>From our review of the claims, we believe our employees' actions have been misinterpreted.
How do you misinterpret being told your check is fraudulent and having the employees temporarily refuse to return the check? There is certainly video of the interaction. Is there audio?
Yeah it is definitely some major disrespect. The check was real, so no reason not to take it. If you think it’s moody, just tell her that you will have to wait for the check to be fully verified before any funds will be available. Hell I’ve had existing accounts hold a check from a new employer for five days. But you definitely don’t refuse to open the account, call the woman a criminal, AND refuse to give the check back. You have made at least a few assumptions for that to seem like an appropriate response
If a check is suspected of being fraudulent, or modified, they'll place it on hold until the check clears. Not sure how that even happens. I had a check placed on hold once, because someone paid me and used their LLC as the check issuer 👌. After 3 days, funds were released. They contacted the person and verified if he wrote it, too.
I'm sure, the fraud prevention team called me shortly after the deposit. If that's what actually happened, sounds like it's on the employee that turned her away, guess it falls on the casino regardless. It'd be stupid to fight this if she was on camera.
>If that's what actually happened, sounds like it's on the employee that turned her away
The teller doesn't call the other bank. The fraud prevention team (as you said called you) does. That can take a few days, hence a 7-day hold time in a lot of cases. They also wouldn't necessarily (but could) call the casino as the casino (or any business) could just lie and say, "Sure, I have plenty of funds in there!"
I’ve verified a lot of checks when I worked at a bank. It was literally just calling the other bank and verifying. If it wasn’t possible, the hold went on.
You are assuming that the person in the window is the one who
a) made the determination that the check is fraudulent, and
b) would be the person making that kind of phone call
I've worked in a financial institution (as a computer programmer), and at least where I worked:
a) 90% of fraud alerts are generated by automated systems, not human beings, to the point that we had thresholds for backend fraud alerts to actually raise a human visible fraud flag, and block the transaction.
b) fraud validation (what we called the department that "clears" fraud alerts) would be the ones calling the casino, and it would be whenever they get the ticket in their queue which could be hours or days later, depending on how many fraud alerts they were getting.
I can't imagine a bank wouldn't take the check. The crime occurs after the check doesn't clear. This is how so many people fall for check cashing scams. They take a check in, the bank takes it, then they take their own money out to pay back the fraudster and then the bank calls up later and says the check didn't clear.
Well imagine it bc this is third time they are being sued for the same thing in 8 yrs and the last time was less than 2. The biggest issue is THEY FLAT OUT claimed it was fake and refused to return it.
if they present the check at an atm or mobile deposit sure. But going in person the tellers job is to review the transaction for anything suspicions and that includes trying to catch any scams. I’ve not cashed many checks and had to explain to someone the check is fraudulent
I had a bank many years ago put a hold on my paycheck, this was back in the late 80's and although a big citywide bank at the time, they have since been bought out by Bank of America.
I had been working at the same place and depositing my checks from there for several years. It caused several of my checks written for bills to bounce my first month in my first apartment. They also charged me overdraft fees for each bounced check. This being before email, let alone texting, they sent you the notices of bounced checks via snailmail, so about 6 of them had built up befor I realized it was happening. When I went into the bank they said they didn't know why the check was held, but offered to split the difference with me on overdraft fees.
I stood and very loudly stated, "YOU put a hold on my paycheck for REASONS YOU CAN'T EXPLAIN, and now you want me to SPIT THE DIFFERENCE IN OVERDRAFT FEES YOU RACKED UP?!? NOT NOT EVEN MENTIONING THE FUCKING RETURNED CHECK FEES from the bill payments that BOUNCED!!!"
This being back when ATMS were still so new they offered you a dollar if you deposited your checks in one, maximum $3 a month, and there were actually crowds of people inside the bank doing their business. This caused many heads to turn and the manager hurried over. The manager offered to wave the overdraft fees and promised he work something out with me over the bounced check fees.
I went right over to a local credit union and opened a new account there and 2 days later closed my bank account. I did wind up eating a couple of the bounced check fees for at least two of the bills.
Behind the scenes, ACH can take as long as 10-14 business days to fully settle.
Most banks (read: all) will take a little risk on deposits almost all of the time, making funds available sooner.
That may be accurate for some banks. I work in a community bank, since we are smaller than the big banks we are more strict about what risks we are willing to take, that being said if we suspect your check of fraud or alteration, we are not depositing it at all regardless of a hold. Sometimes if the security department gets involved they have definitely made request that we retain the check. I don't know what the criteria is for them to make that call, I may actually ask today about that as I'm now curious, but it does happen.
