Bank of America refuses to let customers close accounts

This thread makes me think about my husband's 401K. It's set up so that we can't touch OUR money unless we can prove severe hardship, and then, we can only withdraw exactly what we actually need. So, for instance, when we needed to withdraw some cash to keep from going into foreclosure, we had to actually wait until the mortgage provider sent us a letter of impending foreclosure before we could withdraw money from the 401K. The letter had to state how much was needed to avoid foreclosure and that was all Fidelity would allow to be removed.

It really is frustrating to know that if the SHTF, we will lose all his hard earned money, since we can't touch it. So I guess when the PTB decide to take everyone's 401Ks, as I have read will possibly happen, we will lose everything he's worked for. Just one more way the whole system is in cahoots with one another.

Having viewed the video, there are a few things that can be stated.

While BOA does not have the right to stop a customer from closing their account, they do have the right to prevent a run on the bank. They are obligated by the remaining regulations to stop and prevent such from happening. So while it may seem like they were being crooked and wrong towards the customers, they are in short following the laws of the country and those trying to create a run on the bank, were wrong for trying to get everyone that were customers to try to do such. The reason for this is so that way the BOA can call up the federal reserve to order more currency to honor the requests it is getting, and ensure all of the depositors are going to get their money.

However, that being stated, if the organizers had only a few customers at a time go up and close out their accounts, there would be nothing that BOA could do about such, except yield to their wishes. Keep in mind these regulations, laws and other standard banking practices go back to the great depression, when many banks suffered from all of their customers withdrawing all of their money out at the same time with no protection for either the bank or their customers.

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
Having viewed the video, there are a few things that can be stated.

While BOA does not have the right to stop a customer from closing their account, they do have the right to prevent a run on the bank. They are obligated by the remaining regulations to stop and prevent such from happening. So while it may seem like they were being crooked and wrong towards the customers, they are in short following the laws of the country and those trying to create a run on the bank, were wrong for trying to get everyone that were customers to try to do such. The reason for this is so that way the BOA can call up the federal reserve to order more currency to honor the requests it is getting, and ensure all of the depositors are going to get their money.

However, that being stated, if the organizers had only a few customers at a time go up and close out their accounts, there would be nothing that BOA could do about such, except yield to their wishes. Keep in mind these regulations, laws and other standard banking practices go back to the great depression, when many banks suffered from all of their customers withdrawing all of their money out at the same time with no protection for either the bank or their customers.

what law is this that you speak of.......the law of no running on said bank?.....I have never heard of such a thing, and that video did not in any way appear to be a 'run' on a bank, looked like a couple of people, period. Only way those couple of people could have hurt the bank is if what the individual said earlier in the thread, "that they really have no liquid cash readily available".......then a few people pulling their money out would in fact be a problem. However, back to the point, what law is this that a bank has the right to stop a run on it? I just can't see how even a thousand people pulling their money out of BOA on the same day would hurt a bank as big as BOA. Sorry, not buying that there is an actual law that can prevent one person from pulling THEIR money out of a BANK, or two people or ten or thirty....it is THEIR MONEY.



That same bank sure as HELL wouldn't stop 30 people rushing to give them their money.....so why would the opposite be any different?

It is time to close all accounts at BoA and if they do not comply invade the place and demand that they allow you to close your accounts. Padlock yourself to the doors and disrupt the flow of traffic in and out.

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1


Sorry buddy, I am still confused by why any of that would be necessary.......it is your money, you have only allowed them to hold it......you did not give them the money to do with as they wish...you only gave it to them to hold it...they may use it during that period, but if you wish it back, they promised it would be available at your whim, not theirs.

Write a cheque to yourself for cash or to a family member for the full amount of the account and that wipes the balance clean and when they try charging an overdraft fees refuse to pay it.

Let the account go stale for like 3 months and due to inactivity they'd be forced to close it. They cannot attach a lien to your home for a mere $25!

the headline of this thread

is going to be a very common scenario most Americans face in the months to come.

Funds not available for withdrawal at this time.

our computers are down, whatever the excuse, it doesnt really matter except banks are gonna run wit it, sooner or later!

reply to post by GeorgiaGirl

i will agree with most aspects of your post, however, regarding BoA ... they DID try to foreclose on properties they did not ever invest in ... they offered friends of mine $2000.00 to move out voluntarily so they could assume the property of which they had no legal, contractual or shifted (sold derivative) ownership of said property.

BofA are the dirtiest of the bunch ... they are always posting payments prior to deposits just to generate potential overdraft fees even though the deposit arrived first. Just because their posting process changed doesn't mean the funds were unavailable, they were simply not posted in a chronological sequence. how does that become the fault of the account holder?

yes, many foreclosures were proper and necessary but BofA has a greater tendency to over-reach in every aspect of their business.
If you have any funds there, move 'em before you can't.

