How Banks Make The Bogus Check Scam So Easy
from the no-one-takes-the-blame dept
It's been many years since we first heard about the now popular variation on the typical Nigerian 419 scam. It involved sending someone a large check, often after winning a big ticket item in an online auction. The check would be for much more than the winning bid, and the sender would make some excuse and simply ask the seller to send back the difference after the check cleared. This works because banks are required to clear checks quickly -- and most people assume that once a check "clears" that means it's valid. So they send off thousands of dollars, only to discover a few days later that the check was a fake. That means they not only don't have the money for whatever they sold, but they're also out the extra thousands they sent the scammer. The victims in such scams often are suspicious, but because many banks tell them the check is fine after it's cleared, they feel they're safe. In one case, a few years ago, we even wrote about a lawsuit between a bank and a scam victim over this issue. However, it's amazing that it's taken this long for people to start questioning why banks continue to tell people checks are okay after they've cleared -- and why they don't do more to protect people from such scams. The banks blame the law, noting that they're required to make the money available before they can actually verify the legitimacy of the check -- but it would seem like banks could do a much better job reminding people that the checks may not be legitimate even after they've cleared.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
hehe
Frist post?? ^.^
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: hehe
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: hehe
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Banks
Either way its going to be on you.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lets just say I spend my lunch hour on the phone with the bank today and should I still have to pay those fees, my account gets closed...
To think, they almost had a college loan out of me for next springs semester...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That petrol stations staff have all but disapeared since the place was shut down.
Back on topic: I still think this would be a good idea. I might give it a go with a small amount :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Bank of America zeroed out the account, then because the account was less than $500 (or something) they charged me a small amount in "service fees". However, since my account was then overdrawn, they charged me an overdraft fee. And sent me a nice page of paper explaining how to balance a checkbook. A couple of weeks later I got a threatening letter that said they'd turn my info over to some loansharks (ok, a legal corporation) who would make it impossible for me to get a bank account anywhere and who would charge me $350 for the privilege.
It took about three hours on the phone to fix that (I should have charged them for my time, but then they'd charge me for their time and so on) and I thought the account was closed. But no, somehow the account ended up with a small balance that they promptly charged me a service fee on and while its not overdrawn quite yet, I know its coming.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Big Banking Is Robbery
BofA also wouldn't cash the check even though it was written on their bank. Of course they would charge you $5 to cash any check but wouldn't cash one for that amount.
Wachovia will cash a check written on their bank with a thumbprint and won't charge you anything.
After closing a checking account I had with Centura I had an automatic bill payment clear which Centura paid then charged me a penalty for. They sent me a nice nasty letter to inform me. When I called, they couldn't take a payment by phone so I had to go into the branch. When I went in, the only funds I had were in a check I had recieved for some work I had done. They wouldn't cash the check so I could pay the account off and finalize everything and were pretty nasty to me for even suggesting the idea.
Needless to say, my credit union is my best friend now. I walk in, deposit a check, go home and check my account online 5 minutes later and the money is there to do whatever I want to with. No problem cashing checks and 4 points better for my car loan than any bank. No fee checking with no balance limit. The big banks can kiss my butt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Big Banking Is Robbery
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A friend of mine
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A friend of mine
This loophole has been utilised so many times by fraudstars that many a bank has come out to a solution by making available 5 - 10 % of the cheque amount and notifying the account holder about the proceedings that it would make the funds on hold to a certain time .
I think this a a good workaround .. although it makes the life a little difficult when u require funds fast but get a hold of 10 -15 days of more . Thats a cost to save from fraud .. usually the account holder pays off .
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A friend of mine
What did he do to?
We filed a complaint with interpol and the Attorney General. Because of the law loophole, we are being held liable. I went to my Representative and, at the moment, I am gathering information so I can write to Barney Frank and the Finance Committee.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A friend of mine
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A friend of mine
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: A friend of mine
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
banks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: banks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: banks
Wrong credit unions are just as bad
Someone deposited a chec by lectronic
IN to my account is onto know this person never did
My credit union NEVER HELD CHECK TO MAKE SURE IT CLEARED
THEY MADE THE FUNDS AVAILABLE
THEY NEVER WARNED ME ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF A SCAM
THEY ALLOWED ME TO WITHDRAW THEN THEY HELD MY SOCIAL SECURITY CHECK AS RANSOM FORCING ME TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT UNDER STRESS AS TO PAYING BACK THE CREDIT UNION (MASS BAY CREDIT UNION)
MY QUESTION IS WHERE IS MY SAFETY AND SECURITY IN DOING BUSINESS AS A CLIENT WITH SUCH ?
