It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The FDIC Secret - 99 Years To Pay! An ATS MIX Investigation

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

+62 more 
posted on May, 5 2008 @ 06:35 PM
You can also participate in this investigation by going to the ATS MIX area HERE!

Okay.... here's the deal. I am in my bank today talking with my banker who also happens to be the bank manager and personal friend and has been with this major bank for over 20 years. We are shooting the breeze after I had been in to make a deposit. We are talking about the financial stability issues in light of the Bear Stearns fiasco. After my mom's death this past Christmas, I set-up an estate account with my bank in an FDIC insured account. Anyway, I was telling him that rather than taking her $125,000.00 and putting $100K in one bank and the 25K in another bank so it would all be insured, I figured if the world ever got to a point where my bank (a MAJOR bank) went under, we would be dodging missiles from Iran and it really wouldn't matter much anyway. Then he tells me, "You know FDIC can take up to 99 YEARS to pay a claim don't you?" Of course, this blows me away and my DR mentality kicks in and start pursuing this further with him. He then accesses the FDIC WEBSITE where the FDIC discounts this RUMOR and then he goes on to explain that this is something FDIC is doing to dispel any panic and to insure that the general public doesn’t get alarmed.

I then say to him ”Okay, so do you have any proof?” He tells me he has a document, as do all branch managers of his bank as well as any FDIC bank or institution, that spells this out and what to do in the event of any event that caused a closure of a entire bank. I asked if I could see this but he refused as the bank has cameras and would capture him opening up a secure EYES ONLY area. I told him that I had never heard of this before. He said that relatively few people have as it is something that is kept close to the vest by FDIC other than their rumor spin. He gives me a scary scenario. A small bank goes under.... no problem. But what if some National Emergency took place and rocked the financial institutions of the US off their feet and, let’s say, Wells Fargo or Chase goes under. He then says to me ”Do you really not think the FDIC would have something in place to allow them to stretch their liability in the event of a catastrophe?” The bottom line, anyone who is under the false impression that their money is going to be paid IMMEDIATELY if their bank goes under, is not taking all the possible circumstances that would prevent immediate payment.

So we finished up our conversation of family and friends and I left the bank.

I went to the FDIC WEBSITE and spent several hours and could find nothing more than them dispelling the RUMOR.

Johnny and I want to involve the AboveTopSecret.Com Membership in this investigation. We want your comments, we want your input, we want to see if any of our members can land their hands on any official document where we can secure it and make this document available to the public. We are also interested in doing interviews of people who will go ON RECORD in this investigative report and then will be broadcasted to our 23 Million Plus fan base when we have gathered all the information written and audio.

You can send Johnny and I any copies of documents or data via our E-Mail Addresses, which you can find on our Avatars (Photos) OR you can call our TOLL FREE number at 1-877-417-2204 in the US or CANADA.

Thanks for your help.

Dave & Johnny

Please FLAG, STAR & DIGG This Mutha!

[edit on 5/6/2008 by Dave Rabbit]

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 07:57 PM
wow, way too much to handle, i had to read this three times over! now i have to talk to my husband when he gets home and see what he thinks of this. we have money in government bonds, i wonder if that's safer than a bank? our dollar value is dropping rapidly, maybe i'll buy some gold, dig a hole and bury it but i'm not sure if that's even legal

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 09:07 PM
Well even the Treasury bonds are doing bad and will be doing horrible in the case of a national emergency on the scale of what the main post is implying. I personally am not surprised that this is possible, I wouldn't even be surprised if it did happen. But we really have to think, if the FDIC can't pay it back within a reasonable amount of time then we are in danger anyway.

Truly the only people that I think would be "safe" are the filthy rich and the extremely well connected. So yes if you want the world's dictators.

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 09:25 PM

Originally posted by Dave Rabbit
Anyway, I was telling him that rather than taking her $125,000.00 and putting $100K in one bank and the 25K in another bank so it would all be insured, I figured if the world ever got to a point where my bank (a MAJOR bank) went under, we would be dodging missiles from Iran and it really wouldn't matter much anyway.

Not to derail the thread but expect this to happen within the next Presidency as Hillary WILL win the Presidential Bid, it's fairly obvious at this point that's the case.

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 09:48 PM
In the event of a crash. If the dollars reimbursed took 100 of them to buy a loaf of bread, yet still being the same dollars that were put in the bank when it only took a couple. Well one can continue to paint that picture.

Whatever number one has stored on a bank's hard drive somewhere will be inflated so fat that at that said point in time it would take a wheel barrow full of paper to buy a meal. The only problem is it would take a wheel barrow full of the same paper that was originally hard earned and stored in the bank.

