Chase Refuses To Shut Down Broken ATM Until You Threaten To Report Them To The FDIC

Reader Keith tried to get $120 from a downtown NYC Chase ATM, but the money door never opened. When he went inside to report the malfunction, the teller told him to go outside and wait. Keith thought he was waiting for someone to come fix the ATM or take his personal information. It turns out that he was just being ignored.

Yesterday, I went into a downtown NY Chase branch. I went to the ATM, asked for $120 and the door that dispenses the money never opened.

I went into the bank and told a teller what had happened and was instructed to stand by the machine.

When no teller came out to meet me after standing there like an idiot for 10 minutes, I went back in and asked the teller when someone was coming out. She said, oh – the money didn’t come out YET? She never mentioned me to anyone.

Now I’m instructed to go to the customer service counter where they told me the machine has been doing this all week. My question as to why it’s still in service was met with blank stares until one person said they didn’t have the authority to do take it offline.

Then I’m told that (even though they know it’s a problem) I can’t get the money back for 24 to 48 hours.

I asked to see a manager and was told the same story.

As she said that, another man came in and said that he lost $200 in the SAME atm.

I politely told the manager that if one more person comes in here with the same story, I would send an e-mail to the Attorney General, FDIC, Fed. Reserve, BBB and local news. It was astounding how quickly the proper motivation was able to get the machine turned off and the money back into my account.

I have to wonder, if I didn’t stand up for myself – just how many people would be out $$$ for 48 hours (and possible more)?

Good for you, Keith. It’s a good thing you came along. All the customers who didn’t get screwed by that ATM because you took the time to stand up to Chase owe you a hug.

(Photo: epicharmus )

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. MayorBee says:

    Was his pin code “BOSCO”?

  2. mike says:

    Bad publicity is apparently is more effective than their customers.

    Does anyone here work with a local bank, as in only has few branches in your state?

  3. Coder4Life says:

    That manager should be fired immediately. No matter how good he is. He obvioulsy is not manager material.

    That customer service rep. shoudl also be fired immediately.

    PROBLEM SOLVED.

  4. Why didn’t he go into the branch like a normal person? It’s all his fault for using an ATM.

    /sarcasm

  5. @linus: Yup, worked at two of them in the last few years (20-80 branches total). Generally you just take care of the customer on the spot, then get back with corporate for reimbursement.

    In small towns, a couple of small screw-ups gets around pretty quickly.

    Personally, I use smaller internet banks. No hassles, quick to get a human on the phone, and use any ATM I want.

  6. forgottenpassword says:

    do people regularly withdraw large amounts of cash from atms? Like over $100?

    I usually get maybe 20 bucks cash from my atm. I dont like to carry around large amount of cash.

    Not blaming the OP mind you.

    I personally HATE atms because of their malfunctions. I have had an atm eat my card and refuse to give it back (and then the manager I complained to treated me like I was somehow at fault) & had the new atms eat my check I was depositing and have a shit fit, shutting down & rebooting…. leaving me with no record IF it was deposited or not & that it had my paycheck somewhere inside its innards.

    The NEW atms are more inconvenient for customers (it now takes forever to deposit one or more checks) & more convenient for bank tellers (because they dont have to deal with deposit transactions as much). I hate them. Thanks a bunch for having me stay LONGER at an atm while risking getting jumped/robbed!

  7. Smitherd says:

    @ceejeemcbeegee (AKA!): Because we all know that ATM’s are the mark of the beast and that all those who use one will be doomed to a life of slavery under the totalitarian government whose reign is imminent!

    /sarcasm

  8. xkevin says:

    For future complaints, mentioned the OCC ([www.occ.treas.gov]), which is Chase’s regulator.

  9. Geminijinx07 says:

    @forgottenpassword: I get a number of withdrawals each month so I take out $120 or so each time so I have cash on hand for lunches etc (work cafeteria doesn’t do debit). I’m not going to go to the atm for every $20 – convenience really.

    The fact that this branch didn’t seem to care that the atm wasn’t working UNTIL they were threatened is a real concern and if Chase actually cared about PR and customers, they would “take this seriously”

    Oh, who are we kidding … it’s a bank.

