Ditch the cornbread—swap it out for rye bread instead. Your fruit intake is also hitting high sugar levels, so try limiting yourself to just one or two apples at a time. 😉 :Experienced Mom of a Toddler: 😍
Good grief, this kid is driving me absolutely insane 🙂 But I have to tell you—my OBGYN nearly lost it laughing when he saw my latest glucose tolerance test results 😍 A fasting level of 2.8, then dropping to 2.2 right after breakfast 🤣 🤣 My husband was kind enough to point out that there might be something slightly off with me 🤣 🤣
Clearly, someone had to face the music to learn a lesson 🤷 She agreed to an installment plan—then completely ignored it—running up a debt equal to five months' salary 🤷
It’s honestly appalling to me—it’s just wild—that someone could rack up a debt of $5000 on a salary of $1333, and then, instead of calling their credit card company to negotiate a payment plan or even attempting to secure a loan to clear 🤷, they just sat there letting it fester until their accounts were frozen. Like, the collections process had already kicked in at that point.
Arthur Mendoza5 said:Don't sweat it too much; you aren't going to hand over that $500 which you don't even have and shouldn't be expected to have. $50 will take it, but it's not yours anyway, and that $1500 issue will be handled by the employee who botched the entry; they'll file an internal report where the staff member essentially commits to fixing the error out of their own pocket.
Believe it or not, these kinds of blunders happen all the time in the banking system, and the employees always have to answer for the surplus or the deficit—especially if we're talking about a teller deposit, which seems to be the case here.
Just one small correction: this isn't actually the bank's mistake, but rather the fault of the company that was processing the payroll for its employee. If it were a bank clerk, they'd likely just pay it back themselves, but when you're dealing with a corporation, the process is a bit more complicated. 😉
silverfox91 said:Who actually told him? Someone over the phone? How does he know it wasn't just a friend or a brother reaching out? How can he be sure it wasn't a gift? Who gave him that info and how? Maybe she didn't pull the cash from her pocket, but let's face it, most people only have digital numbers in their bank accounts anyway. It's all just digits on a screen. How can you be so sure she didn't tell him, "Here, take this"? Is there a recording of the conversation somewhere?
Come on, silverfox91, stop trolling.🙂 The guy clearly stated he was at the bank and they were demanding he return funds that weren't his—and then you show up with this 🙏 🙏 As I mentioned a few posts ago, my next expectation is a justification—I mean, the bank has plenty of cash regardless. 🤣 🤣
🤦 First off—this isn't some sort of gift 😍 It’s not like she reached into her own wallet and said, "Here you go, buddy" 😉 We are talking about a misdirected payment—an error that resulted in a client receiving funds they have absolutely no right to—and they were notified accordingly. In other words, it isn't a case of them being unaware that the money doesn't belong to them 😉 Your analogy is a bit of a stretch 😉
I was just wondering why our country ended up in this mess thanks to 🤣 It’s enough to make me browse this thread just to see all the brilliant advice on how to hold onto things that don't belong to me—bravo, everyone 🙏 🙏 I am practically bowing down to you all!!! But the moment one of you gets robbed, there will be nothing but wailing and moaning about the lack of a rule of law 🤣
This isn't directed at the OP, but rather at this "expert" crew offering genius tips like: "who cares," "their mistake," "drag them through the courts," and so on. I truly hope the OP is sane enough to realize that if they follow this "wisdom" into a courtroom, their legal fees are going to skyrocket 😉
edit: I’m expecting the next "argument" from this group to be something like: "well, JPMorgan Chase screws us over, so we might as well screw them back" 🤣 🤣 or "everyone else is stealing, so why shouldn't I?" 😍 🙏
Sure, and he might as well claim his account still has $500 available to refund when it’s clearly not 🤣 🤣—he’ll certainly have a field day with that story, especially now that everyone is screaming bloody murder about thieves 😉
Nicole Long28 said:Morning! When a client signs a contract at JP Morgan Chase, there's actually a specific clause in there: "By signing this ugovor, the Owner provides explicit consent to Bank of America to take any actions regarding the processing and exchange of their personal data listed in this ugovor, which includes the Bank's right to collect, store, record, organize, view, and transfer personal data for the purpose of conducting the Bank's routine business and the operations of JPMorgan Chase & Co. related to this contractual relationship, as well as forwarding it to legal entities under Section 181 of the Banking Act." So, it isn't without reason, and there's no question about the exchange. But the most important part is that bolded section, where fixing a private mistake made by an official certainly doesn't count as routine business.
