Wachovia Teller Refuses To Deposit Check Written In Two Ink Colors
"The best advice I can offer to those who wish to commit check fraud against Wachovia Bank," writes Jim, "is to purchase a typewriter." Although he's been a customer of the bank for years and had a hefty balance that more than covered the deposit amount of his handwritten check, because the dollar amount was in black ink and the signature was in blue ink the teller said it might be fraudulent and refused to take it.
"But you accepted the other 3 much larger checks that were typed in black, and signed with blue ink...", I offer helpfully.
"But I can't accept this handwritten check", she answers "because of the two different ink colors".
"So, no one can write me a blank check?" I ask. "Or if they do, I have to find a typewriter to fill in the amount?"
"We need to prevent fraud." she explains.
Big mistake.
"Are you implying that I might attempt fraud?" I ask after picking my jaw up off the floor. "Look at the account balance" I instruct. "It is several thousand times the amount of the check I am depositing. This is nonsense - let's get your manager over here."
The branch manager slides up trailing the unctuous slime of someone who will grovel to placate, but never look one in the eye and directly address a concrete issue. The conversation ambles around for a bit, without any progress toward connecting a small messy check with the reality of a customer with significant deposits and a long track record. Apparently, my "admitting" that the check was signed by our treasurer, and the amount filled in by me makes matters somehow "worse". I guess I might have lied and claimed that his pen ran out of ink, but I am not a skilled liar.
Let's see, if the check turned out to be fraudulent, Jim would have legally been responsible for it, and the bank could have repaid itself out of his account balance. If he attempted to withdraw his entire balance—which Jim says was "several thousand times over the amount of the check"—the bank could have sounded an internal alert and postponed the withdrawal until a supervisor could sign off on it. But somehow it made more sense to offend a long-term customer by inconveniencing him and implying that he was a criminal.
Jim figured out a simple workaround:
"Never mind", I say after getting nowhere fast for about 2 minutes. "Your bank WILL accept this check, and thank me for my deposit, too. Just watch."
I then deposited my check with no problem at all - steps away over at the ATM, which I had noticed being serviced by an armored truck on prior visits.
The machine thanked me nicely in its usual pre-programmed way. I waved to the branch manager, and cheerily suggested that he "have a nice day".
The best advice I can offer to those who wish to commit check fraud against Wachovia Bank is to purchase a typewriter. The best advice I can offer to honest customers of banks staffed by unthinking automatons who refuse to allow reason to even color their blind obedience to the latest customer dissatisfaction initiative is even simpler. Deposit such checks via the ATM machine located only steps away from the uncooperative employees. The check was credited to my account the same day, and the ATM did not insult me with any implied accusations.
(Photo: kb35)
Post a comment
Comments:
Same here, ATM all the way. The less human contact at the bank, the better. Now if only we could minimize the interaction at the post office, we'd really be set.
I always use the ATM - even with a huge line it's still faster than the tellers.
Weird that they wouldn't take it. We write a LOT of checks at our office. We've had them clear even though we forgot to sign (on the back AND on the front). We've had them clear for different amounts than they were written for. We've had them clear well past the expiration date, and well before the date they should have been deposited. Sounds like the teller just wanted to be a jerk, and the manager had his back.
Sorry you had such problems. Our local Wachovia branch staff have always been helpful and courteous. We've had several overdraft charges reversed by the branch manager, who is likely out of a job in early November...
Unfortuantely, our local Wachovia is shutting its doors. We will have to use the Wells Fargo branch located in ... our local Safeway grocery store.
I guess if I want a car loan or home equity line of credit, I can always meet the branch manager in the produce aisle for a conference.
I used to work as a teller in one of the biggest Canadian banks. I don't know how Wachovia does it, but I know how I would have done and said.
I personally would have deposited the cheque; if I had any suspicions about it, I would have held it for 5 business days, as per standard bank policy.
In my bank, The System periodically goes through everybody's account and makes a credit decision regarding ATM holds: either no hold, a partial hold, or full hold. If a customer makes a deposit (either cash or cheque) at the ATM and anything bad happens, the ATM department at HQ takes responsibility and not the branch.
So if I inform a customer that I'm holding a cheque and they say "well, the machine never holds my cheque", I simply advise them why *I'm* going to hold the cheque and if they don't like it, to deposit it at the machine.