  10. I actually had a similar problem with an ATM a while back at a PNC Bank. I was withdrawing $300 (not to just carry around, there was actually a purpose for it) and of course, the one time I don’t request a receipt…the ATM doesn’t dispense the money. The cash door never opened and it just acted as though the transaction was complete and gave me my card.

    I went inside immediately and mentioned my problem. Now, while my $300 wasn’t credited for about 48 hours, the guy at customer service was extremely helpful, even without my having a receipt. He didn’t treat me like a thief or anything and thankfully, that $300 wasn’t a make-or-break situation for me at the time. The delay sucks, but I was just glad that it was a pain-free process.

    Chase, however…well, there’s a reason I’ll stick with my bank and not deal with Chase.

  11. SkokieGuy says:

    Diebold no doubt made the ATM?

    In an unrelated story, the McCain campaign reported an additional $320.00 in donations received from the New York area.

  12. hatrack says:

    @forgottenpassword:

    There’s nothing I enjoy more than waiting behind someone that decides to do their monthly banking at the ATM.

    The new ATMs are so convenient for bank tellers that many of them no longer have to go to work.

  13. MonkeyMonk says:

    @forgottenpassword: I almost always get out $200 at a time out of the ATM at my bank. I hate to pay ATM fees so I always stock up on a lot of cash when I’m at my home machine. Lasts me for a long while too since I almost never use cash anymore.

    Never really worried about carrying a large amount of cash since I’ve never lost my wallet nor been mugged

  14. dragonfire81 says:

    Managers work like that, they feed you a line of BS to try and make you back down, then only if you don’t will they actually help you.

  15. anarcurt says:

    Whats really going on here is that the manager is to busy(lazy) to close the machine for 10 minutes and check if the cash in the machine is the same as the cash the machine is supposed to have. Most of the time the cash will be caught somewhere on it’s way to the door in which it will be apparent what happened.
    @skokieguy: Great Point!

  16. SteveZim1017 says:

    I agree the manager should be reprimanded, but the original Rep that told him to leave and just go stand by the atm for no reason… I’m sorry, but thats priceless and they deserve a nice pat on the back.

    Got a good chuckle, that made my day.

  17. Buran says:

    @hatrack: Some of us work during bank hours.

  18. klendathu9000 says:

    @ceejeemcbeegee (AKA!):

    Because most banks now no longer give out cash at the counter; I use a credit union and if you want cash, you have to get it from the ATM’s inside the bank. since they don’t have cash at the tellers station longer than 20-30 minutes (it’s taken and put into time locked safes similar to how many gas stations have setup), then less to steal in a bank robbery. (unless the bank robber happens to be Hercules, who can walk in and pick up the ATM and walk out with it).

    They even increased the amount you can take out per day from an ATM to make it more convenient.

  19. calvinneal says:

    I have never heard of banks or credit unions where the teller does not have cash. Midwesterners generally don’t put up with a lot of crap when they can’t get their money.New Yorkers must be more trusting.

  20. amyschiff says:

    wow… I feel lucky that I’ve never had any ATM horror stories… *knocks on wood*.

  21. rekoil says:

    @forgottenpassword: And to top it off, they took away the envelopes, so if the scanner won’t read your check for whatever reason, you have no choice but to take it to a live teller – which some banks (BoA) will charge you for if you do it too often.

    I just came back from depositing a check for $5 (rebate check that was mailed on a postcard) at the desk. It almost wasn’t worth my time.

  22. Voltanis says:

    This is EXACTLY why I refuse to do my banking at an ATM, nor will I deal with a bank that doesn’t allow the tellers to handle cash. If I have a problem, I have a face and a name I can put the blame on.

  23. Lambasted says:

    I love to read consumer stories like this. Where a consumer solved his own problem and writes in to advise us what steps we could take if in a similar situation. So refreshing.

  24. This happened to me too! I went to a Chase bank last April to withdraw $60 and the money door opened and snapped shut without dispensing anything! When I went inside the branch to complain, they said that the ATM was handled separately and they couldn’t help me, I’d just have to wait and contact customer service to see about getting my money back. This is one of the sundry of reasons why I am no longer a Chase Bank customer.