IS IT NOT THE CREDIT UNION / BANKS TO WATCH OUT FOR THEIR CUSTOMERS ?
THEY MUST Benter F.D.I.C PROTECTED RIGHT OR AT LEAST MY ACCOUNT SHOULD HAVE BEEN
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Aren't banks insured?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Aren't banks insured?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Aren't banks insured?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How much did they pay you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How ironic that Brad's initials stand for B.M
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How ironic that Brad's initials stand for B.M
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: How ironic that Brad's initials stand for
Do they teach spelling there?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: How ironic that Brad's initials stand for
Unless perhaps you work for a school that specializes in plants of the genus Ligustrum which are commonly used for hedges?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bank delays
Man, when I bounce a check, it bounces instantly. How come it takes thirty days for a bank to cover themselves?
(End of the story: I told them they had to put the money back in my account now because it was their liability and I was moving that week. They refused. I called an attorney. He told me the five magic words. I called the bank back and said my attorney told me that they had to put the money back in my account now. They did.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bank delays
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How ironic that Brad's initials stand for B.M
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
checks
even a series of forged checks that, if credit crad purchases, the bank's fraud unit would be onto, and calling up the customer (which are almost always legitimate purchases..)
and then banks have the aduacity to not reimburse, unless the victim takes criminal action against the perpetrator. even tho it was basically the banks' fault all along.
AND finally, banks will NOT even attest that the instrument was forged before the victim takes criminal action, leaving the victim open to accusations of false testimony..
it's an utter disgrace..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How ironic that Brad's initials stand for B.M
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Victims
I always laugh at people that get swindled in scams. These ones seem a little more tricky, took some real ingenuity. Here is a thought, if there is any stranger who wants you to do something monetary that will benefit you some and them a lot more, be a little more skeptical. I know my deposit slips at my bank state that the funds received are subject to verification. The atm even states it when you are making a deposit. Whether or not staff remind you at the counter is a bit blurry, as I don't do it too often. People who bank should know all about this and think a bit. I could pull up to an atm and insert an empty deposit envelope and type in a $300 deposit to my account and withdraw that amount. The bank will put that amount in your account and it will show on your receipt but you sure will be sorry when they open that envelope. Regardless, I still laugh at victims... until I'm the victim. People should just accept that they've been had instead of trying to pass the blame to someone else. You are the ass!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Common people
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Common people
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bottom line is
These are antiquated means of payment and are unnecessary in the 21st century.
The last time I wrote a cheque was for paying rent several years ago, and then my landlord got an Interac machine and I could pay by debit card.
Who would ever accept a cheque from someone these days for payment of something. If I am selling something, like a used computer, its cash or nothing. With access to debit machines these days, there is never a time when someone can't get the money out of their account when they need it (unless they don't have that money to begin with). Heck, they can even email me the funds between banks or use Pay Pal.
If you cash a cheque where the linked account doesn't have enough funds, YOUR charged with an NSF charge. The bank considers you a criminal. So your stuck with a $25 charge AND no money for that computer you sold. Good luck trying to get money back.
The amount of time it takes for a bank to clear a cheque is ridiculous too, 3 - 5 business days? I can pay bills online and its immediate (from the bank's end).
Banks should simply end cheques, period. It would probably reduced operating costs and would end an obvious source of fraud that the banks have to deal with every day. If your some yokel or Grandma that fires off a cheque to pay for everything, time to get into the 21st century and get that debit card and learn about online and telephone banking.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bottom line is
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Bottom line is
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Bottom line is
Get real. This is the internet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bottom line is
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bottom line is
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What banks are these?
In 10 years I've never had a bank do anything that you mentioned. What banks are doing this so I can avoid them?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What banks are these?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
no way to win
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: no way to win
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: no way to win
NOT.....that was Wachovia!