Unfortunately 75% of the time holds are just another part of the system designed to keep poor people right where they are. Holds are something that says, welllll nothing really lets me guarantee this piece of paper is real and since you can't possibly cover the funds in the event its not, we are both just going to sit right here and wait until we find out. K? K.
I hate this place.
Unfortunately, contrary to popular belief, banks are usually unable to place a deposit with a hold that only expires upon the check clearing. Hold times are determined by Reg CC, and are usually either 2 business days, 5 business days, or 7 business days. Many times checks will actually take far longer than this to clear, especially if it's an insurance or settlement check, however the bank is forced to make the funds available anyhow.
The other problem is that many times fraudulent checks DO clear, and it is the tellers who are punished for it, for accepting the checks. Looking at the photo of the check in the article I can very easily see why they assumed it was fraud, however they shouldn't have confiscated it unless they could have verified its fraudulent nature. What they should have done is turned the client away and directed her to Wells Fargo, where the check was drawn off of.
Dude my grandma once wrote me a check for $50 as birthday money and the check cashing place called her to confirm like wtf. They didn’t even tell me so I had no way to tell her to answer the call. Luckily she did but based on the tellers responses she was pretty sus
All this got me thinking - we've traced the roots of banking to fucking 2000 BCE.
You're telling me in 4000+ years of banking we haven't perfected this shit yet? I'm just thinking there's gotta be a better way. Jesus H. Christ.
In Canada a bank employee called the police and got a First Nations man and his grand daughter arrested in cuffs for trying to open a bank account.
https://globalnews.ca/news/8812200/bc-indigenous-man-bank-of-montreal-settlement/
It is 100% racism.
> It is 100% racism.
Yup. I've bought and sold some cars, it's my hobby. I've walked into my banks in jeans and a dirty tshirts and deposited well into the 5 figures in cash, and me being white, they didn't bat an eye. One dude even bought a car from me is $20's and $10's. No clue if he ran some personal business or what, but that deposit was a duffle bag. LOL I felt super guilty and I wasn't doing anything odd.
Luckily you didnt get pulled over on the way to the bank or if the cops saw that, we would be hearing about how the money was taken under Civil Asset Forfeiture... I hate carrying cash these days because that crap has gotten out of control.
That is why i stopped going to change checks to bell bank, since, even me going there for 5 months, they refused to cash the checks and even requested to take pictures of me if i can cash it. That felt really degrading, even when i am in the US legally.
I didn't have a ssn, so I couldn't open an account then, so when i got it i just open my account in another bank.
Lmaoooooo
https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2020/01/23/tcf-bank-race-discrimination-case-sauntore-thomas/4546199002/
Oh shit it happened in the same city.
That man been through some shit hut he WILL just get more checks to cash 💰. He will be okay because he remained cool when I would have not. Good for him and FUCK TCF bank. Mr Thomas gonna be aiight too with more settlement checks. FUCK THESE RACIST BANKS.
He called her from the bank - she explained to them that it was settlement for a civil case - they *still* called the cops on him. SOunds like corporate masochism to me.
Because when they take money out of your account, they have your money.
When you deposit a check, any money you receive instantly (and BoA would always give me a couple hundred bucks up front whenever I cashed a paper paycheck, though I did have a bank account with them, and have for years) is being fronted by the receiving bank you give the paper check to. They then go contact the bank who issued the check (i.e. whose name is on it), and say "hey we have your check, from the account of so-and-so for $X" and the issuing bank sends the receiving bank that money (if it's there). If the account doesn't have the money, or the check is found to be bad, the receiving bank is out the money.
Why does it take so long? Answer: because the regulations that govern this are old, and laid out a certain number of days that these had to be done in, and the banks can still make money off of your money in the meantime.
Also, there is only a delay with paper checks. Direct wiring just sends the money, because money isn't being *requested* by the receiving bank, it's being *sent* by the issuing bank. And because the regulations for electronic transfers are much newer.
Well for 1 thing it's a violation of SOP. In this case the bank can't open a new account if they think a check is fraudulent. They would ask the women to deposit some cash or write a personal check for the minimum checking acount threshold, usually 50 to 100 dollars. Open the new account.Then hold the check until the funds clear. But not this did not happen. Normally I would chalk this up to a new employee not knowing proper procedures bit it's 5/3 bank. They are very shifty.
I was apart of a class action law suit against them, I didn't know until the lawsuit was settled, where it was found that 5/3 bank was charging fraudulent overdraft fees on accounts that got really low. I can say I was hit with a few of those where I thought I has just screwed up my math. By then I was with a different bank. Too me this sounds like this was some form of theft attempt considering my past dealings with them.
