "solution" is not really to use 2 different banks, but rather use an idiot/fool/moron proof backup plan for proof of payments.

mets1986 said: [Q]
Secondly, yes, the bank statement you provide could show you have made every single payment for ten years. Here is a common dispute. You, the plaintiff, sue the bank, the defendant, for not crediting your account for a rent/mortgage payment. So you present all of your records to the court and your bank provides totally contradictory statements to what you have in your hands. The banks states, "We incorrectly credited the account with more payments and have updated our system accordingly." So your next argument would be, "Well, why was I not informed of this error?" The bank would merely state, "When paying with online bill pay, you essentially signed a contract that states any and all transactions you make through online bill pay are subject to verification by our bank, yada yada yada. We noticed an error after an internal audit." Then, as I have seen in about 892834937438 cases, the judge will state: "Since there seems to be a dispute in banking records, would the plaintiff (you) please provide this court with a secondary record of proof of payments, such as copies of checks, etc." .....What do you say at this point? "Well sir, I paid everything through online bill pay, so the only records I have are the ones I printed out and was provided by the bank. I do have confirmation numbers as well for each transaction." The defendants attorney, which is very commonly argued, would say: "If there is no secondary proof of payments that the plaintiff can provide, other than transactions number which are also verified by our ba nk, how are we to know that he has not made an error as well in his finances? How do we know he actually authorized those transactions and not his 5 year old son who decided to click OK on the computer while not under the supervision of his parents? Can the plaintiff provide documented evidence that he made each and every single transaction for the last ten years? We have admitted to our error and it has been promptly fixed. The plaintiff has failed to provide this court with any evidence that can prove he authorized every single transaction." The judge then would tend to go with caution in his ruling, stating that since you were unable to provide any further evidence of proof of payments, your case is dismissed and each party is responsible for their own attorney fees.

The point of the above story is not to make everyone pay with paper checks or for anyone to change what they are currently doing. If you are comfortable with doing online bill pay, then please continue to do it. I am just trying to let the FW community know from a bank/creditor attorney what types of things can arise when a dispute happens such as this. My advice to everyone is just be able to provide a secondary option if you were to argue your case. I have seen it too many times and would hate for anyone to have to lose money because a bank screwed up their account. I can see why people might think I am paranoid, but the reality is if it were to happen to you, try and prove your case. In almost every court I have argued in or have been present in during these types of lawsuits, the bank's attorney wins if there is no back up proof to bank records. To each his own though....
now this is bordering on ridiculous. 1st my billing paying bank is different than my mortgage bank. if they don't accept my bank statements, then my mortgage statement would show the same payment. if a payment were to be reversed by any party, i would most certainly hear about it within a month. so that whole argument u just made fails. even if it was the same bank, that reversal would stick out like a sore thumb, and if they didnt correct for 10 yrs, then good luck for them. as someone said earlier, a bank can claim a similar mistake like miscoding a check, and i doubt most people will have checks from 10 years ago, especially if they change banks a lot. also, u make it sound like the bank is always right and that the customer is always in doubt. and ur comment about how bill payment is subject to verification, is not limited to bill payment. if u ever looked at an atm receipt, it just states that it is a record of ur instructions and not a receipt, imagine withdrawing $100 and then having the bank tell u there was an accounting error and they corrected it by debiting $1000 from ur account, and then asking u to prove u only got $100?

mets1986 said: [Q]
You are providing hard copy evidence contrary to the banks records that is proof you actually authorized those payments in those amounts with your signature. The only way the check would be in "error", would be if it was returned NSF or you wrote either the wrong account or loan number on your check. If the bank refused the check, you would then have a different type of lawsuit on your hands depending on if you were in bankruptcy or not. Banks and landlords cannot refuse a payment unless, as with a mortgage, you are paying too far in advance, and therefore, readjusting the amortization of the loan by paying off interest too quickly.

If the bank, for instance, says "You were actually paying the wrong amount for your loan," that is a whole other field of play. If the bank notified you of a payment change or escrow change to your loan and you decided to ignore it, then you are the one is to blame, not the bank. If they failed to notify you, then that is their fault and they must honor the payment amount that was specified to you. The same goes with a landlord. He cannot raise the rent on you unless it is in writing that he is doing so. Even if a conversation took place where he told you the rent would be raised, you would not have to pay the increased rate unless it is provided to you in writing. Most standard leases have those clauses. IF they don't, you should be questioning that when you sign the lease. (Note: This most often happens when your lease expires or if you continue to live in your place on a month to month basis.)

Hope I explained that well. If anyone has any other questions, let me know. Thanks and good luck.

Mets1986

I'm not following you. Why is it that "the only way the check would be in 'error', would be if it was returned NSF or you wrote either the wrong account or loan number on your check" when it is documented on dead trees, but if it is documented electronically the bank can simply claim "we incorrectly credited the account with more payments and have updated our system accordingly". It is essentially the same document subject to the same potential errors. What does the recording medium have to do with it?

(I realize that the courts endow dead tree documents with magical powers, but I'm just curious if you can justify it because I can't.)

lunarscape said: [Q]srns said: [Q]Is it even legal? I just pay with a paper check.

I would love to call my apartment management on this. As it is, the "convenience fee" management charges for using credit cards to pay the rent just barely nullifies the Cash Back rewards of my cards. Should I just walk into the office and tell them to stop charging the fee since it's in violation of their merchant agreement with credit card companies? (Probably not, because I like not getting kicked out and having repairs done in a timely manner.)

Exactly!!

My rent cancels out my Cash Back. Either I pay $15 more every month, and get a fat cash-back check, or just pay $15 less every month with a paper check..

I wouldn't want to fight with my apt management for this. IMHO, if there is an easy way to avoid conflicts, I just do that.




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.

Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

While FatWallet makes every effort to post correct information, offers are subject to change without notice.
Some exclusions may apply based upon merchant policies.
© 1999-2017