I immediately contacted and sent copies of everything to Attorney General.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: no way to win
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
speaking of Bank of America sucking...
I had a really lovely time dealing with Bank of America recently. I'm a poor student, and I had about $30 in my account one night. I go to dinner and the bill is about $10, including 20% tip. Because I am terrible about having cash, I wind up using my debit card three more times the next day for various things that cost around $15 total. Imagine my surprise when I check online, and there are FOUR overdraft fees for each of those transactions at $33 each. In short order I realize that the restaurant has charged me $35 (server decided to up her tip a bit, heh). They agree to do a charge-back, but when I ask them about the overdrafts they caused, they say "that's between you and your bank". Hilariously, when I called B of A, I get told "this is between you and the restaurant, they should reimburse you."
No matter how many times I tried to explain to each of the (about 10 different) people I spoke to at B of A that the overdraft was a mistake and they did not have a right to charge me $142 I was basically told to go f*** myself. Not only were they unhelpful, they were in incredibly rude. Only when I threatened to close my account did they agree to take the charges off. It took me over a week to get this done. Ridiculous!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
banks are the DEVIL
so , in all technicality, im am under in the bank. BUT. the bank will flat out tell you that it will be the NEXT business day (after that midnight nontheless) for it to be pulled from the account. (which is .. AFTER i get paid!). but because, a 'hold' is in effect, they go ahead and charge me for the uderdraft fee. and them im in the hole.
so i go to the bank. to straighten it out. they say, that the bank statment, will be the result of weather i get my refund. so i get my statment. and it basicy shows that if the damn bank didn't charge me an underdraft fee, i would have never gone under!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Check 21
If you are stupid enough to take an international check/check written on a non-US FDIC bank, then you deserve what you get.... when will people start taking responsibility for their own damn actions instead of trying to blame everybody but the actual culprit....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
$40 in the account
Deposit $70 Tues. before the end of the business day.
Use my checkcard on Wed. night for $50(total) in about 3 differerent stores/shops.
I check my account the folliowing Monday and my balance is -$166.
Even the bank I work for is a bunch of sharks. $29 for an NSF charge? The credit union that I keep my money in only charges $15. FYI even though banks handle your money they are still a business so making sure the Board of Directors/Shareholders or whoever come out on top with lots money is their NUMBER 1 priority. Don't let them cloud your mind with that customer service crap.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bank Fees
In hindsight, I am very thankful for Wachovia. They never ditched me as a customer, so long as I paid the fees back in a timely manner (week or two), the account was cleared up and I was on my way. I believe I may have been "flagged" as a problem account for a few months, but after that period, they are as nice as can be.
I hear all the time about banks sending letters of outrage to their customers and closing accounts arbitrarly without a phone call and I never had said problems. So despite the price I paid (fees), and yes they may have been lower at a Credit Union, I feel the fees I paid were just in the name of good business... and I was provided a valuable service by paying said fees... that being I can still use that account to this day.
As for the fees themselves, if you are in the midst of a situation very similar to my past situation... you cannot honestly say that it's not your fault. If you have $40 in your account, and you spend $50... regardless of a deposit... well, it's not there is it? Playing the time game (well... it will be there by the time it posts) is not only dangerous, but more than likely... illegal. I'm no lawyer, so I won't begin with the consequences part... I just now the price I paid and it was a hefty one... all becuase you were "thirsty?" and wanted the 7-11 $1.09 special? Drink some water! And if you really are that desperate, well then don't deposit the money in the bank! A little cash in your pocket is never a bad thing unless you can't handle yourself... well in that case, there isn't much to be said about this issue at all then.
Otherwise, you should be aware by now that every bank will tell you that if you don't get your CASH deposit in by a certain time (4pm Wachovia), it may or may not post. Cash usually does, but checks can take a while, and the posting only occurs on business days. So if you deposit on Friday at 4:10pm, well it's not going to post until Early tuesday morning after the Monday business day. So if you were depending on that money for Saturday... your alot better off keeping the cash, or cashing the check versus a deposit.
And I agree with above poster, PayPal rules, checks are bad. After I got a decent job and a contributing member of society again, I burned my checks. I don't plan to ever play that game again.
Good luck.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bank Fees
The "Double Hold Bank Scam”.