  25. darkryd says:

    If your job was as unfulfilling and monotonous as a banktellers, you’d probably find creative ways to mess with customers, too : )

  26. xrodion says:

    Good, for you man what you did. Sometimes, you have threaten a bank or whatever to get your money or whatever. Since, then they work and help you. It, sad but that is how it is.

  27. IrvinCentaur says:

    @rekoil

    The ATM
    most likely didn’t take your check because rebate checks can sometimes be too
    thick for the CPM to read (its pretty sensitive to avoid situations when someone puts 2 checks in at once).

    The new BoA
    bulk check ATMs no longer read the MICR line only, they now also use character recognition
    to read the account number information on the check. They also accept more than one check at one time.

  28. hellinmyeyes says:

    I’m just happy to see that almost every ATM I’ve used in the last five years doesn’t “take” your card… you slide and remove the card. I bet that’s cut down on a lot of withdrawal BS that people have to put up with with these banks since the bank/ATM can’t hold your card if there’s a problem. A lot of banks claim that they outsource ALL ATM operations to other companies, not just maintenance but filling and changing out regular consumables. That’s gotta save ‘em a couple bucks. *rolls eyes*

    When are these customer service people going to get it, thought, seriously?

  29. kc2idf says:

    @linus:

    Does anyone here work with a local bank, as in only has few branches in your state?

    My bank (a credit union, actually) has only one branch.

  30. thalia says:

    I used to love ATMs because you didn’t have to interact with other human beings but after experiencing the same thing as this poster with a local ATM, I now avoid them like the plague.

  31. Optimistic Prime says:

    @forgottenpassword: Honestly, I only use the ATM if an emergency, or for large amounts of cash. It’s harder to justify $4 in fees for $20 as opposed to $100. I see it as a 20% fee v. a 4% fee.

  32. DrGirlfriend says:

    My credit union doesn’t give out cash via a teller, either. Well, their main branch does, and that’s it.

    I had one problem with an ATM about 15 years ago — it shorted me $20 when I withdrew $100 (funny enough, it was a Chase ATM in downtown NYC, too). I don’t withdraw large amounts often but when I need to I kinda have no choice. Fortunately, I haven’t had any issues.

  33. ClevelandCub says:

    First let me say that while I don’t work for Chase, I DO work for a large bank, and worked for 4 years in our ATM Network. By and large ATMs are pretty reliable cash dispensers, but when they mess up (as all things mechanical will do) , you’ve messed around with one of the things people are most sensitive about – their money. Banks are reluctant to deactivate an ATM that is not malfunctioning for a majority of the customers because they report on their ATM network’s availability and it’s compared to other banks. I am certainly not condoning Chase’s actions, I don’t understand why the branch personnel were so un-cooperative in refunding the money and/or working to correct the problems with the ATM. That just doesn’t make sense in my industry when every customer is important. Chase is hardly the only game in NYC and they should know better.

  34. ClankBoomSteam says:

    Report the bank anyway.

    Even if they fixed the OP’s problem, it was only after what was obviously far too much time, too much arm-twisting and even out-and-out threats.

    If they were able to shut down the offending ATM and give him back his money in a speedy fashion AFTER being threatened with being reported to the Attorney General, the FDIC, the Federal Reserve, the BBB and the local news, then they obviously had the power to do it BEFORE; which means — at best — that they simply didn’t want to do the work involved in actually assisting their customers.

    I’d get on the horn and call everyone you said you would, Keith — if they allowed this to happen to people “all week”, they’ll have no compunctions about doing it again some other week.

  35. BigElectricCat says:

    Don’t have the authority to take a malfunctioning ATM offline?

    My ass.

    If that machine was spewing twenties all over the sidewalk, I bet they’d find that authority real effing quick.

  36. jsttheman says:

    You all have no idea what you are talking about it. There are protocols in place that have to be followed if a machine malfunctions. If it malfunctions it takes 48 hours to get your money back because the machine has to be audited to make sure that the machine actually did not give you your money back. Their suppose to take your word for the fact that you were out 120 bucks? That’s a little absurd don’t you think?

