Bank of America Scandal

[pendragon1998]

I don't know if any of you have heard of this mess, but I think it's relevant to any of us who gets paid by check for our coin sales:

 

 

The Essentials (from Clarkhoward.com:

How the Bank of America blunder went down:

By now, you’ve probably heard the story of the San Francisco man who was arrested and jailed when he tried to verify the validity of a check at Bank of America branch. Clark found out about this story and talked with the man, Matthew Shinnick, who has spent about $14,000 in legal fees to clear his name. It all started when Shinnick posted two bicycles for sale on Cragislist and received a check from a man for more than the cost of the bicycles. He went into his bank to see if the check was legitimate and verify that there was money in the person’s account. He was told it was a valid account and so he cashed the check. At that point, BOA employees called the police and Shinnick was arrested on fraud charges because the check was actually a phony. He had no idea that the real criminal had used the name of a legitimate company to fake a check. So, Matthew sat in the bank branch for hours while police figured out what to do and then spent the night in jail. Once he got out, he wanted to clear his name legally so the arrest would not come back to haunt him. He had to hire attorneys to do this and it cost him nearly $14,000. He then went to Bank of America and asked that the bank cover his fees because it was the bank’s error. But so far BOA has refused. This kind of treatment sends the message that banks only care about their bottom line and nothing about their customers. It's unacceptable and it's time to fight back.

 

Clark Howard, a radio financial advisor (and a really stand-up guy) has gone toe-to-toe with Bank of America on this. He's really mad about this.

 

Clark Howard is asking everyone who (a) feels that BOA is far in the wrong and (b) has an account with BOA, to withdraw all their money from BOA as a way of telling the bank that this sort of behavior and lack of all decency toward the customers will not be tolerated. If Bank of America was a country, they'd have the 60-something-ith largest economy in the world - - and they won't repay this guy's $14,000. Clark even offered to pay half, but BOA said NO!

 

Thus far, I think people have pledged to withdraw $25 million from BOA. If you withdraw your cash, tell the tellers (respectfully) why you're doing it and tell Clark you did it at clarkhelpsmatthew@yahoo.com

 

This is relevant to us here, because what this guy did - go into a branch and ask if a check was valid - is exactly the same thing that hundreds of us do on a regular basis with this hobby.

 

I took out my money.

[Stanley]

We have been getting warnings around my area via newspaper for about a year now about this scam or a similar scam.

 

They are calling it “The Nigerian Connection” Do a Google search if you like.

[pendragon1998]

Spider, you're missing the point. The guy went in and asked "is the check valid?" The teller said "yes, please endorse it." The moment he did, a couple of cops arrested him. The fact that he had a bogus check wasn't the problem, it was the bank's handling of the situation.

[Stanley]

I got it.

[DC Dawg]

In my "real life," I work in the Information Security and Assurance field. Within the industry, Bank of America is known to have many problems in the way they handle information and work (or not work) with those who have identifcation theft problems. In fact, when I teach infosec, I use BoA as an example of how "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" with over a dozen articles from the last three years on their infosec and privacy-related transgressions.

 

One of my credit card issuers was bought out by BoA. I will be closing that account because I refuse to do business with BoA based on their infosec and privacy practices.

 

On a numismatic note, Washington, DC-area roll hunters have recalled stories of having problems with obtaining rolls from BoA. A local collector told me that he moved his account to another bank becase BoA gave him problems with half-dollars--the did not like when he returned unrolled halves after searching rolls.

 

Scott

[jgrinz]

I am cancelling my credit card also ... MBNA was the best when it came to internet related problems - Now they are owned by BoA which I hate and have for a long time. Now I will have to look for another card any suggestions ??

[cpm9ball]

We have been dealing with the same managerial staff at our BoA branch for more than 25 years. I never have a problem ordering or returning coins whether they are loose or rolled. The tellers don't even question how much may be in a bag or box. They just accept the amount I tell them. If I needed a large sum of cash immediately, I could get it in 30 minutes or so. If I needed an extra safety deposit box for 30 days, they would provide it at no charge. The entire staff has always taken the time to get to know all of the customers, not just me. Maybe other branches are not that considerate, but for me, I'm staying at my Bank of America.

 

By the way, the bank manager, the assistant manager and the head teller have asked if they could attend the "wake" we have scheduled for Mom so they could pay their respects.

