Bank of America -- auugggh

Apr 16, 2009 08:46

Anyone have any tips for getting BOA to waive overdraft fees? And/or any advice on convincing them not to let me spend money I don't have ( Read more... )

overdraft, personal finance, banking

Leave a comment

jadorelefromage April 16 2009, 14:23:15 UTC
banks are just a-holes like that. all of them. that's how they make their money. you'll just have to take the time to keep track of your money better unfortunately :(

Reply

atarashini April 16 2009, 14:34:02 UTC
It's not assholish to lend you money when you haven't opted-out of overdraft protection. You agreed to it when you signed up for the account. They're a business like any other, and they have to make money to stay in business and pay their employees.

Bottom line, banks are not charities and don't have to be nice to you.

Reply

jadorelefromage April 16 2009, 14:38:35 UTC
this is true.

BUT one thing that BoA in particular does that IS assholish (and which they got sued for, I received a class action settlement thing in the mail for) is when you overdraft with, say, a $100 charge, and PRIOR TO THAT had made a few small charges, they will put through the high amount FIRST to overdraft you, and THEN put through all the smaller charges so they can give you an overdraft on all the smaller ones. THAT is wrong. i'm glad they got sued for that.

but in general i agree with you, people just need to keep track of their money. i am OCD about writing down everything in my register, i often take my account down to less than a dollar and never get overdrafts. it's really not that hard to keep track of your purchases!

Reply

atarashini April 16 2009, 14:50:10 UTC
IMO transactions should be processed in the order received, so yes. I would agree that that's wrong. I'm just sort of tired of people bitching about how the mean banks screwed them over, when in reality they just aren't keeping track of their accounts.

Reply

jadorelefromage April 16 2009, 14:52:41 UTC
yeah i agree. my boyfriend is constantly overdrafting and getting pissed, when it's 100% his fault for not keeping track of his spending. it's like HELLO! keep track!

Reply

xxvv69xx April 16 2009, 14:56:56 UTC
holy crap you're right they do do that... assholes...

Reply

lilyofthewest April 16 2009, 15:00:43 UTC
Yep, this is exactly what happened. I had a total of 6 transactions that day. Processed in order, I had the money for all but the last (and largest) of them. Processed as BOA does it (largest transaction first), I didn't have the money for any of them. I was still dumb and accidentally spent money I didn't have -- but that's a difference of $175 in overdraft fees.

Reply

neaira April 16 2009, 15:26:33 UTC
You still spent money you didn't have and would have overdrafted regardless of the order the transactions were taken out.

Reply

lilyofthewest April 16 2009, 15:35:55 UTC
Come on y'all, how many times can I say mea culpa, I screwed up? I know it is my responsibility to keep track of my own money. I know if it is my own damn fault if I overdraft. I said that upfront in my original post.

I had not previously known that I could make an ATM withdrawal of money I did not actually have. Lesson learned.

Nor had I previously known that BOA processes the debits in order from largest to smallest. In the actual real-time order that these transactions happened, I only overdrafted once ($35 fee). The way BOA deals with things, it counted as 6 overdrafts ($210 fee). I think that's a shitty (if lucrative) business practice. Now I know.

Anyhow, I appreciate the bits of constructive advice I have gotten about how to talk to the bank (didn't work, but that's not surprising given that this *was* my fault), how to reduce the chance of overdrafting in the future, and how to reduce the impact if it does happen again despite my best efforts.

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

atarashini April 16 2009, 14:57:03 UTC
I don't agree with the bank bailouts either, but at the same time we can't let all of the major banks fail. The FDIC doesn't have enough money to cover all of the losses, because when times were good the banks stopped paying the fees into it.

Reply

ladyluna April 18 2009, 04:40:54 UTC
A lot of the banks were forced to take bail out money even if they didn't want to. And have to get "permission" if they want to pay it back early.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up