  37. ClankBoomSteam says:

    @BigElectricCat:

    Damn right they would.

    (hey, is that an obscure Oingo Boingo image you’re using as your avatar? If so, good on ya.)

  38. ClankBoomSteam says:

    @jsttheman:

    I’m pretty sure ATMs have video cameras on them. If they’re so convinced that you’re trying to pull something, they can go to the instant replay.

  39. jsttheman says:

    @ClankBoomSteam: It’s not that easy. A lot of times the cameras are actually being monitored by an outside source. Can you say network? The ATM’s have camera’s on them but they are only in real time. If you needed actually footage it would need to be ordered from the security department…which…again…would take time! 48 hours is reasonable time to research something.

  40. BigElectricCat says:

    @ClankBoomSteam: Good catch, but it’s not so obscure to me; I actually bought that EP when it was new n’ fresh & I was a senior in high school.

    [en.wikipedia.org]

    Bonus points if you can identify the obscure origin of my handle, though. :)

  41. Quintus says:

    All you would have to do is tape a piece of paper over the monitor that says: OUT OF ORDER.

    That would only take a couple of minutes. And it would be the curtious thing to do until you can get it fixed.

    Then if someone tried useing it and lost their money, whose fault would it be?

  42. ClankBoomSteam says:

    @jsttheman:

    Here’s the thing, though: Banks rarely have a problem with crediting an account and then rescinding the credit when they decide it’s invalid. Happens all the time with ATM deposits where an incorrect amount has been entered by the customer. And as we’re talking about a bank here, I doubt that even hundreds of such transactions a day would detrimentally affect their bottom line.

    Even if it does take days (or even weeks) to review a transaction, the bank can and should assume good faith on the part of the customer whom they are contractually obligated to serve.

    The contract between the bank and the customer goes both ways, as well: why is it acceptable for the bank to assume that the customer is trying to rip them off, if it is not acceptable for the customer to assume that the bank is trying to rip him off? The bank has protocols in place to protect itself from fraud, but where is the customer’s protection in this scenario?

    There’s right and there’s wrong, and it’s obvious that the bank is in the wrong, here.

  43. BigElectricCat says:

    @Quintus: DINGDINGDINGDING!

    We have a winner!

  44. Bourque77 says:

    @jsttheman: According to the comments 48 hours is also a reasonable time to loose a few customers. I guess you ignored the fact that the manager knew of other people it cheated out of money too.

  45. ClankBoomSteam says:

    @BigElectricCat:

    Dangit, ya got me. I Googled it, and I’m guessing that you’re a fan of either Philip K. Dick, or else the band that shares your handle. I’m unfamiliar with the band, and I haven’t read Dick’s work since high school, so it didn’t ring any bells for me. :)

    On the other hand, I’ve been listening to Oingo Boingo for around 25 years, now. Still pretending that they’ll reunite…

  46. jsttheman says:

    @Bourque77: No. I didn’t ignore it. Has it ever occurred to you that the manager can’t do anything about it? I’ll tell you what, by the manager just giving the person back their 120 dollars he is taking it in good faith that the client did in fact not get his money. This decision was probably based on the fact that it has happened in the past. The thing is though that this type of behavior only promotes the idea that if people whine or blackmail that they get their way. It doesn’t work like that. It takes time to get things done. The only problem is that people are testy when it comes to their money

  47. jsttheman says:

    @ClankBoomSteam: Ah, but the bank does assume good faith. That’s just it. If this fine gentlemen would have just called customer service this outcome could have been totally different. Possible outcomes: The machine malfunctioned and realized that it happened and put a note on the clients account and customer service would have credited him back immediately. OR, customer service would have credited him the amount that was in dispute WHILE it was being researched. A lot of banks do this with fraud. You call and tell them that there is fraud on an account and they’ll most likely credit you the amount in dispute while they research it. If it comes back that it is fraud you can keep the money, if it’s not fraud, they take it back. Sounds like good faith on the bank’s part to me. What happened here is that some person whined and complained to get their way and they got it. Had they followed the procedures it would have been handled quicker than 48 hours most likely because that is just the disclosure time that the tellers and managers have to give to cover their a**.