 

Chris

[WinstonWare]

Er….troubling. Many if not most people in Boston use BoA. We use to have Fleet Bank but that was bought by BoA.

[Scavenger]

Was part of the story left out? because from what I read, the guy trying to cash the check did nothing wrong. As far as being detained for a few hours and spending the night in jail - the police department would pay dearly for that.

[pendragon1998]

No that's it in a nut shell - basically, BOA is hiding behind a CA law that says that banks can't be sued for false arrest. They refuse to pay out. The judge who saw the guy's case immediately dismissed all charges, but he had to pay ~$4500 bail and ~9000 to clear his new criminal record.

 

He says all he wants is an apology from BOA and a refund of his expenses. He even said he'd sign away his right to sue again. BOA refuses. Although they are threatening to sue Clark Howard!

[EZ_E]

I am cancelling my credit card also ... MBNA was the best when it came to internet related problems - Now they are owned by BoA which I hate and have for a long time. Now I will have to look for another card any suggestions ??

 

That's a shame! I have a MBNA acct and have had no complaints. I previously cancelled my BofA acct years ago for similar behavior.

[jtryka]

Luckily there are no BofA branches anywhere near me.

[jgrinz]

Reason is they have already changed thier policy - They used to be a "Credit the Customer account first" and let the vendor proof facts on the CC charge.

You make a complaint they deduct it right away and hash out the details. They no longer do that since the take over ... It stays on the bill until resolved accruing interest and penalties because obviously you not going to pay a fraudulent charge.Thus effecting your credit rating

[ldhair]

9000 to clear his new criminal record.

How would he have a criminal record? The judge threw it out. Something is not being told here. I have too much going on with Bank of America to jump on this band wagon.

[pendragon1998]

He had an arrest record, due to his being arrested. He needed to have his record expunged and there was a legal process he had to go through to get that done. That process cost him money. BOA should pay for his costs.

 

You should note - BOA isn't saying that this didn't happen or that they didn't do anything wrong. They're saying, "we don't have to do anything for him." Since when did doing what is right depend on people having to do it? It is right for them to repay him for his expenses at the very least and they're using a legal technicality to excuse themselves from doing the right thing.

 

What blows my mind is that for $14,000 they could avoid all of this bad press and lost interest on the millions being withdrawn. They are a multi-billion (if not trillion) dollar company. What's $14,000 to them?

 

I don't intend to give them any more of my business if that's they way they regard their customers, because it could just as easily be me or you.

[ldhair]

Ok I can understand that. I can see where a person would wish to see an arrest record erased. I would probably do the same.

 

That being said, please consider this.

BofA was obligated to bring in law enforcement when the bogus check came to the teller. The police made the arrest based on the facts in front of them.The bank did not make that decision.

 

The truth is I don't feel BofA did anything wrong.

They did what was right from the start. Why would they be responsible for the actions of others? As a normal they would have had nothing to say about the situation and that is the correct response in todays world of legal junk.

 

There is more to this story than we know.

[pendragon1998]

Well, Larry, I really don't want to get into an argument about this, but I disagree with you. Nobody seems to be disputing the facts. What I find particularly telling is that M.S. went in and asked them, "is this a valid check?" Clearly he wasn't trying to pass a fake check. He was doing what any person would do when they get a check they suspect to be bogus. The teller then proceeded to lie to him and say, "Yes, the check's good. Endorse it, please." As soon as he endorsed it, the police that were called by the bank arrested him.

 

My wife is a bank teller with another large megabank. She has reviewed this story and has told me that no teller in their right mind would try and have the man arrested. Furthermore, as soon as MS went before a judge, the case was immediately thrown out. Obviously, the judge would be able to consider all of the facts and determine if there had been a crime committed by MS. The judge clearly did not believe this to be the case.

 

So now we have a BOA teller lying to MS and having him arrested. We have a judge reviewing the case and immediately dismissing it on grounds of fact. We have BOA stating not that they did nothing wrong, but rather that they are shielded from being sued on the grounds of false arrest - which they do not dispute happened. We have a man who was booked, spent the night in jail, and spent $14,000 in legal fees to post bond and to clear his record - a record which, if not cleared, could have had serious impact on his future employability, amongst other factors - and all of these things when he was, in fact, innocent. He had done nothing wrong and suffered a number of ills despite that fact.