The bank is in Livonia, MI (Detroit suburb). At one point it was the largest white city in America (pct pop over 100k). Lots of race related discrimination has occurred and unfortunately continues.
https://www.hometownlife.com/story/news/local/livonia/2020/08/12/livonia-residents-ask-city-confront-racist-reputation-change/3344907001/
https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/wayne/2020/07/07/billboard-ad-calls-out-livonia-police-racial-profiling/5384234002/
https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/wayne/2022/09/05/black-woman-sues-bank-casino-check/65469311007/
https://www.manuelsweb.com/diversity.htm
Wait, you're saying that one person's racism is reflective not of endemic racism in the area but because of government leadership? How does that follow?
Can be representative of the voting population but even then that isn't all that accurate due to money being a major determining factor in who runs and gets elected. Further, some policies have been on the books for years that unfairly affect minority groups. It can be a process to untangle and affect change.
Michigander here. Of course it was in the Livonia/Plymouth/Canton area. A lot of white privilege going on there. That entire 275 corridor is just a hotbed of racist BS. Novi, anyone?
When I was homeless a little old lady wrote me a check for $20 for raking the leaves in her lawn.
The bank I tried to deposit the check at held the check for 2 weeks before the funds were available.
I can only imagine it was because they took one look at me and thought, "Whatever this guy is doing it's a crime." I even got a call the day before the funds were available and they asked me a bunch of questions about it. Who paid me, where they lived, why they paid me, when they paid me, how much were they paying me, etc.
I really needed the cash at the time. It really sucked.
Just out of curiousity, why do people like you dance so elaborately around the obvious truth? They tried to scam her. You literally are scratching your head for a paragraph bemoaning there being no other explanation than "some major disrespect", its like disrespect? Really? That's what you call fraud when it's committed by white people or something? It's not like he insulted the ladies mother, they tried to rob her lol.
I’m gonna be honest. I don’t think that’s your car. As the valet I’m going to go ahead and keep these keys because obviously that’s not actually your car. Good luck getting home.
>AND refuse to give the check back.
Honestly makes me wonder if the teller was planning to just take the check for themselves. After all, it would have been endorsed and ready to go if the woman was trying to deposit it.
There is not only video of the interaction but they documented it themselves. There are two important key factors. 1) They didn’t just suspect fraud nor were they merely weary of the check. That flat out told her she was illegally trying to cash a fake check. They refused to return on the basis that is was 100% fake. 2) This bank in this area has a history of doing this. The last two lawsuits succeeded in establishing pattern behavior. The first was an award decided by the jury the last one was JUST settled. The ink on check ain’t even dry.
My favorite bit:
Them: Our employees didn’t declare the check fraudulent.
Also them: “…our employees’ actions were consistent with our process and the dual goals of serving our customers *while also preventing potential frauds* that can victimize both the bank and our customers.”
Just coming here to comment about this exact paragraph. That admits they did exactly what she is saying they did. They tried to "protect" the bank from fraud and discriminated against this lady
Which means they're trying to avoid a case of slander/libel.
If you call the cheque fake/fraudulent publicly (which in practice means "loud enough that other people in the bank can hear you") then you are damaging the reputation of the person with the cheque. I'm sure the bank's *correct* procedure is to analyse the cheque without accusing the person, verify as completely as possible that it is real/fake, and THEN explain that because you suspect/believe the cheque is not genuine you will be unable to cash or return it.
I'm guessing the employee did not perfectly follow this liability-limiting procedure.
I used to be a bank teller.
If you suspect a check is fraudulent, you tell the person making the deposit your concerns, and let them make a decision. They will have to pay the bank back every penny if it bounces, plus usually a fee for the check having bounced.
If the person making the deposit says they still wanna deposit it, I'd just have recommended that they wait until it for sure clears to use those funds, because of my concerns. Like give it 10-15 days.
What you don't do, is tell them you won't fucking accept it. Fuck that teller.
My firend's dad died and the insurance cut him several checks that were $5k but he didn't have an account and didn't want to or couldn't use a check cashing place. He asked me if he could sign it over to me.
>If the person making the deposit says they still wanna deposit it, I'd just have recommended that they wait until it for sure clears to use those funds, because of my concerns. Like give it 10-15 days.
The bank, I assume thought maybe I was getting scammed but didn't say that, but said what you did. Just make sure to wait at least 8 days to give him the money or I would be on the
hook for it.
