He sure showed them.

Well, isn't that until the armored car comes to do a pick up?

If you really wanted to punish bank A, you should have taken all the money out, went home, un-band it all, then bring it back. Then you would have wasted the banks money by making them pay the tellers to count it to verify the deposit amount.

They may be physically storing the money (for a flat fee for the other bank), but they don't get to draw any interest from the money nor count the money as part of their assets.

@NeedsSharkRepellent_GitEmSteveDave: Oooo, you're evil.

I like!

@NeedsSharkRepellent_GitEmSteveDave: think there are machines that count money...

at least now, his money is at another bank, and i applaud his actions... even though the original bank will still be making money indirectly through his deposit with the new bank

at least they have to re-count all the $20 bux notes all over again...

I'd say they get the run for their money.

@NeedsSharkRepellent_GitEmSteveDave:

Yes, because we all know that the tellers are responsible for denying this man his loan and setting bank policy. So of course it follows that they must be punished this man's righteous indignation.

@Jonathan Marek Bailey: How would that be punishing the tellers? They make the same amount of money no matter what they're doing, and counting money when you work in a bank isn't exactly cruel & unusual.

@Jonathan Marek Bailey: Oh, I dunno. Sounds like counting money may peripherally be part of the job, so, yeah...

That man painted a fellow playing tennis with a cow. He is my hero.

@NeedsSharkRepellent_GitEmSteveDave: Can't wait for next week's screen names!Here's a few suggestions:

MayoSando_GitEmSteveDave

nodessertthanks_GitEmSteveDave

canwesplitthetabimalittleshort_GitEmSteveDave

wishmymomwasntmakingmemoveout_GitEmSteveDave

@taking_this_easy: Yeah, they do. But any teller that initials a band based on just a machines count should be fired. NOTHING is better at detecting funny money than a experienced cashier. I've picked out counterfeits while doing a fast count on feel/weight alone.

@Jonathan Marek Bailey: It's exactly what he did to the people at the bank he brought his money to, isn't it. To teach Bank A a lesson, he punished Bank B's tellers, and Bank A get possession of the money anyway

@Galactica: I have to keep up a "surfing theme" for at least the next two weeks.

@JennQPublic: B/c nothing bothered me more than when someone would break open a strap of bills and not use them, which required me to re-count/re-strap/initial them. Besides, do you know how dry/dirty your hands will be in the end?

Can we stop giving this man the attention he is so desperately begging for?

@Brent Woodle: Why? It's like an EECB, but better.

@the_gank: Right, because there aren't machines to do that.

And because the tellers refused his loan.

And I'm sure the guy has perfect credit, and they're just picking on him.

Right.

@RecordStoreToughGuy:

I see, so that's why he withdrew in $20's instead of doing an electronic transfer or using commercial paper. Right?

The whole point of doing it in $20's is to make it difficult, tedious and annoying. But the only people he's doing that to are the people least responsible for the denial of his loan.

Your logic is about as good as that of teenagers that pirate everything because they "weren't going to buy it anyways" or it's "just like a demo."

Makes sense to me.. I'm sure after he realized what a ruckus he caused he figured "Oh snap, I have $190,000 in cash on me and everyone knows about it.. Maybe this wasn't such a great idea."

@Jonathan Marek Bailey: Actually, the people he punished had NOTHING to do with his loan. They worked at a different bank, and could no more have influenced Bank A's decision than I could here in America.

This guy has $190K in cash? Why the heck would they deny his mortgage? Clearly he'd have been able to pay it back.

@NeedsSharkRepellent_GitEmSteveDave:

Well I've never withdrawn that much money but I, dangerously, "assume" that they have to count out $190,000.00 when he closed his account. It just seems to me that all he accomplished was making someone's work day at both banks more tedious than it needed to be. Maybe he can paint them a nice picture? :)

@StanTheManDean: I can't imagine that Westpac stores other banks' cash for free. I'm sure they still benefit from it.