People don't see this stuff, and don't care to see it either.

If somebody is going to sit on wealth, it should be in metal. Gold and Silver have been money since the beginning and will be until it's time to cast it out in the streets.

I certainly doubt any archaeologists have found any 5000 year old linen paper receipts backed by faith, which still are worth their face value, but a 5000 year old ounce of gold is still worth an ounce of gold..

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 09:53 PM
I am sorry but I don't quite understand the line of reasoning.

Perhaps you can help me out. I thought that all the government had to do is print up some more worthless money and start handing out bales of it.

OK that is a metaphore. We all understand that they simply release an electron flow.

So, in the scenario of a bank crisis, what is to keep them from pulling the dollars out of thin air? Or am I wrong about this being a viable response?

This is a brilliant discovery none-the-less!

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 10:18 PM
David John Marotta should be able to give you those documents & answers you've requested, here.

Is my money FDIC insured?

Original video (along with more of David Marotta's financial-advice) can be found,

David John Marotta is the President of Marotta Wealth Management, a fee-only financial planning and asset management firm in Charlottesville, Virginia. He is an oft-quoted writer and speaker on financial matters and his weekly financial column can be found at

A so-called, financial advisor (alias: ClockworkJon) visited a popular forum-site (, recently.

Here's what he came to share with the members of that site:

Originally posted by ClockworkJon:

Not to piss in anyone's pool, but FDIC's reserve goal is 1.25% of all US Bank deposits. Their total reserve is about $40 billion. The bank I work for has about 35 times the assets of FDIC, and its not the largest in the country. FDIC couldn't cover the top 25 or so banks if they tried. Also, they clearly state in their literature that they can take up to 99 years to reimburse. If you can invest wisely in a disciplined, long-term focused manner and beat an FDIC account, do it. One should always have some cash on hand for emergencies, but it doesn't make for a very good retirement. At this point you're not even keeping up with the price of milk, to say nothing of gas and medical costs. The Enron people got screwed because of Enron, not the market as a whole. Besides, anyone who puts 100% of their 401k into one of anything (like all Enron stock) deserves what they get, or what they lose, as it were. Just my $0.02 What do you expect, I'm a financial advisor!

In 2007, someone named Ken B. commented on that page:

Originally posted by Ken B.

Well folks, hate to break the really bad news to you. But if banks fail the FDIC has up to 99 years to pay back your money that is FDIC insured...

His comment is a response to this lecture:

FDIC Insurance: What If My Bank Fails? Make Sure Your Money Is Covered ( )

With all these new online banks which are pretty much just virtual branches of a lot of regional banks, I thought it would be a good idea to look more into this whole FDIC insurance thing we put so much trust into. First some quick basics, taken from the FDIC website:

What Does the FDIC Insure?
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) is a government corporation that insures all deposits at insured banks, including checking and savings accounts, money market deposit accounts, and certificates of deposit (CDs), up to the insurance limit. Use this form to find out if your bank is insured.

How Much Does It Cover?
The basic insurance amount is $100,000 per depositor per insured bank. Certain retirement accounts, such as Individual Retirement Accounts, are insured up to $250,000 per depositor per insured bank.

Way To Increase Your Coverage
Since accounts at different banks are insured separately, the easiest way to increase your coverage is to simply keep less than $100,000 at any one bank. You could have $100,000 each at 500 different banks, and be insured for $50 million in total.

You may also qualify for more than $100,000 in coverage at one insured bank if you own deposit accounts in different ownership categories. For example, here is a way that a husband and wife could qualify for $600,000 in total insurance all at one bank:

What Happens If My Bank Really Fails?
First off, I would note that the FDIC does not notify people that their bank is about to fail or has failed. The only way to you find out is when your debit card gets denied or you walk up to your bank and it has a new name. Here is a list of banks that have failed since October 2000, which includes a summary how it was handled.

The Finance Buff has a good post about what happens when your bank goes out of business. he example given is Metropolitan Savings Bank in Pittsburgh, which the FDIC took over just three months ago.

Here’s the timeline: The FDIC announced the bank’s takeover on Thursday. By Monday the deposits have been taken over by another bank, the branches were re-opened, and the insured people have access to their money again.

But, out of the $12 million in deposits in the bank, there were 30 account holders with total assets of $1.2 million not insured by the FDIC. Those people are now creditors to the receivership of the failed bank, and must wait as the FDIC liquidates the bank’s remaining assets. Waiting on the light fixtures to be sold until you can get any of your money back? Not good.