When you sign a contract, you are simultaneously signing off that you are aware of the general terms and certain decisions—depending on what the contract covers—which means they absolutely apply to the client and are available to them.
Obviously, decisions about vacations or salaries don't concern me because those aren't business-related decisions for a client, but things like decisions on how much interest can be offered on savings if I'm a depositor do concern me. A bank isn't the NKVD; everything shouldn't be a secret.
Unauthorized is unauthorized, regardless of whether or not you actually use that data.
Exactly. If they have the authority to browse through private data, then I guess they should also have the authority to draft a few lines on official Bank of America letterhead and slap an official seal at the bottom.
I guess it’s more about where she actually got that number rather than how she acted. That's really what I've been trying to say this whole time.
And you honestly think balancing a cash drawer isn't part of a teller's routine job duties? Seriously—I would love to see you report some banker who calls you to resolve a discrepancy in your account just to see how they respond. 😍 🤣 (And by "bank," I mean the institution 😉). Furthermore, you didn't even answer Marlei regarding whether you’d be complaining if a teller accidentally deposited $300 instead of $1000 and then called you to fix their own mistake immediately: Stop feeding him misinformation; he's already dealing with enough trouble regarding foreclosures and this erroneous deposit, yet you're lecturing about bank secrecy—which has absolutely nothing to do with this situation. If a clerk were snooping through his accounts, checking balances and transaction histories just to gossip about them over coffee with friends, *that* would be a breach of bank secrecy, and you'd have every right to make her life miserable. But when a clerk identifies a surplus or deficit during a daily cash reconciliation and accesses those same accounts specifically to identify which client was affected by the error, that is simply conducting business. 😉 Don't believe me? Send an inquiry to JPMorgan Chase 😉
Chris Doyle4 said:Look, I explicitly stated right at the start of this thread that I was looking for advice regarding the sheer complexity of my situation—which, by the way, I am incredibly grateful for—but at the end of the day, I’m still allowed to have an opinion.🙂
Look, I gave you an honest answer regarding your options and what I would personally do. However—the moment you start spinning arguments about being "rewarded" by Bank of America just because a teller made a mistake costing them half a paycheck—even though you know perfectly well that money isn't yours to claim—I lose all interest in continuing this conversation. 😉 Anyway, good luck to you. 🙂
What am I even supposed to say to you now? 😕 Just buy the teller at Chase a chocolate bar and thank her for settling your overdraft and foreclosure issues—it’s the least you can do. 🤷
If I were in your shoes, I’d try to pay it back. But hey, do whatever your heart desires.
Joseph Watson3 said:I did read it—but you’re still out here blaming a guy who isn't even at fault here. He isn't legally obligated to pay back the money within the timeframe some bank teller is demanding. He basically walked into a situation where he could face a garnishment order, and now we’re just supposed to act like it's perfectly fine to strip away his legally protected income just to fix a mistake made by someone behind a desk? Apparently, that's how it works now.
I didn't realize this forum was crawling with so many bank tellers.
Go ahead, read it again.😉 I suggested he go speak with the branch manager to negotiate—whether that's getting an authorized overdraft for that amount, setting up a payment plan, or finding some third option that works for everyone. At no point did I suggest he should just conjure money out of thin air; I'm well aware of how difficult that is.
Nicole Long28 said:It isn't a bank mistake; it’s an individual mistake. There is a massive difference.
He didn't receive it (since it was just "dumped" into his account) and he didn't keep it (because the bank sent it onward due to a garnishment).
If I hadn't advised him otherwise, I wouldn't have (by the way, the man can't return it, and he wants to, but that same bank already forwarded the funds due to a garnishment), but I am now encouraging him to file a complaint about the privacy breach. We aren't pushovers who should be afraid of the bank like the devil.