  48. BigElectricCat says:

    @ClankBoomSteam: A valiant try, but nope and nope. Told you it was obscure! ;)

    It’s actually the title of a cut from Adrian Belew’s first album. You may know of him from his work with King Crimson.

    [en.wikipedia.org]

  49. ClankBoomSteam says:

    @BigElectricCat:

    Hah! That was my next guess!

  50. glycolized says:

    So, there was a ‘heroic’ tag created for this? Wow.

  51. ClankBoomSteam says:

    @jsttheman:

    I’m sorry, but “good faith” would have to come before the customer has no recourse but to threaten calls to the FDIC and the Attorney General.

    The bank’s staff told him there was nothing they could do, remember? Then they suddenly have the power to do something once they could be in trouble for their business practices? No amount of “whining” on the part of any customer can imbue a bank’s staff with the heretofore ‘impossible’ ability to return lost funds to said customer’s account; either they had the ability all along, or they didn’t.

    The fact that the bank’s staff evidently lacked the presence of mind to alert its customers that the ATM in question had been doing this “all week” by labeling it ‘out of order’ in some way shape or form only exacerbates the egregious nature of this particular bank’s disinterest in their customers’ satisfaction.

    Also, the scenarios you describe involving the “immediate” crediting of the customer’s account had he only called the customer service line as he was instructed, or else the crediting of his account while the transaction was under investigation, simply do not jibe with most banks’ standard business practices. Most banks will never assume the burden of crediting a customer in a show of good faith; when it comes to these circumstances, a bank will be quick to remind you that they are in the business of making money, above and beyond all else. I don’t know anyone who has had a dispute with a bank who was ever given the benefit of the doubt. I’m betting the same can be said for any number of people who participate in the discussions here on The Consumerist, as well as for most anyone out there in the ‘real world’.

  52. jsttheman says:

    @ClankBoomSteam: First off. All he was doing was throwing out threats. What is the FDIC going to do? Nothing. 2nd. There is nothing that he can do. The client must call customer service. Now, in this instance the manager just refunded the money back to the client and that was the end of it. However, this probably caused a loss for that particular branch. Each branch is ran like a store. Income and expenses. Branch managers have to account for this. It is not unreasonable for the branch manager to expect that this person is lying. He gave the money back to the client on GOOD FAITH that the client was telling the truth. There is doubtful there is anyway that the branch is going to recoup that 120 bucks that was given back to the client.

    3rd. My bank (Bank of America) credited my account a temporarily deposit when they were researching my fraud claim. Seems to me that it is good faith from one of the largest banks in the industry.

    I understand that this needs to be looked at the consumers point of view and it does suck that he didn’t get his money right away and they handled it bad but the thing is that people can’t expect to whine and get their way.

  53. ClankBoomSteam says:

    @jsttheman: What would the FDIC do? That’s up to them. Assuming they would do nothing is on you, I’m afraid.

    “The client must call customer service”? Uh, no. He clearly did not have to do so, or else this article would have a completely different ending, would it not?

    As for the branch “recouping” the $120 they gave the customer, they didn’t lose it in the first place — it’s still in their ATM, which makes their till (to use your ‘store’ analogy) even, not under.

    Your experience may have been good with BofA, however I can tell you my own experience with them was the exact opposite: most everyone I dealt with there was rude, cranky and unwilling to give an inch for any sort of dispute, great or small. And again, I’m willing to bet most of us here at The Consumerist have had similar experiences. I’d argue that your experience in disputes such as this with banks is the exception, not the rule.

    Finally, I have to take issue with your calling the customer’s approach “whining”. Calling it “whining” serves to weaken him as a character here, portraying him in a negative light by using a word with in-built negative connotations, and it’s an invalid form of argument.