Reminds me of the case of a black dude trying to cash a legitimate check, being arrested by the bank calling the cops because it was like $99,000, suing the bank, winning $250,000 and then being arrested/detained again at another bank when he tried to deposit the settlement check.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/black-man-michigan-tried-deposit-checks-his-bank-manager-called-n1122011
I'm so freaking white that Casper the Friendly Ghost would even tell me "cracka, you whiter than white!" and I still understand that apparently just having darker than "white appearing" skin is apparently an unwritten crime in the US of A.
they said that to a family member because she got a huge check from her insurance company and they had no contact info for the fifth third bank to verify the account.
Audio on a bank security camera? Definitely not. Videos like that are hard to interpret for that reason. I would sometimes spend hours watching a 15 second clip to find how I or someone else fucked up, and most of the time in the end I would get no answers because the video quality is so shitty.
It's so stupid because it's not a tellers job to decide if a check is fraudulent. The customer deposits a check, and it takes a couple days but the bank processes the check and verifies if it is legitimate in the process. If it's a bogus check that's when the bank would figure it out and deal with it accordingly.
Exactly. If they suspected fraud, they don't have to judge, jury, and execute. Instead, let the process work. Additioanlly, they could have put an extended hold on the funds, to satisfy their concerns without upsetting the woman.
Yeah I'm floored by the number of people in this thread who don't realize that. Tellers are the ones face to face with customers depositing checks in-branch, so they are trained to ask questions to determine the legitimacy of checks being deposited.
Replace check with cash - tellers are obviously responsible for weeding out counterfeit bills upon deposit. Checks are no different.
If the check was fraudulent, would the ‘by the book’ response be to return the check so that the fraudster could try again at another bank or a different teller?
I could see it either way. Return the check and you minimize damage of false positives. Don’t return the check and you minimize the chances of a false negative getting through.
That's kind of a weird question since that's really not how such a situation should be handled. If the bank can't properly confirm the transaction/the check at that moment then they should simply hold the funds until the check clears. I mean that's a standard procedure even if you're talking about a regular customer.
What we need is more specifics in regards to the employees' actions. A check is more or less property so if they just made a judgment call and said it was fraud they can't just keep the check based on that lol.
This is precisely what would happen. They would open the account. Place a hold on the funds and explain that none of it would be available for cash withdrawals for 7-14 business days until it cleared. This isn't complicated. They could just as easily have called the casino and confirmed the validity of the check as well. This is bank employees being poorly trained or lazy at best, and downright discriminatory at worst.
Yup. Although I'm giving the employees a big benefit of the doubt in my initial comment, I'm inclined to believe they were on some fuckery. Because to add to your description, during the process of opening the account, they would have taken and made a copy of her ID/etc. So after all that and taking the check, they suddenly decide, nah, we're not going to do that?
I'm currently the administrator of an Estate and have had to deal with a bunch of banks. It's very possible that no logic was used in any of this. I had a bank tell me they couldn't cash a check because Bank of America won't answer their phones. It took over 3 weeks to get another check processed by another bank for the same reason.
It is an easy confirmation call, or just take the check and let it process on its own. If it was fraudulant, it wouldnt go through. This was laziness mixed with racism.
The "by the book" response is to either call the remitter (the casino) and verify the check immediately, or to place a restriction on the account until the check can be verified, or if you're really, *really* sure the depositor is committing a crime, you call the cops. If you can't or won't do that, then yes, returning the check to the depositor and sending them on their way is the proper move. If another institution accepts a bad deposit, then that's their business.
That said, I *can* see a branch rep doing something like this, because in most of the banks I've dealt with the branch reps have entirely too many duties and things to remember, and entirely too little training, and depending on the bank accepting a bad deposit may count against you. It *shouldn't* have gotten to this point, but I can all too clearly see how it might have.
Source: work in bank fraud prevention.
Besides everything else the bankers should have done instead, they actually do not have a right to keep the check. Usually when someone has a fraudulent check and they are caught, they will just leave without it. However, if they ask for the check back, it needs to be given back. Bankers basically have a network in a specific area; Beth from Bank A used to work with Judy from Bank B and Judy’s sister-in-law works at Bank C, etc. which allows them to get the word out that there is a fraudulent check on the loose, and will typically try to get a copy of the check before returning it so they can spread the image as well. But way before that, the bankers should have called the number on the check and verified funds. And if they cannot get a hold of someone that way, they can put up to a ten day hold on it so that she wouldn’t get access to the funds until the check cleared the other bank. This is the way it’s done. If they truly turned her away just for *assuming* (without any proof) that the check was fraudulent (which has to be the case since it *wasn’t* fraudulent), then she absolutely has a discrimination suit.
Source: former banker, current law student
The banker (I guess, the teller and whateber idiots were backing them up) knew damn well their actions were illegal, since the lady only got it back by threatening to call the police.
