You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
-Lurid Crime Tales-
Banks don't have to honor own receipts for cash deposits.
2007-07-19
This is astounding, and from an FAQ list on a web site created by the Comptroller of the Currency:
Q: I made a deposit by check/cash and received a receipt, but the bank says that its records do not reflect the deposit. Since I have a receipt, doesn't the bank have to credit my account?

A: You should contact the bank and provide a copy of the deposit receipt. However, the deposit receipt is not conclusive evidence that you deposited the funds.

If the deposited item was a check, you will need to contact the party that provided the check to you and obtain a copy of the front and back of the check. If the deposited item was cash, and the bank does not agree to honor the receipt, you will need to consult with legal counsel about your rights.

So you deposit your cash at your bank, get a receipt, the money vanishes, and the bank just denies ever getting the deposit even though you have the receipt they gave you. YJCMTSU
Posted by:Anguper Hupomosing9418

#2  Woodie Guthrie said it best:
Yes, as through this world I've wandered
I've seen lots of funny men;
Some will rob you with a six-gun,
And some with a fountain pen.
Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418   2007-07-19 21:44  

#1  It's a lot worse than that. When banks set up the authorized automatic account withdrawl system, so people could pay their bills automatically, they made it easy for companies to "borrow", interest free, from accounts they were not authorized to withdraw from.

That is, accounts are numbered consecutively, so when a company was given an account number, they could withdraw from it, and also take money from several more accounts they were *not* authorized to withdraw from.

They thieving company would then get the float on from between $100 and $500 a month, or until the account holders noticed that the money was missing.

The account holders would then contact the bank, who would refer them to the company that illegally stole their money. "Not our problem."

When finally notified, the company would promptly return the principle they stole, but not the income they had earned from it. And the bank would also profit, because they would not pay the interest on the money from the time it wasn't in the account.

In this way, these companies could not only get hundreds of thousands of dollars from interest free loans, but also get the float from the money while it was in their account. And since the banks also got free money out of the deal, only the account holders get screwed.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2007-07-19 21:20  

00:00