    His situation was, in your own words, “handled bad”, and he stood up for himself. If the bank’s staff had done its job in the first place by not allowing people to use their broken ATM “all week”, he wouldn’t have had to fight to get his money back in the first place, would he? As such, the entire scenario was indisputably the bank’s fault, and this customer knew it. He had been wronged by his bank, and he fought back; no more no less.

  54. Breach says:

    This guy also had some knowledge they were probably hoping he didn’t have, like knowing exactly what 3 organizations would be very interested in the BS scheme they were trying to pull and acting incompetent. People seem to cooperate quickly when you go above their heads when they expect you to be a sheep about their screw up. Good for you Keith!

  55. Tejas says:

    i was recently in NYC on my dream holiday. I used my Australian (But US $) travel card at BOA to withdraw $500. i was shorted $50, and when i went into the bank and explained he situation (i was leaving the next day for a 2 week tour of washinton, philly, toronto, montreal and quebec) the manager gave me $50 out the till.

  56. jsttheman says:

    @ClankBoomSteam: Ok. I understand where you are coming from but the exact wording is

    “Then I’m told that (even though they know it’s a problem) I can’t get the money back for 24 to 48 hours.

    I asked to see a manager and was told the same story. “

    What was the story? Obviously there is no dialog for us to review but if he’s going to get his money back in 24 to 48 hours I can almost promise you that it’s going to be through customer service, not the branch. Even if in a perfect world it could be handled through the branch, why couldn’t the client accept the fact that it would take 24 to 48 hours. If it takes that long for everyone else, why can’t it take that long for him?

    You are right. I shouldn’t use the word whine. I should use the word threaten. That’s exactly what he did. I think we are debating about two separate things. I know this was the banks fault that the machine malfunctioned and the manager didn’t handle it the best but there should be no reason to expect that the client should get back his money right that instance when no one but the client saw that his money was taken by the machine.

    You would be surprised how much power branch managers actually have. Usually branches aren’t allowed to take their ATM’s offline without going through a series of protocols.

    The Consumerist thrives off of people who complain. My experience at Bank of America is probably shared by others. Banks aren’t out to get people. They aren’t the bad guys. The employees are the ones who misrepresent the banks. All banks and any company care about is customer service but it’s the employees jobs to make sure that the message gets portrayed back to the customers.

  57. angrycandy says:

    I work at a Chase branch. Our ATMs are both broken – we call tech support every day – they come out and “fix” the machines – and the next day they are still broken. Customers lose money, deposits, debit cards – and there is nothing I can do but get yelled at. Fricking ridiculous.

  58. ClankBoomSteam says:

    @jsttheman:

    Okay, I think I’ve found the sticking point, here:

    The question is not “why couldn’t the client accept the fact that it would take 24 to 48 hours. If it takes that long for everyone else, why can’t it take that long for him?”.

    The question is “why should this customer have to wait at all (let alone as much as 48 hours) for the money that he was already trying to withdraw right then and there?”

    What if the customer was withdrawing the last of his money for something of extreme importance (as in, food/medicine/rent, etc.)? What if 24-48 hours is far too long of a wait for whatever it is that the customer was intending to spend the money on? My point is that it should always be assumed by the bank that the money being withdrawn by a customer is money they need — as in, immediately.

    As far as the banks not being the Bad Guys here (and the employees being the ones who misrepresent the banks), what is a bank but the people who work in it? If a bank is staffed by bad employees, that bank is effectively a bad one, to my mind. I don’t care what the public face of a given banking institution may be, bad service is bad service. Without referencing the service one receives from a bank, how do you propose we gauge one as ‘good’ or ‘bad’?

  59. tcp100 says:

    Well, an aside to the story, and the inverse.. But just to remind folks, we have it bad with banks like BoA and such, but not THAT bad:

    [www.bjreview.com.cn]

  60. mythago says:

    @klendathu9000, most banks DO keep cash at the teller window. They do limit the amount of cash any teller is allowed to have in their drawer at any time. That’s one reason bank robbery is such a stupid way to make money; you’re just not going to get much cash. I’d think a bank with a “no cash” policy is actually running the risk of its tellers getting hurt.

    Perhaps you’re thinking of bank branches that are “service centers” rather than actual branches that handle money?