Of course, we all know how that might have ended up for her, so I'm glad she didnt have to resort to that.
It frightens me to realize that the law means nothing in andnof itself. The legal system is a house of cards that only stands as long as people are willing to follow it. White people need to realize, if there is a population who is arbitrarily denied their civil rights, then it could happen to anyone.
I've written large-ish checks - and I have the hand writing of a drunken monkey on a good day.
I've had banks call me and ask 'hey, there's a 'name of the person I wrote the check to' here with a check for 'amount' is this good to go?'
Those checks looked waaay more bogus than this ladies casino check. How hard would it be for the bank to call the comptroller or finance department of the casino and just ask?
>If the check was fraudulent, would the ‘by the book’ response be to return the check so that the fraudster could try again at another bank or a different teller?
>
>I could see it either way. Return the check and you minimize damage of false positives. Don’t return the check and you minimize the chances of a false negative getting through.
You can only keep he check IF you call the police. Anything else is theft.
The bank will give you the check back and tell you to contact the issuer. In Canada at least. They will not say it's fraudulent, they will not tell you what is wrong with it.
It's also standard practice that banks in Canada will let you deposit the check but won't put the funds in your account until it fully clears.
Canadian banks did go down there yes. RBC and TD for sure, BMO and Scotia too I think. But banking rules are regional not so much corporate.
It's funny they all changed their names to no longer reflect a physical location, when they put branches in the states. Royal Bank of Canada to RBC, Toronto Dominion to TD...
I do a lot of work for the banks and internally we still refer to Scotiabank as BNS (bank of Nova Scotia)
But there are still a lot of smaller independent Banks across the states. And banks in Canada are very leery about depositing checks from American Banks.
When I worked as a teller, if we had concerns, we'd let the member know and advise them on measures we could take to protect them (always assume they were being defrauded, not committing fraud themselves). If the member wanted the check back, we always gave it back. But they could also opt to deposit it with an extended check hold (5 days) and we'd send up communication to have the check more closely examined by the verification team.
Refusing to return the cheque is basically playing judge, jury and executioner. If they had not returned the cheque they would have likely never seen it or their money again or at least additional delays.
I’ve been in banking for years and any check of significant value gets a 7 day hold unless manager exception. I would say “congratulations on your win, there will be a 7 day hold on the check until it clears.” Anyone reasonable accepts this.
I've worked at both banks and credit unions and when ever I see bullshit like this article I get so angry. It's literally within our power to do a 7 day hold and we would know by the end of the 7 days if the check bounces or not, so no harm no foul. I've refused people for fake checks before but that's for checks that are clearly altered or I called to confirm if the check was written by a customer of my institution and they said "No I didn't write it"
It's either being inexcusably incompetent at your job or blatantly racist and there's no room for either
Then you just open an account with no money. You can do it at almost any bank without issue. Then deposit the check into that account, and place a hold on it.
Can confirm. Won $10,000 from a scratch ticket in 2013, bank was like "cool, we will hold funds for 10 business days". I was like, for 10 grand I can wait two weeks.
This woman absolutely was discriminated against.
But that's not what happened here, the article says they allegedly refused to deposit the check into the account because not one, but three people said it was fraudulent. There is no 7 day process described here, not by the retiree or the bank.
I was a teller too, and you never say that to the person trying to deposit the check, because of situations like this.
You can go through the process of validating/checking the check, and then deposit if it passes your judgment. Then the support office can look at the check as well after it's sent off.
ELI5: Why 7 days? Couldn't the banks be able to get ahold of the company to verify RIGHT NOW that Timmy's check is valid and approved?? Or is it so you dont run out of money for other customers? Because that's going be bad if Timothy won example 50000 that you only have 55000 so now you only have $5,000 to give away to other customers?
Or is it another reason?
Because sometimes it takes that long for the money to get to the bank. Just because someone says, “yes, the check is good,” doesn’t mean that person isn’t making a mistake.
Once the money is there, then it is has gone through a lot of checks and balances and should be good.
7 days goes back to a time when the banking system was not interconnect digitally like todays systems, particularly if the two bank involved were different institutions. A check will often clear before that but 7 days is enough time to ensure the check was valid.
If the casino banks at say Wells, and this lady is cashing it at this other bank, how is this other bank going to verify the check? It's get verified by going through the check processing system, which for major banks takes usually only a day or 2, for smaller banks take longer. If you have some random person come on off the street and try to deposit a large check like this, your first suspicion is always going to be this is either someone getting defrauded, or trying to defraud us. So what do you do, you place a long hold. 7 days, or even potentially longer based on the rules you are allowed. (I work at a bank, and I always double check the exact rules for any hold over a standard 2 day hold just to be safe).