This is where a bank like Wachovia will change the date of your actual debit card purchase when they pay the charge to reflect a day or two after the actual date it was charged. This creates a temporary double hold on the available funds, which does not appear on the account but it reduces the available funds behind the scene not visible to the client. When the bank posts the payment(s), they change the initial charge date to the double hold date. However, the account summary still reflects a balance and date of when the initial hold was applied. Since the client only sees the initial hold on the account summary, they are not the wiser.
After the double hold is applied on a specific date after the initial charge date, any additional debit card charges or checks posted on that specific double hold date may take the account into overdraft and overdraft fees are applied. When the bank makes the payment, the double hold is removed and the initial charge date is changed on the posted payment to the double hold date (The new hold date is then recorded on the right hand side of the payment). If a client calls the bank to inquire about the overdraft charges, they are told that when charges came in on the double hold date (new charge date), there was not enough available balance to pay the charge. Therefore, they were overdrawn and thus the overdraft fees. If the client asks why the initial charge date was changed to the double hold date, they are told that the merchant double billed on that new date. However, there is no record of the double billing and the account summary still displays the initial charge date and balance.
The following example will demonstrate how the “Double Hold Banking Scam” can take a $100 bank balance and only $90 in charges and transfer it into a negative -$25 bank balance when the actual balance should be $10.
The “Double Hold Bank Scam” Example:
Starting Available Balance: $100
Charge#1 $60
Charge#2 $30
4/18/07 Initial hold of $60 - This is noted in the debit card hold section and the account summary reflects a
Posted Balance of $100 and an Available Balance of $40
4/18/07 Available balance $40
4/19/07 Double hold $60 - This is NOT noted anywhere on the client's account and the posted balance and
available balance remain the same. At this time, there is an actual hold behind the
scene of $120 NOT $60.
4/19/07 Available balance $40
4/20/07 Initial hold $30 - The account is taken into overdraft yet this is NOT recorded on the account at this
time. Nothing looks out of the ordinary.
4/20/07 Available balance $10
4/24/07 Posted payment $60 (4/19/07) – The date of the initial charge is changed to 4/19/07; but the account
summary still reflects an available balance of $40 on 4/18/07.
If the client questions the changed charge date, they are told that
the merchant double billed. Yet the account has no record of the
double billing and the account summary still displays a date and
balance of when the initial charge was applied ($40 on 4/18/07).
In addition, the debit card hold section is deleted and there is
no available record.
4/24/07 Posted payment $30 – The bank pays this and charges an overdraft fee of $35.
If a client calls to inquire why they were charged an overdraft fee when they
had enough money to cover the charges, they are told that on 4/20/07 when
the charge of $30 came in, they had charges that were on hold that reduced
their available balance to a level that took them into overdraft.
4/24/07 Available balance (-$25)
This is how the scam works to generate bank fees. This is a simple example. If you have some problem understanding it, add 10, 20 or 30+ transactions and the holds to it and see how complicated it gets to an average novice. It’s ingenious and extremely hard to detect in the middle of multiple transactions.
Since the bank does remove the temporary double hold and makes a single payment on the charge, the books even out. No client is the wiser and it would be extremely difficult to detect by any novice.
You can test this out for yourself. Get anyone with a Wachovia Bank Account and watch their accounts. It's best to use an account with lots of movement. I suggest you take computer snap shots of the "debit card hold" section because they delete them. When the bank posts the payments, compare the dates of the debit card holds you took snaps shots of to the date the bank notes they were initially charged. What you will notice is that Wachovia is changing the initial charge dates when they pay the charge. If you study it more carefully, you will see that they are temporarily double holding to take the account into overdraft.
