Citigroup Warns Customers It May Refuse To Allow Withdrawals

reply to post by freedomataprice


Where do you live? LOL

2nd line.

reply to post by ExPostFacto


Were it takes the local and state police 2 weeks to find anyone! And that is no joke.

They stumbled out here one day and ask us to put up a sign "for 911" I said HELL NO.

Sorry to go off topic.

But banks in general suck.

Well, lets see here a minute. It is a interesting coincidance that another poster said that the FDIC is putting a major office in Chicago. Hmmm

[edit on 19-2-2010 by Lil Drummerboy]

Reg D: To control the supply of money available in the U.S. and financial institutions’ reserve requirements, the Federal Reserve Board created Reg D and account classifications.
This is a Federal Regulation that effects all financial institutions


I work at a credit union and have for several years. As far as Reg D is concerned, we use it to ensure that people are not using a savings account like a checking account.
Lets say you have your pay check direct deposited into your savings... you are then out writing checks on funds that are not in your checking account but rather in said savings acct ... Reg d limits the number of times that money can be transfered from your savings to your checking. 6 times within a 30 day period. Once those 6 transfers have occured, the member will incur overdraft fees.

If read article this is only pertains to Texas.
They made mistake, and it went out nation wide.

[edit on 20-2-2010 by googolplex]

The seven day notice policy only applies to customers in Texas, Ira Stoll reports at The Future of Capitalism. It was accidentally included on customer statements nationwide.

Relax. Not the end of the world. Also please read the update posted on pg 1.

If Citibank and every other bank closed their doors and you couldn't get your money, really, what would you do? You should already find ways to get by without that money just in case. Learn to be self sufficient.

reply to post by (C2C)


Note that the first item thieves look for are "safes" for your valuables.

There are other methods to protect your goods such as burying them in a sealed pvc tube or in the walls behind a mirror,etc.

I withdraw my paycheck as soon as it is deposited. If they are going to put a freeze on that I will make other arrangements.

Eventually, when the dollar crashes, it won't matter if you can withdraw it or not.

This statement made by Citigroup makes me think that they are using peoples money for something that their customers would not be happy about. The '7 day' crap may be being implemented because they may need up to a week to gather your money from wherever it is being invested; whether that be stocks, war, oil, or whatever.

Sounds like the government may be involved and they are more than likely using/paying Citigroup to do their business because they have a customer base large enough to help do whatever they need help with.

Just my 2cents.

This may or may not be relevant - the devil is in the detail as they say.....

Headline news was the Discount rate being raised from 0.5% - 0.75% , I've been catching up on the other announcements, one of which seems to have gone unnoticed but is alarming !

Effective March 18th the typical maximum maturity for primary credit loans will be shortened to overnight (o/n). These are loans from the Fed to other banks to keep liquidity in the market. For more info. see www.frbdiscountwindow.org...


Talk about the Fed squeezing the market and not trusting its money for more than one day (or 3 if friday/monday o/n deal)

Whilst searching the above link I also noticed the FRB's window of maximum maturity had already been reduced on Jan 14th from 90 days to 28 days!

So now ALL the banks needing to finance their loans can only do it on a day by day basis - (subject to what other banks are prepared to lend them) can you imagine what that will do to the traded rate in the markets as they all scrabble to get their money ??? The FRB is in a win win situation here (what a surprise) but the notion that they will only lend o/n is alarming - or is it just me ?

It is a form of credit tightening (ie they are not exposed for as long) and could set an unhealthy precedent to money markets.


[edit on 20-2-2010 by slidingdoor]

Originally posted by amatrine
That really scares me. If I got that notice from my bank, I would be long gone.

I'm with you on this one. No one knows when an emergency could arise and the need to pull cash out that day. I would find the nearest credit union or local bank.

just a reply to people who said they will take their money and run
how can you withdraw your money if they will not let you????
had to state the obvious

Better to stay far away from Citi and put your money elsewhere. If it's there...take it out fast. (well 7 days fast anyways!)

Originally posted by jumpingbeanz
just a reply to people who said they will take their money and run
how can you withdraw your money if they will not let you????

had to state the obvious

You didn't read the article.




had to state the obvious.

This is actually like the northern rock incident except they are warning prior, no different in my eyes.
people will line up empty everything (if they can) and the bank will fail,
surely these bank fatcats could do better.....

never borrow what you cannot afford to pay back, simple
probably worth looking into changing mortgage,

hey but thats just my opinion

reply to post by googolplex


Hmmm just Texas you say Texas is pretty much a pro-freedom anti-progressive state right. I would hate to think any funny business is going on . I am sure there is a perfectly good reason to make it just Texas right?


I wonder if messages are being sent using a method of plausible deniability? I hope they realize if Texas rises up I have a feeling they will not be the only one's. Times might get very interesting very quick.