The takeaways here are

1. Banks still fail, and without warning.
2. If your money is insured, it is unlikely any failure will interrupt access to your funds for long. Either another bank will take over (they all want more deposits), or the FDIC will pay out from their reserves.
3. Never exceed FDIC insurance limits, because you may never see your uninsured money again.

[edit on 5-5-2008 by ChadAndrewATS]

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 10:21 PM
I started doing a little reading over at the FDIC.
It seems that the accounts value is frozen at the day the bank goes under.
It ceases to gather interest. This is noteworthy and supports the proposition that the repayment would have little to no value in 99 years.

Furthermore, six months after you die, the insurance evaporates unless the account is restructured, whatever that means.

99 years after the bank fails, it unlikely there will be too many people waiting for their money back, but even their heirs might be in for a surprise!

(j) Continuation of insurance coverage following the death of a deposit owner. The death of a deposit owner shall not affect the insurance coverage of the deposit for a period of six months following the owner's death unless the deposit account is restructured. The operation of this grace period, however, shall not result in a reduction of coverage. If an account is not restructured within six months after the owner's death, the insurance shall be provided on the basis of actual ownership in accordance with the provisions of § 330.5(a)(1).

[Codified to 12 C.F.R. § 330.3]

[Section 330.3 amended at 63 Fed. Reg. 25757, May 11, 1998, effective July 1, 1998; 64 Fed. Reg. 15656, April 1, 1999]

330.5 Recognition of deposit ownership and fiduciary relationships.

(a) Recognition of deposit ownership--(1) Evidence of deposit ownership. Except as indicated in this paragraph (a)(1) or as provided in § 330.3(j), in determining the amount of insurance available to each depositor, the FDIC shall presume that deposited funds are actually owned in the manner indicated on the deposit account records of the insured depository institution.

This is an excerpt, the section goes on to say that you cannot claim feduciary responsibility unless your name is expressly listed in the original account records as having feduciary responsibility. So if heirs are not specified on your accounts, the insurance evaporates six months from your death.

I believe my children are beneficiarys on my accounts, but I do not recall every being asked if I wanted to assign them feduciary responsibility in the event of my death.

Perhaps someone more knowing could comment upon this?

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 10:37 PM

Originally posted by Cyberbian
I am sorry but I don't quite understand the line of reasoning.

Perhaps you can help me out. I thought that all the government had to do is print up some more worthless money and start handing out bales of it.

OK that is a metaphore. We all understand that they simply release an electron flow.

So, in the scenario of a bank crisis, what is to keep them from pulling the dollars out of thin air? Or am I wrong about this being a viable response?

This is a brilliant discovery none-the-less!
Oh, it's true enough that they can and do create money out of thin air, or thin electrons. What is also interesting is that what they call 'marginal banking' is their version of counterfeiting with a pen, instead of a printing press. After the Great Depression, a law was passed that banks had to have 10% of their deposits on hand. The banks quickly interpreted that to mean they could loan out 9x their actual deposits. So you deposit $100. How much of that is loaned out? NONE! They only loan out up to $900 because of your $100 collecting 2 or 3% interest. When it is payed back, they have 'made', literally counterfeited, 1200%. And they throw you 3%. Personally, I think any idiot who would go bankrupt doing such a profitable scam, should be shot, even if they are from the Bank of Italy, or a Well Fargo Robber bank. So who is robbing Americans more, those bankers, or a government that spends 75% of our GNP? And half of the Federal budget is 'Black Budget', unaccounted for. Sure a good thing we can all trust this government.

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 10:50 PM
I don't know specifically about the 99 year thing but I have posted about how people will not see a dime of FDIC money in any real emergency.


some reading required.


posted on May, 5 2008 @ 11:07 PM
And the fdic logo always used to make me feel so warm and fuzzy. Sounds like precious metals is the only way to go in a real shtf venue.

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 11:29 PM
Remember in the 50's when people were urged to cash in all their silver coins and dollars for the new silver coated copper mint? Saying that silver would 'always' be available at the asking? Muahahaha. Anyone who doesn't feel like charlie brown kicking a football should see Sally. The dr is in.

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 11:29 PM
I have answered my own question above, so I will post the answer here.

The FDIC is a Federal Government Corporation it is said to have the backing of the Federal Government.

I believe that "backing" means moral support in this instance.
They don't get money from the govt, I presume the fed is a parent corporation, since they are a Federal Government Corporation.

I don't comprehend why the Federal Govt spins out Corporations. I assume has something to do with damage control and compartmentalization.