Great point, their fuzzy accounting is border line criminal.....example:

you have 220 dollars in your account.....On that day you deposit 300 dollars at noon.
you make 5 charges against your account on the next day.
charge 1 at 8am for coffee and bagel: 2.50
charge 2 at 9am for parking: 8.00
charge 3 at 12pm for lunch 12.00
charge 4 at 4 for the cell phone 80.00
charge 5 at 4:30 for the rent 200.00

Thinking you have 520 in the account, their spreadsheet is different. it follows
220-200=20-80=-60-12=-82-8=-90-2.50=-92.50

now you are in the whole 92.50 + average overdraft fee of 32 a pop times 4=128......so you are now -220.50.....then two days later that 300 you deposited posts, which leaves you 79.50....

They are horrible about this stuff, and the joke, they will come up with any excuse to justify running the numbers like this. I used a credit card merchant service, and it would batch me with like 20 charges at 10 and 20 cents.....yes, 10 cents charges......I never knew when they would post, and they hit on 25th of the month, I wasn't watching the account, and a number of other things posted a few days later....However, they all got attached to the same date. However, they ran them in order largest to smallest. So by the time it got to the 20 small things 10 and 20 cents....it was dinging 32 dollars every pop, even though those charges came in days before......If they had done it by time/date stamp on the transaction, I would have had only one overdraft charge. total scam, and they have a number of excuses as to why it is that way, yet none of them would be acceptable in reality. That happened once, then a few months later, it was a different sequence, and they had a different excuse....I tried to explain that wasn't how they explained it to me last time, and i was told I was wrong......You receive a refund to your charge/debit card, it takes 3-10 days to clear into your account....why is that, when it is exactly the same process as a charge to your account. It takes seconds for the money to be removed from your account, but when KFC gives you a refund, it takes days for it to get back into your account even though the process is identical, just a negative instead of a positive before the numbers......just more time that your money sits in their accounts making them more money.

In regards to the bailouts: That was one of the worst slaps in the face the American people have ever been dealt. The system is supposed to take care of itself. If BofA can't manage it's business and it goes belly up, then it gives opportunity to another bank to rise up, and hopefully it wont make the same mistakes. How is the market supposed to get better if you throw money into a greedy sink-hole? Why was so much of our money given to these banks, and so many families thrown out of their homes by those same banks? F#$% this.

Originally posted by pointr97
Great point, their fuzzy accounting is border line criminal.....example:

you have 220 dollars in your account.....On that day you deposit 300 dollars at noon.
you make 5 charges against your account on the next day.
charge 1 at 8am for coffee and bagel: 2.50
charge 2 at 9am for parking: 8.00
charge 3 at 12pm for lunch 12.00
charge 4 at 4 for the cell phone 80.00
charge 5 at 4:30 for the rent 200.00

Thinking you have 520 in the account, their spreadsheet is different. it follows
220-200=20-80=-60-12=-82-8=-90-2.50=-92.50




now you are in the whole 92.50 + average overdraft fee of 32 a pop times 4=128......so you are now -220.50.....then two days later that 300 you deposited posts, which leaves you 79.50....

They are horrible about this stuff, and the joke, they will come up with any excuse to justify running the numbers like this. I used a credit card merchant service, and it would batch me with like 20 charges at 10 and 20 cents.....yes, 10 cents charges......I never knew when they would post, and they hit on 25th of the month, I wasn't watching the account, and a number of other things posted a few days later....However, they all got attached to the same date. However, they ran them in order largest to smallest. So by the time it got to the 20 small things 10 and 20 cents....it was dinging 32 dollars every pop, even though those charges came in days before......If they had done it by time/date stamp on the transaction, I would have had only one overdraft charge. total scam, and they have a number of excuses as to why it is that way, yet none of them would be acceptable in reality. That happened once, then a few months later, it was a different sequence, and they had a different excuse....I tried to explain that wasn't how they explained it to me last time, and i was told I was wrong......You receive a refund to your charge/debit card, it takes 3-10 days to clear into your account....why is that, when it is exactly the same process as a charge to your account. It takes seconds for the money to be removed from your account, but when KFC gives you a refund, it takes days for it to get back into your account even though the process is identical, just a negative instead of a positive before the numbers......just more time that your money sits in their accounts making them more money.

Exactly! I tried several times explaining that to my wife (who will side with Satan himself rather than me). Then, I received a notification in the mail that a class action lawsuit was filed against bank of america because of the "reordering of transactions" causing multiple overdraft fees. Apparently they have settled and are supposed to give money back to customers this November (if I recall). Maybe the new $5 fee is to offset the lawsuit.