This bank scam reminds me of the old scam cashiers play on people even today. You would give them $20 for something you purchased. They would ring it up for $10 and put the $20 in the cash register. Then they would give you change on the $10. Later, during their shift or when they close the cash register out, they would pocket the extra $10. Since they only rung up a $10 sale on the cash register, the cash register ribbon that records the sale even out with the cash in the register (They keep a tally of the amount they took from people in their head or write it down somewhere. It can amount to hundreds of dollars per day). If a customer notices that they just got ripped off, the cashier or the store owner goes through the cash register’s ribbon and looks at the charges. Since only $10 was entered, they can’t see it from the ribbon. However, if the cashier did not pocket it yet and the cash in the register is checked with the ribbon, it is uncovered. The cashier apologizes for the “mistake” and there is no proof of “intent” and there is no possession. They are simply looked at as bad cashiers and they are free to do it again and again, etc.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Bank Fees
But, the bank also puts a hold against your account for the same amount, and it remains until that charge clears, (2 to 4 days)So effectively the bank has a hold on money that they have already adjusted your account balance for. It's during that hold period that they get you to go into overdraft. Because their computer factors in the hold amounts against the balance that they already adjusted. How they can have a hold on an already adjusted account balance and factor that hold amount in for justification to charge overdraft fees is beyond me. They get billions in overdraft fees each year through their creative accounting methods and it seems that nobody can touch them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's my opinion that banks are somewhat still stuck in the middle, between trying to help their customers and following their rules. But I have yet to see that Check 21 stuff work out to be what it was promised. And the least they can do is hand out pamphlets detailing these scam scenarios. As long as you're on top of your finances you should never have a problem...
BTW, Fifth Thirds (why isn't it 1 2/3rds?) sucks pretty hard.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bad Check Scam
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Direct Deposit Biatches
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Direct Deposit Biatches
I know it's supposed to be in case they over pay or accidentally run payroll twice (yeah right)
What would they do if it was a live check? they'd either stop payment, or they'd have to ask me for it back.
I'd give it back, but I don't like the idea that they can just reach in and take whenever they feel justified.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't Endorse Checks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Techdirt readers are such morons...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
whatever
the problem is that banks are processing thousands of checks each day, and there is no way to look over every check and verify its legitimacy. which is why a check can be "verified", but the owner of the account of which is was drawn on may not notice the item until later.
im not a bank apologist, but on this issue i understand the shortcomings banks have with processing checks, while trying to meet the demands of their customers.
and credit unions are no different. they may be have a "friendlier" feeling to them, but they are just as susceptible to check fraud.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Banks
My ex tried again and this time it worked, no prob right? A couple days later we got more money out and noticed that the machine charged us twice so we went to our bank to straighten the thing out.
The lady we talked to was courteous to the point
of inanity but was firm that it would take 45 days to
clear this up as the tapes for the ATM were only collected once a month(she called the ATM owner)
and then they would have to submit some kind of
report to get the money from them.I called the ATM
company and they told me that they already had a copy of the tape and the forms were already faxed over and they would release the funds within a week.
I waited the week I was told by the ATM company then called again to make sure and I was told the bank had received the refund 2 days prior so I went to the ATM and tried to get money,nothing. I went into the bank to have a nice chat and was told that they would not credit back my account until their timetable was met.I asked quite politely if I would be getting the interest they made off the money while it was in their posession and was asked to please leave. Now I wasn't going to close that account because I would never see that money, I just knew it, so I was grousing to my boss about it and he says
"Our company does it's banking there and maybe the
CFO would like to hear this. Well one long phone call later I was assured that there would be blood on the walls. The CFO was Irish and hadn't had a good yell in months(hee hee) After that there were new people at my bank, hardly recognised any of them and the ones I did hid in offices. Moral is get a rich friend or boss and bank where they do, it saves oh so much headache.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Banks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cashiers Check Cashing and Money-Gram Scam
Advertisement Source: CareerBuilder & Monster.com
Positon Applied For: Customer Service Evaluator
Company Name: Secret Shoppers
Company Address: 1555 Regent AveWest;
Company City/State: Winnipeg MB R2C2J4
Company Office #: 204-951-3140
Company Fax#: 204-951-7183
Contact Name: Michael Thompson
Contact Telephone #: 204-951-7657
Contact Fax#: 905-494-0151
Cashiers Bank Name: Harris Bank of Fairfield, IL
Last April, I was contacted by Michael Thompson an Agent of Secret Shoppers. He did have an Nigerian or African dialect. Michael Thompson had sent me a assignment package with a check for $3865.00. Because of my long hours at work, I did not make it a priority to complete the assignment. Finally, day 4 of reciept, I decided to complete the assignment as agreed.
The assignment:
I then proceeded to continue my Secret Shoppers assignment which was at any Walmart's
Money Gram.