Originally posted by soficrow

Originally posted by Amaterasu

No... Their choice to "reclassify" these accounts had everything to do with the fact that now they can freeze them at will.

I agree - Citibank's after-the-fact explanation is a little too complicated.

...And sounds an awful lot like damage control.

Reasonable Explanation - Please read

Okay, first of all, banking IS VERY complicated... particularly the Federal Reserve System. I have read through the Regulation D manual and here is what I believe is the reason for the seven days:

The whole idea of "reserves" is to determine how much cash they have to keep in the bank, compared to the amount they have out on loan. This is known as the "reserve ratio." Obviously, when you put money into a bank, you are indirectly giving them a right to loan that money out, and the Fed only requires them to maintain 1/10th of the total deposits as cash. Now, in Regulation D they explain that this reserve amount is calculated every seven days, so in order to allow them do the correct calculations, they essentially must be allowed to prevent a large withdrawal (or many small withdrawals) from happening within that seven day window.

As an example, let's say that on Monday they had 20 billion in deposits. Simplifying the calculations, they would have to keep 2 billion (1/10th) in cash. Now, if they only had 1.5 billion in cash, they would "purchase" 500 million from the Fed so as to have the correct cash ratio.

Now, as long as the cash withdrawals don't go over 2 billion for the week, everything is okay. But, what if some big millionaire wants to withdraw 100 million on Tuesday? Or what if a million customers try to withdraw so much that the bank would go past their 2 billion in reserves? They can't just call up the Fed and order more cash, because the Fed only allows the ratio to be recalculated every seven (or for some accounts 14) days.

So, at the end of each week, the bank looks at it's normal withdrawal rates, and also any unusual withdrawals that someone has given notice on, and they determine how much reserve they will need for the coming week.

This really is nothing to worry about. What Citibank said is that they had put into place a safer FDIC policy during 2009, where each account was guaranteed for it's entire amount (not just the normal $100,000), and that under that scheme, they could get immediate withdrawal coverage under that particular insurance policy.

Now that they believe the financial crisis is essentially over, they are electing to return to the normal (and cheaper) FDIC coverage of $100,000 per account. This required them to notify customers of the Regulation D issue, which requires them to recalculate their reserve ratio once a week, thereby imposing a potential 7-day lock on big withdrawals (or any withdrawal that would cause them to exceed their cash reserves).

I took the time to read the Reserve Maintenance Manual, and indeed there is a 7-day reserve ratio recalculation period, so what they have said makes perfect sense. Most people don't really understand how banking works, and they just believe that everyone's deposits are just sitting there at all times, and that you can just waltz in any time you want and take as much out as you want. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Under normal banking conditions, where people are not rushing to the bank to pull their money out because of ignorant fear, the 10% reserve ratio seems to hold up well, especially if people use credit cards and EFTPOS transactions.

Since the FDIC only covers $100,000 per account, if you have more than $100,000 in a single account you may want to spread your money across multiple accounts, and even multiple large banks.

Anyhow, I hope this helps to bring some understanding to the complex banking language and protocols.


[edit on 20-2-2010 by downisreallyup]

Originally posted by TheCoffinman
so im not exactly sure what this means

What it means is that Citi considers the potential for a run on their bank in the future as a distinct possibility.

Originally posted by leo123

Originally posted by TheCoffinman
so im not exactly sure what this means

What it means is that Citi considers the potential for a run on their bank in the future as a distinct possibility.

No, you are mistaken. Please read the post directly above that I wrote explaining how this all works.

The bank is always in a position where they have far less cash on hand than the total amount in deposits, so they are always vulnerable if people drastically change their withdrawal pattern. They are simply informing people about the realities of banking.

I would also say that this information is primarily for people with big accounts, who may want to take out very large amounts, since those are the types of withdrawals that could cause them to exceed their cash reserves for the week.

I was just wondering what about when you use a dept card at say the grocery store? Or write a Check to a friend written to Cash? I did not see anything that would make either of those way's to access your money.

Originally posted by highlyoriginal
This statement made by Citigroup makes me think that they are using peoples money for something that their customers would not be happy about. The '7 day' crap may be being implemented because they may need up to a week to gather your money from wherever it is being invested; whether that be stocks, war, oil, or whatever.

Sounds like the government may be involved and they are more than likely using/paying Citigroup to do their business because they have a customer base large enough to help do whatever they need help with.

Just my 2cents.

No, this has to do with the fact that they can only order cash to cover big withdrawals every seven days, as per Regulation "D" It is quite apparent that very few people understand how banking works, even people who claim to work in banking (primarily as tellers or loan agents).

They don't need a week to gather your money from investments, they need a week to get more cash from the Fed bank in order to cover their withdrawals they exceed the 10% reserve requirement. Remember, during any given week, a bank must only be 10% solvent.