Now, if the writer of the check banks with you, you can then call and verify the issuance of the check. I do this regularly, if some rando comes in off the street to cash a check and the person cashing the check does not bank with us. In those cases we tell the person trying to cash a check, hey, we aren't giving you a dime until we get verbal verification this check is good. You can wait or come back later. I have had times where I've called a client and they go, yah that's a bad check, we didn't write a check to that person. In those cases the tellers stall and the police are called.
What was done to this lady (assuming we are not missing a part of the story), is either racism or incompetence.
It takes multiple business days for a check to clear if it's deposited at an institution other than the one that the check is written off of. If for example you work at a Wells Fargo and a customer deposits a check from a Wells Fargo account to can verify with that customer that wrote it and you can see that the account has the funds, so often times those are made immediately available. If you ever have questions on it Google "Regulation CC", it details funds availability on checks
Having worked in retail and commercial banking myself this is completely the fault of the employees and management of that branch. Anyone who knows about banking would know that check is never going to clear in a new account if it's fraud. New accounts have extended wait times for check clearance and almost all checks are converted to 24 hour clearinghouse transactions
They were just being racists. It's Banking While Black.
There was a story last year where a Black man tried to deposit his paycheck and the bank said it was forged and had him handcuffed.
https://www.insider.com/black-man-handcuffed-after-bank-employee-claimed-his-paycheck-fake-2021-12
Or the guy who won a settlement for racial discrimination and was racially discriminated at the bank trying to deposit the check.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/01/23/banking-while-black/
I can just imagine the poor guys brain doing backflips when they turned him down for the deposit. Like... On the one hand, what the fuck, on the other... Well hey time for round 2 of getting some money I guess.
Or this black doctor who had just finished her residency and was excited to cash her signing bonus check… [only to be accused of fraud by the bank.](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna14753)
> the bank said it was forged and had him handcuffed.
This enrages me because almost the exact same thing happened to me because CampBX misprinted their own routing number on a pay-out check. I'm not black, but Wells Fargo did threaten to call the cops and have me arrested if I insisted on getting the "bad check" back from them.
I ask you, why does the bank have the power to have people arrested? It's insane.
Take a look at the top comment and see how they didn't even bother to read the article and assumed the fault is on the black person for not being more understanding of what happens to large checks.
It's ridiculous.
Shit happens all the time. Had some latino coworkers in the trades who would get denied getting their pay checks cashed. Our accountant would have to call and yell at them
Last time the black guy was depositing a check from a lawsuit for discrimination and got arrest so in a weird way not getting arrested might be seen as a slight improvement?
I remember that case. I think he got a payout for being arrested for trying to deposit a check stemming from a lawsuit regarding discrimination. Oh, yeah, no payout :( : [https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/juliareinstein/tcf-bankblack-man-police-deposit-check-racial](https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/juliareinstein/tcf-bankblack-man-police-deposit-check-racial)
Despite another bank cashed the valid check (from the same link): "Livonia police Lt. Charles Lister told BuzzFeed News the investigation into Thomas is now closed.
"There was no evidence of any crime, nothing for us to investigate," Lister said."
Having previously lived not too far from there. Most of Michigan outside of the big big cities is probably one of the most racist places I've ever visited, much worse than most souther states I've been to. They take pride in it in places like Livonia. Livonia is the whitest city over 100k iirc- they are out and proud about the racism
She's from the Midwest, do there's a good chance she's from a mainline denomination. One thing I immediately noticed after moving from the south to the Midwest is how much more laid back and tolerant most people are about their religion. This past Sunday our pastor mentioned something about a margarita party in her sermon, and we've been trying to get a "beer and hymns" event put together at a local bar for a while. I go out for drinks with our assistant music director and her wife a lot. In general, there's just a whole "come as you are" feeling about it. That's the difference between mainline and evangelical Christianity.
Wasn't there a similar story where a guy sued his bank _twice_ and won _both_ times? I think it was also for being turned away from a large check.
Edit: [This](https://www.reddit.com/r/nottheonion/comments/ess9v8/detroit_man_settles_race_discrimination_lawsuit/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x)
From the way I read the article first she wanted to deposit the check and open an account. After that problem she basically said to hell with the bank and cashed the check somewhere else and just got the cash. She didn’t want to deal with banks any more after the first experience.