I wired $3515.00 and was instructed to fax my Evaluators Sheet to Michael Thompson.
MoneyGram Payment made to: Albert Deamas
MoneyGram City Payment made to: Moncton, New Brunswick Canada.
Now, when BOA cleared this Cashiers check for $3865.00, I had less than $12.87 in
my account. BOA gave me cash, no holds. Just days before, they held my $905.58
Payroll check for 3 days. This is why, I was led to believe that there was no issue
with the cashiers check.
Banking History:
I've been Banking with Bank of America for over 15 years. Historically BOA has
held almost every check varying from $1k-10k that I have presented for 2-3 business
days. BOA in the past and just two days prior Bank of America held my payroll check
for three business days, and consistenly held other checks 3k-10k, for more than
four business days. One example, I tried to put money down for a home, or borrowed
money from IRA to relocate, or even vacations out of the US. Bank of America has
consistenly chose to hold my funds. Personal Bankers could not explain why my checks
are been held. I was in Puerto Rico at a Day SPA and BOA had held my funds after
5 days of depositing money a week prior to. I instantly called BOA demanding a
reason why this is happening. I received no explanation. I get a release on my
account and access to funds.
I am at wits end. BOA is not cooperating with me to get this resolved. I did contact Harris Bank in IL,
and the Acct Risk Control is investigating transactions on the account listed above.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cashiers Check Cashing and Money-Gram Scam
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Id like an answer from someone this isnt right.re anon coward
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bogus Check
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cashier's Check Scam
Thinking smart when it comes to money matters is definitely going to give you a leg up on any institution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I just deposted a possibly fraudulent check
Can I still request for cancellation of that check my Monday since its not yet 3 business days?
Or is it already too late?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Same thing just happened to me
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I KNOW THIS IS BAD BUT CAN SOME HELP ME OUT
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
check fruad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
fraudelent bank check
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
scammed
The next day a "pending" debit balance appeared in my account.
The next day the "pending" negative balance disappeared which I took to mean that the check had cleared.
3 days later a negative balance appeared in my account showing that the check had been "uncleared"
But there is no evidence of it having been put into my account in the first place.When I cashed it it did not go into my account and does not show on my account that it went in
The person whom I cashed the check for has (of course) disappeared..
Do I have any recourse since the check was cleared and then "uncleared"but there is no evidence of a deposit
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The best ever
Find a way to refuse to use the check system and make these scumbags work a little bit harder to prey on the unsuspecting good at heart. He will have to meet his maker some day...Vengance is mine saith the Lord.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
empty deposit envelope at atm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Scamming the Scammers/Bank?
So, here's the thing. i Just moved out to CT and 'm kind of tight on money...couldn't i just cash this thing and look at is as a cheap loan from the bank? i mean, 2,250 is some pretty decent money to me...i could spend like...300 and then pay them 1,950 right away. and then pay them the other 300 next month or something.. do they charge me for the bounced check (25?) and how long do i have to pay this back? could i spend all of it and just slowly pay the bank back? does it damage my account? Basically, if i cash this with no intention of paying anyone, just to use a few hundred for some groceries (i just moved. im poor) ... what happens??? all help is appreciated.
i also agree that people need a bit more common sense. i mean, i know the exact email being discussed. i got it. its obviously a scam. the old adage:" if its too good to be true, it usually is" ...it's an old adage for a reason. i was initially shocked that scammers were so lazy as to be so blatant and careless...but, foolish me, obviously the fish are biting. its almost tempting! :P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
fake check
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Common sense has its place...