@Traveshamockery:
+1

@Jonathan Marek Bailey: I would guess they either handed him money that was delivered from their federal reserve/BEP(or their version of it)/armored car company. Since that money arrives pre-banded and "certified" as being the amount sent, you could literally just hand it over, as that is what you have counted the money at in your "house count"(I.e. if the fed delivered an extra $20 in a bundle, they delivered it to you as $2,000, you took it in/counted it in the vault as $2,000, and until you open it, you would never notice the extra bill). They could have also given him bills banded by them, which was initialed by whoever banded it, and was verified by the counts of cash on hand matching up at the end of business/shift.

In the case of money going out, and in this situation, as long as it was banded and had already been tallied in the official count as the amount on the band, I would have no qualms handing him over packs of bills and/or letting a machine count it. The onus would be on him then to count it under supervision to verify the amount. Yes, if it was me, I would have re-counted it by hand once it was given to me. It's only 9,500 bills. I used to have strippers/bartenders come into my 7-11 and buy a $500 money orders, and pay me 501 singles, so they could deposit the money order in the ATM slot, rather than stay awake until the banks opened. As long as I had some water for my tongue and a table, I'd probably be done in an hour, hour and a half.

@Joanna Franz: Because the cash was to be partial payment for the house and the denied loan was to be the rest. He would not have the means to pay back on a regular basis, given the sporadic nature of his artist income, and despite the fact that he was apparently making well above the median income when averaged over time. All it would have taken was a bank willing to make loans with a payment period larger than months. But such loans are not the norm for the secondary mortgage market, so any bank making such a loan is stuck with it.

@JennQPublic: Counting THAT much money is pretty cruel, and also leaves a lot of room for error.

@Brent Woodle: Well, he is an artist...

@Joanna Franz: That money was going to be used for the down payment on a home, he wasn't to withdraw it anyway.

@Skaperen: God forbid someone make money on a different schedule.

@Brent Woodle: Aside from the fact that you're free to not read an article that doesn't interest you, you're missing the point here. The stunt draws attention to flawed bank policies.

@JennQPublic: IDK, the tellers at our local United Bank branch in Huntington WV I am sure would have a problem with counting that sort of money...they have a problem with working altogether. I have never sat at a branch in the drive thru with three cars in front of me for 40 MINUTES. Two tellers, and no, no one knows what was going on but they were incredibly rude. And they wonder why we won't open an account there.

Ha! Go take the money out again to protest NBS's business relationship. Get 100s, because it's not really their fault.

@supercereal: Thus the flat fee that Stan mentioned for the storage.

The only person he's punishing when he takes out piles of money is the _bank_. The employees are getting paid, whether their counting that money or doing something else. However, they're not doing something else (thus increasing labor costs), by counting his money. Sure, all it cost the bank was five or ten bucks....

@Skaperen: Hold up. The house cost $385,000 and all he needed was an $80,000 loan from the bank to purchase it. So... the bank would have over 79% equity on the property!! People who have much smaller incomes can easily get loans on only 20% equity (AKA the Down Payment). The bank lost out on a great customer who knows how to save and even with sporadic (but HIGH) income, b/c of his savings, would most likely never miss a payment.

Even if he foreclosed, the bank would come out ahead with the HUGE equity on the home -- even at a foreclosure sale. Typically those go at around 90% of market price, but can be as much as 100% depending on the desirability of the neighborhood.

I was in the same position with Citibank earlier this year. My income is a bit more regular than an artist's, but I am also a self-employed HIGH income earner with high equity on my home. Not to mention a great credit score and no debt. Banks are not only doing people such as myself and the aforementioned artist a disservice, but themselves as savers make for reliable customers.

@MMD: Tell me about it!

@bobert: Actually, that looks like a badminton racquet. Or maybe racquetball, since he's wearing a helmet. But the hitting surface is small for tennis.

@JohnnyUtah_GitEmSteveDave: Genius.