Wachovia
Account closed

After reading how others feel about wachovia. I decided also to let others know what they did with me. Also contacting the comptroller didn't really help. You do need to know with wachovia the comptroller is contacted. Not the f.D.I.C. My problems with wachovia go back several years. The problems started before they bought southtrust. With the fact the problems were real bad with southtrust. If not worse then with wachovia.

One problem with (then) southtrust was frequently cheques were returned without the amount the cheque was for encoded with ink. They claimed this is not required unless paid to the government. Regulation CC subpart a says Bears a MICR line containing all of the information encoded on the original check's MICR line, except as provided in the industry standard for substitute checks; 2. The definition for 2 is Magnetic ink character recognition (MICR) line means the numbers, which may include the routing number, account number, check number, and check amount, that are printed across the bottom of a check in magnetic ink. The industry standard for substitute checks is American National Standard Specifications for an Image Replacement Document IRD, X9.100-140. ANS X9.100-140 specifies ways in which the content of a substitute check's MICR line may vary from the content of the original check's MICR line. ANS X9.100-140 also specifies circumstances in which a substitute check MICR line need not be printed in magnetic ink. Doesn't thay say the amount of the cheque is to be printed in ink? To think the comptroller also says the imprinting is not required. How?

They were asked about the timely return of cheques. Again the bank, and it seems the comptroller may not want to help. Subpart C says there are rules concerning the expeditious return of checks, the responsibilities of paying and returning banks, authorization of direct returns, notification of nonpayment of large-dollar returns by the paying bank, check-indorsement standards, and other related changes to the check collection system. 12 CFRs 229.30 and 229.31 require paying and returning banks to return checks expeditiously using one of two standards: the two-day/four-day test and the forward collection test. Under the two-day/four-day test a local check is received by the depository bank two business days after presentment and a nonlocal bank four business days after presentment. How can banks get by with claiming there is no regulation for the return of cheques?

There is also the issue regarding the fact cheques returned with endorsement amount being so wrong it is questionable. The amount was in the hundreds. Again then southtrust, claimed it wasn't their fault. The error was the result by the company it was made to. Recently I discovered this too was another statement they made that is questionable. It seems to be the bank is the one who has the responsibility for this. Guess they, and the comptroller thought it isn't a big issue. The bank was indeed notified immediately about this. To. They as said choose to pass the issue.

I further ad they were contacted regarding the issue of letting payments go through on a card that expired. The comptroller claims this is not illegal. How? Should the bank not of informed me about this. The federal register in Paragraph 2 (c) (2) (iii) says al1. Point-of-sale transactions. Denial of credit at point of sale is not adverse action except under those circumstances specified in the regulation. For example, denial at point of sale is not adverse action in the following situations:

I. A credit cardholder presents an expired card or a card that has been reported to the card issuer as lost or stolen. Here again banks, and one wonders about enforcement people. If they really know the regulations. According to this information what was done on this is also questionable.

If there is something I learned about banks it is don't question them. After all they are somehow allowed to close accounts WITHOUT NOTICE AND REASON. How? According to the comptroller banks are considered private businesses. Therefore they have the right to do pretty much their desire. Sure. When you really want to find what wachovia is really like go in and do a little arguing with a teller. Then go out and look for another bank. Your account will be closed due to their false claim you acted with inappropriate manner and language. Also do not ask for an explanation. They refuse to provide it. To think wachovia allows teller to act snotty. For I wanted to cash a small cheque that I accidently tore the very end off. There was no information on the border that was torn off. However the teller still refused to cash it due to it would be returned as fake or some junk like that. Then we get our account closed for using with inappropriate manner and language. I don't understand them.
For one way I went down to discuss the issue of deposits not seemingly being credit right. Everytime I felt the teller made a contradictory statement. This was pointed out. There was no yelling, acting in a manner you might wonder if I was going into a fit. However several months went by and discovered they closed the account because they felt I acted with inappropriate manner and language. Maybe we aren't to question banks. Especially wachovia. After all they are always right. Even when wrong.

They ignored repeated request to send a copy of their proof. Further they seem to forget we have the right to see proof that is said to exist which is used against us. Could they not also of forgot another issue that exist in the U.S. Constitution allowing us to face our accuser? After all I have to remember this is a bank I am discussing.

When they feel you have harassed them enough you receive a cease and desist letter. From someone I wonder if they have the legal right to send one. Also since they restrict you from voicing your opinion to someone. Aren't they too like a nsl unconstitutional?

There is something they tend to forget about these things. They only restrict the one receiving it from contacting them. Also I believe the letter ignores it only applies to not contacting current employees.

Yabadabado
columbus, Georgia
U.S.A.

Company: Wachovia
Country: USA
State: North Carolina
City: Charlotte
Site: wachovia.com

  <     >