@mjbroken: The post office near where I work (it's on Hanover Street, NYC,) has an automatic machine where you can weigh and print out postage for packages as well as buy stamps. I absolutely LOVE the thing-- the only time I don't use it is when I have to send something overseas, as it doesn't handle international mail. The branch only has one machine, and the USPS office near my house has none, so I'm really hoping I see more of these things. They're really easy to use and I've never run into a problem with one.
Here's what you do. If it's under a pound you can send it as a letter. Tell the machine it's only correspondence, reply where it asks whether anything in it is oddly shaped and your half done. Then you need an extra .26 for the package rate. The machine will let you buy custom rate stamps. Then just slap the customs form on.
The bank would rather you use the ATM. It costs them money to have to staff the bank with tellers.
I'm stubborn, I guess. I would have pulled all my money out, right then and there. It might be an over-reaction, but I would do it anyway.
Welcome to Wells Fargo, how can we screw you today?
Aside: Why is this tagged with Chase?
A couple of years ago, when Canada's Banking industry was raking in record profits, a Bank of Montreal branch, in Montreal, that was located (on the corner of Benny and Sherbrooke West) in the middle of a lower income neighbourhood closed its doors.
Nearby residents, predominantly retirees and old-age pensioners, not to mention veteran families, were told that it was in order "To Serve You Better...." The branch that was "Serving You Better..." was 20 blocks away.
When a large majority of your customers struggle to walk on their own and you move the branch 20 blocks away, you're not serving anyone better.
I closed my account with that bank on principle alone and told the manager as much. I'd been a customer for 15 years and was looking for a place to open up a new corporate account and get a new business line of credit at the time. While I honestly believe they're all awful. I did vote with my dollars that day.
Not to be a grammar Nazi, but it's just ATM, not ATM machine. Sorry, it just bothers me.
@Ennis:
I think part of the problem is that, too often, we expect nouns to be accompanied with adjectives. I could see a conversation like this taking place:
Person A: "I just deposited $20 at the nearby ATM"
Person B: "At the what?"
Person A: "You know, ATM machine."
Person B: "Oh, one of those."
Furthermore, some people aren't familiar with the abbreviation. But, the added word "machine" helps give them at least a nebulous idea of what is being talked about, despite it being redundant. It would probably be best to write "AT machine" or "Automated Teller Machine."
@JanDuKretijn: Yes, I'm afraid I would have. I don't react well to crappy customer service. My knee-jerk reaction is to cease being a customer. That doesn't work in some situations (like dealing with Comcast, ugh), but there are plenty of banks that will gladly take my money.
This man, a solid, long-standing customer, was treated like a thief by a company that can't hire employees (even managers!) capable of independent thought. It's not a company I would be interested in doing business with.
I have to side with the bank on this one. If the bank was to accept the check that the OP originally deposited knowing that he admitted to filling in the amount, the teller who works for the bank would be held accountable for the amount of the check.
Many people commit fraud at the bank every day, and the tellers are doing everything in their power to prevent fraud. Many of these people are the people with large amounts of deposits, and many are not.
While the ATM seems like an easy solution, eventually the checks in the ATM reach a human in the center where the checks are processed, a human who verifies the amounts, dates, and signatures on the checks. Checks normally take quite a while to clear, even though the US has very specific rules in lines of funds availability which are often shorter than the time it takes to reach the account.
The OP received next day credit for the check because of his strong deposit relationship with the bank, although realistically the check hadn't actually cleared yet.
The bank could have actually just called the maker of the check to verify if it was OK and avoided this whole mess.
I tried depositing a Chase check into my Chase account as cash and was told I couldn't do it. But I could cash it and put the cash into my account. Add this to bank rules that make you scratch your head!
If it were really a problem, they could have deposited it and put a hold on it. If we suspect a check is not going to be paid, or it's a check being redeposited after coming back NSF once, we put a Doubtful Collection hold on it, usually 7 to 11 days. But absolutely they should have taken the damn thing.
@PLATTWORX: I stopped using the ATM to deposit checks when the one for my bank nearest me said they were disabling the feature due to fraudulent activity. The only chapter open near me anymore still allows deposits, but I still won't use it. Also, my bank is sweet because when I deposit government-issued or in-state checks with the teller, the funds are available right away. I doubt it works the same way with the ATM.
Say it with me...
"Credit Union"
Problem solved!
@Ennis: It's called a "machine" whether or not the final letter in the acronym is M. For example, we used to have a brand of ATM here called MAC, and they were known colloquially as MAC machines. I don't think it's fair to tell people to stop referring to them as machines just because there's a 50% chance the acronym is hiding the designation behind a letter.