Originally posted by UniverSoul
i was under the impression they had no legal right to do this?
greedy banks make me sick

It's probably in your contract (that nobody reads) when you open an account. You'd be surprised what is in there they can hold your money for up to 6 months and not give it to you and you agreed to it by signing the contract...

reply to post by notquiteright


absolutely.......in today's technological state, the systems are totally automated, there is zero reason why anything needs to be 'fixed' or 're-ordered'.....there is no reason for pending or holds....well, maybe one or two, but not as a standard......it is just a bunch of 1's and 0's going over the net, with time/date coding, we should know exactly how much is in our account at any one time.....Yet, I have chase now, and I LOVE that I have a ledger balance and an available balance.....i'm sorry, but in the old days, I could understand the elapsed time to clear a check, but that is a moot point now. They will put a 3 day hold on a check written to you on the same bank you bank with.....it is an internal transfer...seriously? It takes them 3 days to alt-tab to another account to see if that account has the funds? Oh wait, if the money is in your account they have to pay you that interest, if it is in their account they pay themselves that interest........theft, pure and simple.

reply to post by HIWATT
they did just that walked in and said we are out, give us our money, and BOA did but you can not get what they do not have money that is

Pallavi Gogoi, AP Business Writer, On Monday October 3, 2011, 4:06 pm EDT

NEW YORK (AP) -- The smart money is split on Bank of America.

Big investors George Soros and John Paulson are selling shares of the nation's largest bank. But Bruce Berkowitz, Thomas Brown and other fund managers find the stock so attractive that they are buying up boatloads. Billionaire investor Warren Buffett also invested $5 billion in the bank.
So, who's right?

BOA and Buffett, you the account holder/owner are not, as the saying goes "you can not get blood out of a turnip, but you can try" so ya go get anew account at a different CU, banks are dead or are dieing, and see if BOA will pay out the funds or see if they say "ISF"
PS a savings account is the smart thing to do, you know when and where your money goes from your hand to the open hand, no fees

Originally posted by hawkiye

Originally posted by UniverSoul
i was under the impression they had no legal right to do this?
greedy banks make me sick

It's probably in your contract (that nobody reads) when you open an account. You'd be surprised what is in there they can hold your money for up to 6 months and not give it to you and you agreed to it by signing the contract...

do you think seeming we may have to wait 6 months there is a way people can go to their banks now and advise them they may want to withdraw so that 6 months has started in a sense..just as a backup
would be good to hear from someone with real banking law knowledge

im lucky im with a credit union

reply to post by UniverSoul
did you get a atm service fee or a debit use fee notice if so go to a different CU, just some up front knowledge and experience with hidden fee CUs and banks, all this reminds me of my _ _ bank account the first letter of said bank is U, this said bank had all of the bells and whistles you could think of, but when was all said and done, you owed them come payday, every payday. seems BOA learned form them

Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by UniverSoul

 

did you get a atm service fee or a debit use fee notice if so go to a different CU, just some up front knowledge and experience with hidden fee CUs and banks, all this reminds me of my _ _ bank account the first letter of said bank is U, this said bank had all of the bells and whistles you could think of, but when was all said and done, you owed them come payday, every payday. seems BOA learned form them

nah my cu is top notch. you only have to pay a fee if its the atm provider charging you..which is why they have their own atms that dont charge you
haha i dont think ive ever heard of a bank that doesnt have all the bells and whistles according to them.

The good old, tried and true Fractional Reserve banking system!

The banks are so over-leveraged, they probably hold less than a single figure percentage of assets in cash reserves. Deregulation / self regulation and pure greed and gaming the systems over many years has led to the situation we have today. All under the watchful eyes (sarcasm intended) of government watchdogs, usually staffed with people from the very institutions they are supposed to regulate and keep in line.

The banks, and thus the government, who answer to them, will use everything in their power to protect themselves from uppity peasants wanting their money. What makes me laugh is that the police will happily get a hard-on at the prospect of beating up and macing a few protestors on behalf of the banks, but are too ignorant to see that they too are being screwed.

Also, as long as people keep a small amount in an account to keep it in the black, then why not just quietly open another account somewhere else, redirect any payments - from employer etc - or direct debits to this new account and leave the old one alone? Do it stealthily, under the radar, instead of turning up en-masse at the bank and giving them an excuse to get the police involved.

reply to post by UniverSoul
well i know that now did not know it then, first bank account BTW, listened to all that were "experienced" ya more like, we are fools so we will make you a fool as well, well i got the last laugh, i just pay in cash.

reply to post by Britguy
ya the housing played a big part of it, bank gives loan of $150,000 home worth 75,000, home now foreclosed, worth 0$ now.