How the FUCK does a person who has never had any prior experience with or knowledge of any of these types of scams supposed to magically know (again with no prior knowledge how are you supposed to make the common sense determination)??? For those comments above from the people saying things like, "HAHAHAHA you flipping idoits, fools, HAHAHA, you deserved to be scammed, you asked for it, if I had the chance I would scam you also how gullible of a person you are." You need to understand that its possible even with todays technology to have people unaware of such dubious and devious tactics that these evildoers are committing. Tell me how often does a victim of such a crime go running around their neghborhood or school or work place or when visiting with family/friends blabbing about how they were just defrauded...huh well they don't. Why, ahhhh common sense ASSHOLES not only is this a screwed up situation for them to deal with, not only are they feeling terrible, not only are they in disbelief of what happened, obviously there's so many diffeent emotions going on all at once racing around the victims mind but do you FUCKED UP commenters think that this victim is actually going to go around broadcasting to the world their personal life and the fact that they have been a victim of such a crime...FUCK NO morons its common sense right??? So how do con-artists and criminals as such still get away with these felonious acts in this day and age of technology and security measures in place...I'll tell you how. There's one very important factor here that everyone is missing but I don't blame any of you for not knowing because it's NOT COMMON SENSE for a typically good natured person or even you negative piece of shit ASSHOLES to have to know. Once I divulge this information (in other words once I've shared some prior knowledge with you all there's no excuse afterwards of not knowing or being aware of such.) Here it is the only way a bank can allow for such crime to happen and then actually put the blame on the victim or hold them responsible for the now negative balance reflective on their accounts, is that their are internal associates working in cohesion with these fraudsters and there isn't a single bank out there (including Federal CU's) immune to this reality that is not COMMON SENSE for the typically good natured person to be aware of or even you ASSHOLE commenters. As for myself its COMMON SENSE to clearly understand the law in that a person cannot committ a crime against someone, for the sole purpose of having the unsuspecting party also committing a crime as a result that they are then held responsible for. In other words you can't break the law in order to cause someone else to break the law and then place them at fault for commiting the unsuspected crime such as accepting and receiving either a physical paper check, wire transfer, account transfer of funds or even cold hard green cash that were ultimately deposited into the vicitms account and used for obvious reasons.
Back to the internal associates working together with these US or overseas criminals. Now I ask you FUCKIN negative commenters since you all have figuered out these scams and the tactics used, tell me this how is it that the fraudsters are able to be one step ahead of the general populations knowledge of such crimes and one step ahead of the authorities??? Ahhhhh COMMON SENSE, we've all acted and behaved to a certain extent with the same manner these criminals use, only when we did this it was for something harmless like a surprise b-day party you know a bunch of people purposely plotting against a person in order to make them believe that no one would remember their b-day or maybe even distracted them by leading them on some false excursion to virtually anywhere in order to get them to leave their home, allowing for time to have everyone else enter and set up for the surprise. Or how about when you were younger, you and your friend/sibling were trying to sneak some cookies from the kitchen so one of you either kept an eye out for the parent as the lookout/early warning system or you actually went and distracted that parent from making their way into the kitchen allowing for your partner in crime to get away with some cookies upon which you both met up afterwards and shared in the spoils all the while thinking how clever your operation was. Yep we all know the truths of what it takes to get away with such manipulation. I'll be damned if any of you try and attempt to argue that these harmless acts are not of the same nature and much different from these adults that are committing fruad you can eat a DICK for real because it's one in the same mentality or thought process utilized. Without their being someone allowing for it to happen from the inside who shares the inner working of the banks systems, timeframes to clear such transactions, certain red flags being removed temporarily from ones account like no holds on a check that otherwise would've taken 3-5 days to clear
but for this particular fraudulant transaction WOW there was no hold at all & it cleared within minutes showing funds available already only to have the red flags re-activated the following day to make no one the wiser from the banks internal risk/compliance/governance dept. that is designed to divert the attention from the real criminal, the internal employee & over onto the ususpecting good person. Without the internal associate allowing for the open window it would generally be much more difficult for purely external fraudsters to get away with such crime. One last thing to mention anyone that works in the banking world specifically for the corporate side of the bank, the corporate associates would agree that working at the branch level is no different than working for a fast food joint like say McDonalds or Burger King and their wages aren't that much more in comparison. Go ahead question this statement, if you know someone that works at the corporate level for a bank ask them how are the branch level associates and even the branch itself viewed as...now go ahead you negative pieces of shit and choke on your FUCKIN comments but I guess I aleady know you will...COMMON SESE tells me that!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fraudilent
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fraudilent
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bank should reimburse
My account next day the funds
Were in there so I used them thinking it was clear 2 days later bank - took all my
Money will not help me
CHASE BANK!!!!!CASHIERS CHECK
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
g
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
LOL @ US for using checks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How I recovered funds stolen by BO brokers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How I recovered funds stolen by BO brokers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]