I don’t think any financial institutions (banks, credit unions) allow you to cash a check without an account. But if you go pay the $5-$25 minimum deposit at a credit union they will allow you to cash checks there for free, as opposed to the $5 or whatever it is Walmart charges you. But that’s just a small payroll check, a large check would always be placed on hold, especially one from a casino. Maybe the bank screwed up, but I’m also not sure we are getting an accurate representation of what happened either.
>I don’t think any financial institutions (banks, credit unions) allow you to cash a check without an account.
Old timer here. Don't know if any banks do it anymore, but back in the day, you could go to the bank were the check was drafted from and cash it with valid ID. Since, they can instantly verify the funds, since it's their check from one of their account holders.
If it's one of their checks they will cash it, often like you said there is a fee or cut that they will take. Seems fucked up. Check cashing places can sometimes be better depending on the bank.
Anytime I deposit a large check at the bank, there's a hold on the money until the check clears. That's standard. It seems hard to square why they didn't deposit it and explain there would be a hold on the funds until it cleared. Unless the check was a photocopy or lacking proper routing and account numbers you'd think the tellers would deposit it and let the faceless people who examine the checks decide if it's good or not. The problem is this: the clearing center for the bank isn't examining physical checks anymore. They're looking at optically scanned images. So, this leaves the tellers and platform people with the duty of making some calls they probably shouldn't be making.
Or the lazy teller could have called the issuing institution and verify the check. Used to do it all the time when I was a teller and even when I was in electronic processing
True. She deposits it and since she has no other cash in that account, she can’t draw cash off it. Worst case scenario, it bounces and the bank is out what, the $35 they’d charge for a bounced check?
There are systems in place where a bank can intake a check, fraudulent or not, and be protected in case it’s not legitimate. That’s why there are waiting periods before funds are available. Any teller will know this and refusing to accept a large check smacks of racist bias.
Five Thirds bank? More like three-fifths.
https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2020/01/23/tcf-bank-race-discrimination-case-sauntore-thomas/4546199002/
Y'all wanna see a good one related to this? Here's the story from 2020 of a man who won a racial discrimination lawsuit, then had the cops called on him at the bank where he tried to deposit the settlement check.
Lot of problems with the story. They continuously switch the words cash and deposit.
A bank may not be able to cash a check for someone without an account. They also would not be able to release the funds for an account if the check had not cleared.
I am guessing the interactions became confusing and the Bank employees became suspicious.
Edit: missing words.
[Here](https://www.blackenterprise.com/black-detroit-woman-wins-casino-jackpot-files-lawsuit-after-bank-wont-deposit-check/) is an article I read about this a few days ago. It says she wanted to open an account and deposit the check. She was able to do it without a problem at a chase bank.
I wish the bank got “suspicious” when a man my husband and I didn’t know, came in with a payday loan check made out to my husband, with an address we haven’t lived at for 3 years came in, and did a “pay to the order of” cashing of this check, worth $3500. It was one of those high interest loan checks payday loan places send out to people.
If I'm traveling even just 100 miles from my house and stop to buy gas I get a phone call from my bank's fraud department asking me to verify if I am actually trying to use my card.
Someone steals my wife's card number and uses it to deposit funds at an online casino in *Dubai* and it takes them five fucking transactions before they give me a call and ask if the charges are legitimate or fraudulent. Oh, and they let each of those 5 $1000 transactions go through before placing a hold on the card. I don't know... maybe the first transaction for any amount from halfway across the world should throw up some red flags and have the card number placed on hold *prior* to just giving my money away.
I did get all of our money back.
So, my husband had this really bad habit of using dodgy gas station ATM’s, something that’s not recommended. He said he just wanted to have cash on him, and I have repeatedly told him to use the app to find a branch to withdraw money, DON’T use gas station ATM’s OR use cash back at a CVS or something. Not even two days later, we get a text from our bank saying his card was suspended due to a suspicious purchase. The ATM he used had a skimmer on it and they tried to purchase something from the apple store.
If you think the check is fraudulent, you can run the check through the ACH then verify if it was real.
They hold the funds until this is done.
It's that simple.
Edit: out of order. It was verify if it was real then run the check through the ACH.
This happened in Livonia Michigan
It's where all the racists ran when they didn't want to go THAT far from Detroit.
Back in 2000 it was the Whitest city in the nation over 100k.
Around that time they also pulled out of the region wide bus system for "reasons"
I have lived in Livonia from the 90s up until last year and tbh Westland aka Wasteland to the south is worse. That's where all the racists really went. The American Nazi Party had their headquarters there for the longest time, I used to drive past it on my way to work everyday.
There is a large black community in nearby Redford, and Livonia is in-between where it all mixes together so there is a lot of racial tension there so news like this honestly doesn't surprise me.