Yeah, but I'm betting it's probably going to be some of the exact same people going through the checks from the ATM. And there's a chance they'll refuse it and send it back to you, especially since they thought you were being difficult.
Not that you actually were being difficult -- I would have had the exact same attitude. But my guess is that's not how they'll see it.
@Drew5764: I use my PI number at the AT machine. Then I use the money to buy books after scanning their UP Codes and looking up their ISB Numbers. All while trying not to contract the HI Virus.
BTW, there's actually a clever name for this phenomenon: RAS Syndrome. Short for "Redundant Acronym Syndrome Syndrome!"
Several months ago, I decided to open a saving account with Colonial Bank. I talked to this woman there who helped me understand I had no interest in ever having any business with Colonial Bank again. Here is our conversation:
Me - I'm interested in opening a saving account.
CB Woman [noting my non-American accent] - Are you an American?
Me - No.
Woman - Are you a legal resident?
Me - Yes and I DO work and I DO have a social security number.
Woman [disregarding what I just said] - Do you have any account with any other bank?
Me - Yes, why?
Woman - We need you to go get a letter from ANOTHER bank stating your good standing with them, then we will consider your request to open a saving account with us...
And all that for a SAVING account? My money can rest in better places. It seems that there is no limit to idiocy inside bank buildings.
Why use the teller anyways? I dont get why people have to go to the teller to deposit.... The ATM doesnt talk back... it has never ever made a mistake that wasnt my own fault.... its not going to steal your money...
"WHAT IS THE CREDIT UNION DIFFERENCE?
New federal laws and regulations are changing the structure and face of the financial services industry. In this time of accelerating change, it is important to truly understand how credit unions are unique and different, and why we remain a necessary and extremely popular financial alternative for 87 million Americans.
* Not-for-profit. Credit unions are not-for-profit financial cooperatives. We exist to serve our members, not to make a profit. Unlike most other financial institutions, credit unions do not issue stock or pay dividends to outside stockholders. Instead, earnings are returned to our members in the form of lower loan rates, higher interest on deposits, and lower fees."
[www.cuna.org]
[www.creditunionsonline.com]
[en.wikipedia.org]
@c-rizzle: Oh lord. I'm surprised it took this long for someone to start parroting the OMG CREDIT UNIONS R SOOO AMAZING bullshit line.
@aloria: Yeah, and it doesn't handle media mail. And your still required to see a live person if the package is over 13 ounces.
When I can, I am very happy to use that machine.
USAA. So wonderful, so great. Your scanned checked would have been black and white. No one to talk to... I you did, the friendliest around.
Ahhh....
/Smug over load.
@JohnAllison: Ah yes, USAA: Another scumbag company that refuses to pay claims against their insurance policies until threatened with small claims court.
@c-rizzle:
I gave my credit union the ole' heave ho today and it felt so great!
The local branch of my regional credit union has been getting worse and worse by the month. First they started to close on wednesdays....then they changed the hours on the other days to open at noon instead of 9am. I can never keep their hours straight in my mind and last month I went there three times expecting them to be open, only to find that they were closed.
When they were open, they ran a skeleton crew...one teller and 8-12 people in line, every single time...
The last time I was there facing the locked door, I swore it was my last time, so today I cashed one last check with them since I had already written my acct# on the back of the check the previous day, and washed my hands of them. As I was standing at the teller, she told me, "now, I see you're currently enrolled in paper statements, I need to let you know that starting in October, we're going to start charging for that 'feature' ". I smiled and said, "Thanks for helping me confirm my decision"....to her quizzical looks, I outlined my reasons for leaving. She responded saying, "well I guess the cut hours and staff are better than the branch closing altogether"....I responded simply that I would prefer to bank with an institution that can afford a full staff.
Took my cash, went down the road to US Bank, whose hours are Mon-Fri 9am to 6pm, sat 9am-2pm, and opened a new account. It was like a breath of fresh air.
I'm sure there will be things I'll miss about the credit union, but I never found them to have competitive rates or superior service, quite the opposite. i found them to be rather podunk and unprofessional.
I have two more outstanding transactions to clear through the credit union account and then I will go in and officially close the account.
@JanDuKretijn: I know I would have. I've done it four or five times already (finally ending up in following every sane person's advice, which is to use a small, local, credit union, instead of a bank, where I've received nothing but great customer service for six years straight now).
