1. Tuesday, November 27, 2012 - 4:16 PM
While I don't think I would ever defend America's worst bank (a.k.a. Bank of America), your post raises a few questions.
Your experience #1 mentioned an erroneous transaction on a "credit card," which then incurred "overdraft fees." If it was really a credit card, wouldn't the fees be for going over your credit limit? And then you talked about reversing the "money." Are you sure you didn't mean a debit card? Another question, didn't you sign or otherwise approve the transaction in the restaurant. If you did, and didn't notice it, then you were also partly at fault. That might explain the "logic" of the CSR reversing only half of the overdraft fees. If the tip was imputted by the merchant later, so that you never saw the total amount of the transaction, then I think you shouldn't have been penalized with overdraft fees for an error made by the merchant that you couldn't possibly have known about. As a general rule, never use a debit card for transactions in which the card is ever, for even a moment, out of your sight, or for transactions which don't require your approval of the total amount being debited from your account.
Your experience #2 with post-dated checks. Here I really find it difficult to blame Bank of America. Many banks, as a matter of policy, do not allow post-dating of checks, and will not refuse a post-dated check when presented for payment. I do not think that Bank of America is unique in this matter.
The freezes for anti-fraud reasons that you mentioned last do seem to be a bit overboard, but is it not possible that because of what happened in the sushi restaurant that BofA may have flagged your account as one requiring greater anti-fraud vigilance? Did you speak to anyone at BofA about why this was happening so often?
Your experience #1 mentioned an erroneous transaction on a "credit card," which then incurred "overdraft fees." If it was really a credit card, wouldn't the fees be for going over your credit limit? And then you talked about reversing the "money." Are you sure you didn't mean a debit card? Another question, didn't you sign or otherwise approve the transaction in the restaurant. If you did, and didn't notice it, then you were also partly at fault. That might explain the "logic" of the CSR reversing only half of the overdraft fees. If the tip was imputted by the merchant later, so that you never saw the total amount of the transaction, then I think you shouldn't have been penalized with overdraft fees for an error made by the merchant that you couldn't possibly have known about. As a general rule, never use a debit card for transactions in which the card is ever, for even a moment, out of your sight, or for transactions which don't require your approval of the total amount being debited from your account.
Your experience #2 with post-dated checks. Here I really find it difficult to blame Bank of America. Many banks, as a matter of policy, do not allow post-dating of checks, and will not refuse a post-dated check when presented for payment. I do not think that Bank of America is unique in this matter.
The freezes for anti-fraud reasons that you mentioned last do seem to be a bit overboard, but is it not possible that because of what happened in the sushi restaurant that BofA may have flagged your account as one requiring greater anti-fraud vigilance? Did you speak to anyone at BofA about why this was happening so often?
3
(