 

We are finally left with a man who has suffered significant financial damages as the result of improper actions by Bank of America. He has (quite nicely, I think) offered to sign away his rights to sue BOA in exchange for an apology and reimbursement for the fees he incurred as a result of their ineptitude. BOA has basically given him the finger.

 

That is why I now refuse to bank with BOA. Frankly, I think that these uncontested facts speak for themselves. If you can't see that, then I don't see any point in further discussion of the matter; we just won't see eye to eye.

[EZ_E]

Ok I can understand that. I can see where a person would wish to see an arrest record erased. I would probably do the same.

 

That being said, please consider this.

BofA was obligated to bring in law enforcement when the bogus check came to the teller. The police made the arrest based on the facts in front of them.The bank did not make that decision.

 

The truth is I don't feel BofA did anything wrong.

They did what was right from the start. Why would they be responsible for the actions of others? As a normal they would have had nothing to say about the situation and that is the correct response in todays world of legal junk.

 

There is more to this story than we know.

 

Consider this. A man goes into a bank branch to cash in a large quantity of Eisenhower dollars. The man calls the police because he believes that the man is trying to passed counterfeit money. This really happened not too long ago.

 

So, because the boneheads at the bank perceived this as an apparent violation of the law then this made them right?

 

No, of course not. There is right and wrong and common sense. I have refused to deal with BofA for over a decade and have not changed my mind. I am disappointed that MBNA is now owned by them. I will most likely cancel this longstanding platinum account for this fact.

[ldhair]

It's not an argument it never was.

The first post said.

He was told it was a valid account and so he cashed the check.

If that is what he ask, the bank did not lie. It was a valid account.

If the bank said "Yes, the check's good. Endorse it, please." that's a different matter, but that was not part of the original post. Do you know for sure that's what the teller really said? If so the teller was in the wrong.

 

Please ask your wife what her bank's procedure is when a bogus check hits the counter. No bank names please and I understand if she would not wish to say. This is not something most banks would like to post on a forum .

 

My point was that the teller had no part in the decision if the police made an arrest. The police make that decision based on the facts in front of them and the judge made the right decision to trash the case.

 

I feel this is one of those deal we would have to have been there to really understand it.

[pendragon1998]

No, it wasn't a valid account - it was an account marked in the system as being used for fraud. The quote from the website was a paraphrase. I've heard the exchange related several times - obviously I couldn't have heard the actual exchange - but the jist of it is he asks "is it a good check" they say "the check's good. Endorse it." He does. He gets arrested.

 

My wife says that what her bank would do is probably call the police - not to have him arrested, but to simply report the bad check. She says that they would just tell the person inquiring whether their check was good that the funds weren't in the account and that they needed to return to the party who issued them the check and get their funds in another manner.

 

Whatever the original exchange of words was, it's clear that MS didn't commit a crime - the judge reviewed the case and immediately threw it out and had him released.

[bochiman]

No that's it in a nut shell - basically, BOA is hiding behind a CA law that says that banks can't be sued for false arrest. They refuse to pay out. The judge who saw the guy's case immediately dismissed all charges, but he had to pay ~$4500 bail and ~9000 to clear his new criminal record.

 

He says all he wants is an apology from BOA and a refund of his expenses. He even said he'd sign away his right to sue again. BOA refuses. Although they are threatening to sue Clark Howard!

 

 

Ok, the $9k was to clear his name. I've never been arrested, but I thought bail money came back to you if you didn't jump ship? What's the $4500 really for? Was that his entire bail amount or did he have to borrow a larger amount and that is the amount he paid to borrow it?

 

Also, understanding there is a procedure to have this taken off his record, it sounds like he could have gotten someone for a lot less than $9k.

[pendragon1998]

As I understand it, the $4,500 was the fee he paid to get $45,000 in bond money. I think the way it works is you pay the bond company a percentage of the bond amount, which they keep as their fee. They are reponsible for paying the full amount to the court if you don't show, so they have an interest in making sure you do. At least that's what I get from watching Dog the Bounty Hunter

 

As to whether the $9,000 was more than average, I have no idea, having never been forced to retain a lawyer myself.

[ldhair]

10% of the bond is about right. The bonding company may also ask you to sign something to attach any property you may own to the deal. If you skip and they loose the bond to the court, they want a way to get the money back.

 

The lawyer may ask you to sign something as well. They all want their money in the end. If you get billed 9K there is very little you can do, other than pay it. I think the guy took a bath on this deal. I don't feel the bank will ever pay anything. It's an interesting situation.