The FDIC receives no taxpayer funding. Instead, the FDIC charges deposit insurance premiums, which are paid by members.

Fourth Quarter 07 FDIC had 52.4 Billion dollars in reserve.
The FDIC insured 13,038 Billion dollars 4th quarter 2007

So the FDIC has less than 1/2 of 1 percent of what it insures in reserve.

according to
FDIC Quarterly banking profile.

While that is a lot of cash, it's stated purpose is to prevent a run on banks, in the event of major bank collapses which exceeded the reserves, the FDIC could go chapter 11, bankrupt. I would expect it to reform and make fractional payment on debts, or stretching repayment out over time.

I have to wonder where the FDIC billions are invested. How much would be left after a world financial crisis? I promise you that no corporation has Billions in paper sitting in a vault not collecting interest, and waiting to be handed out. The Federal Government has a paper cash reserve but that is not the FDIC.

These numbers are derived from charts in the quarterly statements of the FDIC.

Can someone else please make the effort to review my statements for accuracy?

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 11:50 PM
In what I've come across over the past few months in researching the subprime/mortgage mess/credit crisis, I don't believe FDIC is adequately capitalized to handle a major bank collapse. I think they would be stretched to handle a large regional bank siezure (think Suntrust, BBT, WaMU). However, if one of these were to be allowed to fail, failure by either the FDIC or quick Govt. intervention to make depositors quickly whole to at least the $100k level would ensure that all the others would fail in short order due to a massive run on all banks.

I don't think that too many people are interested in what I've had to say lately so I didn't even bother posting anything about this, but doesn't the following article give you warm and fuzzies about what they're planning to do with the money they have.

FDIC Chief Calls For Emergency Loan Assistance

Sheila Bair, chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., weighed into the debate over what to do about the nation's foreclosure problem, telling reporters that the Treasury Department should make up to $50 billion available for a "homeownership preservation" program.

I'm pretty sure she's another Brownie.

[edit on 5-5-2008 by jefwane]

posted on May, 6 2008 @ 12:08 AM
What in tarnation.
Wouldn't that mean removing from circulation in investments, further killing the economy? Or is this just magicking money into existance, and further weaking the dollar and the value of everything anyone owns.

If they do that, then they want the economy to fail!

Not a cent of our money or our equity should be thrown to the dogs.
The bankers should be forced to responsibility in renegotiating the mortgages which they greedily pushed on the public into sustainable deals. And to hell with their profit margins. They need to learn to eat lower interest rates rather than rob the public. Notice that almost none of the interest rate cuts makes it to the mortgage market, so only bankers benefit from the rate cuts. Starving the people, and feeding the bankers. That is what Washington is doing.

[edit on 6-5-2008 by Cyberbian]

posted on May, 6 2008 @ 12:19 AM
One of my moderator friends made a comment to me in our "Moderators Only" area about this scare tactic 99 year thing being something he was made aware of when he was in the non-bank investment business. But as I told him.... I am skeptic by nature..... if this had not been a personal friend of mine and also a bank manager who himself brought this up during a friendship conversation and had absolutely nothing to gain..... I would be skeptical myself. It is because it was unsolicited that leads me to believe there is a lot more to this than meets the eye and Johnny and I intend to do our damn well best to find the truth with YOUR help!


[edit on 5/6/2008 by Dave Rabbit]

posted on May, 6 2008 @ 12:30 AM
reply to post by Dave Rabbit

Dave, I don't believe the 99 year thing.
But this is a great thread anyway.

You have brought our attention to the fact is that the FDIC is a house of cards.

posted on May, 6 2008 @ 12:32 AM
Dave, I've come across some research on it over the past few months, I'm trying to find it again ATM. I remember two very smart people on another board having a major disagreement over this. They had some good reference links that I'm trying to find now. I think Gools post referenced earlier may have alot of the same but not sure. If you get your money back after a bank failure but it is 30,60,90 days after the fact how much good does that really do ya anyway if you've not had access to funds you need?

posted on May, 6 2008 @ 12:33 AM
Bet your bottom dollar Dave. The fields are alive with skunks these days in the deteriorating financial markets. Connected people should be able to give some 'illuminating' answers.

posted on May, 6 2008 @ 12:45 AM
I don't know if this helps but it's a proposed change to FDIC rules from back in January.

The largest number of deposit accounts in a failed institution for which the FDIC has had to make an insurance determination was about 175,000 for NetBank, FSB, Alpharetta, Georgia, on September 28, 2007. Today, some of the larger banks have more than 50 million deposit accounts.

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in