  61. Kounji says:

    @ceejeemcbeegee (AKA!): there’s always one

  62. jsttheman says:

    @ClankBoomSteam: Hey, I may not like how long it takes either but rules are rules. The fact is that this person believed that he is better than the rest of us and that rules don’t apply to him.

    What is any company that isn’t their employees? The thing is that can you screen for employees having a bad day? No, you can not. Yes, you will base your experience with that store off the employees but the fact is that you need to look at the bigger picture.

  63. ClankBoomSteam says:

    @jsttheman:

    You’re missing the point: He wasn’t just believing that he was “better than the rest of us and that rules don’t apply to him” in a vacuum, he was reacting to someone else ‘breaking the rules’ by allowing customer after customer to use their broken equipment “all week” (their words).

    They could have prevented the entire affair by keeping him from using the broken ATM, but instead they allowed him to lose $120 of his own money for up to 48 hours (assuming that they weren’t coming up on a weekend, I’d like to point out).

    It was all the bank’s fault, and it was entirely due to their lazy inattentiveness. It’s not like this was some strange event that might have been caused by a variety of possible catalysts, it was obvious what was going on, and the bank knew immediately what had happened to the guy — there was no investigation necessary.

    What should have happened in the first place was a simple verification of his identity, followed by an immediate payout of the contentious $120. Instead, the bank’s staff opted to employ a ruse (“there’s nothing we can do”), which left them open to the embarrassment they caused themselves when the customer called their bluff and said the magic words that scared them into action: “I’ll rat you out to the people who can cause you to have a very bad day”.

    I’m sorry that you disagree, I really am. But no amount of reiterating that the customer was a “whiner”, or that he thought that the “rules didn’t apply” to him, or that he thought he was “better than the rest of us” changes the fact that the bank effectively stole his money by not protecting him from their faulty ATMs, which they knew were faulty in the first place. That’s the end of it.

  64. mrearly2 says:

    Chase: Owned by thieves, so you can’t expect much good.
    If people knew the actual banking practices and their background, they wouldn’t be a bit surprised by the underhandedness of banks.

  65. mountaingirl says:

    Here’s what happened to me 2 days ago…I wanted to withdraw $400 from a Chase ATM and i got almost all the way through the process and it gave me a receipt that said “transaction denied”. So i tried it 3 more times,all with the same results. I went inside the bank to see if they were having problems with their ATM and was told there were no problems and i should call the 1-866 # on the back of my card and have customer service help me. I thought, ok, maybe something is up with my card. So after getting a hold of a customer service agent, she wanted me to go back to the ATM and “walk me through” the process of withdrawing money. I went through the whole process again and then the machine starting beeping really loud and my money DID come out of the little slot. I was still on the phone with CS and told her looks like it worked this time. I went to grab the money and it the sucked it back in the machine! I just stood there stunned and told the girl on the phone what just happened! She told me to go back inside th ebnk and tell them what just happened. I was so upset…never had a ATM take my money back! After telling the woman inside the bank what happened, she sternly told me that “for security reasons” the machine would take back the money after so many seconds to prevent it from being left out it the open…and i should have been paying attention and not talking on my phone! I was SO angry at the point i told her i was on the phone with their customer service agent TRYING to get their ATM to work correctly. So she gave me a 1-800 # to call “to report a dispute”. This “dispute” CS rep told me she would file a dispute claim and i would have to check my account in 15 calendar days to see if the money was credited to my account. I went back in to the bank, told them what i was told….and left my phone # for them to call me. I said that their ATM machine would be $400 over and i wanted my money ASAP. So the next day i called them to see if they had any news on my missing money and i was told the ATM balanced out for the day….it was not over $400! I was like…no way….and they told me maybe the $400 was credited to my account (it wasn’t and still has not). They told me there was nothing they could do. Now i am waiting for my “dispute” decision. I expected more for Chase, especially dealing with this in person, face to face with them. They act like it’s no big deal to them and are not helpful at all. It was their ATM right outside of their building that ate my money and “there’s nothing they could do”. Wow..i’m SO pissed off right now….what happened to customer service and helping the customer?