They can use it for official business related to the client-bank relationship or by court order, not to fix an employee's private problems.
He’s just stuck here. He didn't get a choice in whether to accept the deposit, just like he can't stop a garnishment because he doesn't have that option. Ideally, he would just pay it back if he could, but the teller wants him to return it even if it means hitting an overdraft and getting hit with God knows how much interest. I guess it feels like the bank expects people to just "take it on the chin" when they make a mistake instead of making these arrogant, high-handed demands.
This was an error by a specific bank employee—and again, I highly doubt she called him personally. Bank privacy laws prevent employees from leaking account details to third parties. To obtain his phone number, she wouldn't have needed to access his balance or discuss his business with outsiders. Essentially, that same clerk could have just called the contact listed for 😉 on the other hand, why didn't this client just authorize a transfer of at least those $0.50 sitting in the account? Instead, he's lurking on forums for advice and claiming someone might have stolen his debit card. 😕 I agree, the man is in a tight spot, but I am certain he should have approached the branch manager to find a resolution (which is still my honest advice).
Nicole Long28 said:The issue is specifically that it was unauthorized. It’s controversial because that data is protected by banking privacy laws. My question for you and anyone else working in the banking sector is this: have you ever just snooped through the accounts of politicians, business moguls, or athletes out of pure curiosity when they weren't even your clients? I bet you haven't, because you know if an audit catches you, you're getting fired on the spot.
When I provide my information, I do so under specific terms. Also, I highly doubt any board of directors at any major bank operating in the USA would ever pass an internal policy stating, "If an employee makes a mistake that costs them personally, they are allowed to access a client's account to fix the mess themselves."
It’s not about lacking time; it’s that sending a formal notice would force them to admit the error. If everything is settled over the phone, the client ends up with zero proof of the bank's blunder. Not to mention the inconvenience. With a formal letter, you can take 3, 5, or 8 days to respond with a cool head, whereas someone might catch you off guard on the phone.
I wouldn't want to talk about the method either. What shocks me is that someone used an unofficial channel at all. Banks usually love everything to be official, documented, verified, and notarized... unless it doesn't serve their interests. In those cases, a phone call works just fine.😁
I'm telling you again: it's highly unlikely a teller was the one who made contact.😉 Regarding admitting a mistake—you can read previous posts to see that regardless of the bank's error (like a misdirected deposit), this is still the client's problem because he received and kept funds that don't belong to him. Instead of advising him on how to resolve this with the least amount of friction, you people are offering "wonderful" advice like: "Why do you care? They messed up..." or "Sue them for a privacy violation..."—absolute nonsense. First and foremost, the client signed a waiver allowing the bank to use his data. Accessing that data in this specific instance doesn't constitute a breach of banking privacy.😉 Secondly, regardless of the bank's slip-up, the client is holding money that isn't his! Period! It isn't his money, no matter whose fault it was!
The tax documentation—specifically the JPK files—is essentially the digital paper trail of our fiscal existence; it’s the bureaucratic equivalent of a high-stakes audit waiting to happen if one single decimal point goes astray. kaže: Does anyone actually grasp that a person under a lien still possesses certain rights? It’s absurd to suggest a third party can just settle someone else's debt and then immediately demand reimbursement through coercion—that's essentially debt buying and predatory collection tactics, which is a straight-up felony.
Good grief—if our banks are truly this disconnected from reality... I’ve been seriously considering closing every single one of my accounts here in the States.
It would be wise to actually review my advice before launching such a baseless attack—honestly, a little due diligence goes a long way. 😉
Chris Doyle4 said:The bank just wants me to pay back every single one of those $1066 that landed in my account.
Did you actually tell them you don't have the funds? If you did—and if you actually had the cash—you wouldn't be facing a garnishment in the first place. If I were in your shoes, I’d head straight to the branch manager to negotiate a way out—maybe an authorized overdraft for that amount, a payment plan, or some other middle ground. I mean, surely you realize that money was never yours to begin with?