The only language the banking industry understands is "deposits". If you remove your deposits from them, it weakens their position directly. The crappier they are, the more people should take their deposits elsewhere, and eventually the bank will either fix its policies so people don't keep jumping ship, or they'll put themselves out of business faster than you can say "Economic Darwinism".
@nytmare: "MAC" in "MAC Machine" stood for "Money Access Center", so no, "machine" there is not redundant. :-)
It *IS* redundant following "ATM", though.
@PLATTWORX: As a former teller, I can tell you that the whole point of watching for multiple colored ink on checks is to prevent the use of "altered" checks (a check written originally written for fifty dollars with "one hundred" written in front of it after the fact). If it is something like a blank check where the signor wanted to pay for a service but did not know the final cost AND trusted the payee, there should be no problem as long as it is clear (no crossed out words/numbers or erase marks).
@italianscallion33: I only use ATMs to deposit checks if they are the no-envelope variety. They verify the funds immediately and, depending on your checking account (and bank) clear within one day. But you are correct that you should always deposit bank, government, and payroll checks with a teller since most banks make them available immediately.
Although it is pain in the butt, the best way for the OP to get his point across is to wait for the checks to clear and pull his money out. Wachovia is a crappy bank anyway.
Credit unions have stupid rules, too. I got so fed up with the endless questioning every time I tried to deposit cash or checks into my account - "What are the last four of your social?" "WHat is your birthdate?" "Who is the joint account holder?" I couldn't understand why they wouldn't just take the &*^$ money - we were 20-year customers!! Then I smartened up and just deposited in the night deposit chute. Then, I really smartened up and moved all our money to a local bank where everyone knows me and the President and I are on a first name basis. Goodbye stupid questions and endless hassles!
Please don't be rude to bank tellers. Yes, she was implying that you were capable of check fraud, something she has a right to suspect, and which costs banks billions every year. These costs are passed on to you as a customer.
@Agent19488: Funny, have had several claims over the last few years and never once had to threaten to sue to get my money.
Please don't be rude to the teller?!! How about not being rude to the depositor? Good Gawd! I seriously doubt that teller really cares about fraud. Knowing what tellers make on the average, I think she was trying to throw a little "power" around to build up her self-esteem pretending she is somebody.
@Derek Balling: Wait. When you say you've done "it" four times already, do you mean just you've switched banks 4 times?
Or do you mean that it happened 4 times that upon not getting the service you wanted, you closed your account right then and there?
@savdavid:
How about the teller really cares about their job and wouldnt want to get fired over something simple like a check fraud they could have caught if they were more assertive? I doubt the teller was thinking "I'm going hold this guy up and piss him off and show him I dont have to take his check.....that'll make up for my $8/hr."
Its a give and take between the consumer and retailer/banker/creditor etc. If the teller wanted to be suspicious, they had every right to, I would want them to if it were my money involved. Could there have been an easier way to go about it? Probably, but theres no need to crucify the teller for doing their job and being suspicious. This dude escalated to a higher up and still got nowhere, then its time to bitch.
Well, obsessively enough, I've always thought this could happen someday. If I write a check and run out of ink while writing it, I look for a pen of the exact same make. If I can't find one and have to write with a pen which obviously produces different looking writing, I destroy the check and restart.
I'm not saying people should become obsessed like I am.
Agreed..I was a customer of Southtrust -- [en.wikipedia.org] --
before they were bought out by Wachovia.
Back when I was a poor college student I had trouble cashing a federal tax refund despite having 3x that amount in the bank and having been a customer for years. I closed the account and have avoided them ever since.
@savdavid: She is somebody, you snob. The fact that she has to deal with customers on a daily basis does not make her a nobody as you imply. Nothing in the story suggests that she acted rudely, only that she exerised her discretion to not accept a suspicious check. Something that would reduce the enormous cost of check fraud if more people acted as she did. And also, what is the treasurer of this company doing handing out blank checks to employees? Isn't that a pretty basic breach of his/her duty to the company?
@JohnAllison: You don't have to SEE the teller, you only have to hand it to them as long as it's fully postmarked. If there's a line and they're helping someone, just walk past the line, set it on the counter where they can see and reach it, and say "thank you". Easy peasey.
I can not recall the last time I used a teller for a deposit. It all goes in the ATM and never had a problem. I thank the OP for proving my method to be correct!