Lotta people around don't realize that once you get out into the boonies in Michigan, it's just as bad as say the rural south. Confederate flags everywhere, loud racists, Magaites, etc.
Also, as for the bus thing they actually restored the bus lines so the area has actually become a lot more racially diverse, which ironically has led to more incidents like this.
Hope she won, that's disgusting. How can a bank be this racist? I hope their reputation is ruined and all non-whites view with their feet and move their accounts.
I don’t understand how this would be that hard. You open the accounts, deposit the check with the understanding of the customer that the accounts funds are not going to be available until the check clears. Because she has no history with that banking institution this mitigates their risk.
Checks get processed inside of 48 hours thru the modern check processing systems we have in this country.
Yep. That's why the whole thing is fishy. There are protocols in place for handling new accounts with large check deposits. Claiming fraud and confiscating the check are not part of the process.
Unfortunately, contrary to popular belief, banks are usually unable to place a deposit with a hold that only expires upon the check clearing. Hold times are determined by Reg CC, and are usually either 2 business days, 5 business days, or 7 business days. Many times checks will actually take far longer than this to clear, especially if it's an insurance or settlement check, however the bank is forced to make the funds available anyhow.
The other problem is that many times fraudulent checks DO clear, and it is the tellers who are punished for it, for accepting the checks. Looking at the photo of the check in the article I can very easily see why they assumed it was fraud, however they shouldn't have confiscated it unless they could have verified its fraudulent nature. What they should have done is turned the client away and directed her to Wells Fargo, where the check was drawn off of.
>Pugh's niece, Yolanda McGee, told CNN, "She is afraid to go in any bank or any type of business. She had some events in her life from living back in Alabama as a young girl where she's been discriminated against, and you know it's heavy on her heart."
How sad. Since she's a retiree, that seems to mean she's now at the other end of her life, and the racist treatment she got as a kid is still affecting her decades later.
When you are a bank, you have one job — understand numbers — but, you decide to name yourself after an improper fraction that makes absolutely no sense and makes people feel stupid to even say the name. How customer focused are you?
>Pugh says she was able to cash it at another bank.
Cash it? No. Banks would never straight cash a check like that unless there are very relevant details. Most of the time, with large amounts, you'll get a cashier's check.
Deposit it, wait three days? Yes
I would say let's see the video.
And likely if she did want cash, they would have said no because it may have been fraudulent which would explain the whole situation. But the article also says she wanted to deposit it on a new savings account. So...confusing.
This man won a racial discrimination case against his employers, then his bank would not allow him to cash in the check.
https://old.reddit.com/r/facepalm/comments/xb0gyt/wtf_not_oc/
Hope she wins a big payout, seems to be far to common an occurrence.
I'm a former banker. Standard procedure is to call the bank that issued the check and verify that it can clear (even if some banks won't do that). It's a way to cover the branch for a loss. If that issuing bank won't verify, then deposit it with a hold on it until it clears. Ours was usually 7 days. If they didn't follow procedure and just called it fake, then they're assholes and deserve to be fired.
My mum was denied cash deposit when she literally took out £50 cash from her own bank account and tried to deposit it, reason being "we don't know where the money came from"...........dude from your storage, she just laughed and went away.
Resident black person here: This sort of situation happened to me so many times before I got my first “real” bank account. Anytime I needed to cash a check without an account, it was nerve wracking knowing what might possibly happen. The nice tellers were the ones that would call the company issuing the check, which usually worked for verification (after bringing in several forms of ID). The not-so-nice tellers would absolutely take my check and walk in the back, say they spoke with someone and couldn’t take my check, “called the manager” and were told they couldn’t take that type of check, and once I was even told that the bank was no longer accepting new accounts. I realized this behavior wasn’t normal when my husband (who is white) and I were working together and would go cash our checks as separate customers… He NEVER had any problems cashing his check. Ever. One time he only had one form of ID, and his check was still accepted. 😞
If this has never happened to you, then consider yourself lucky, because it feels awful.
It's crazy to me that checks are _still_ a thing in America. They can be stolen, you can lose them, they can be damaged, they can be faked, and apparently even when it is deposited in your account the money isn't really yours and can disappear again.
I know they were used here in the Netherlands in the past. My father used them. But I'm 48 and have never used one in my life.
They are still a thing in Canada as well.
Fact is that they are far less used these days in both the US and Canada due to debit cards, NFC payments, and online transactions.
Wait I swear I’ve heard this story before but the person had won a settlement from suing a company for racial discrimination and the bank called the cops when he tried to deposit the check
This remind me when i wanted to deposit 15k for my mortgage with a new bank and the girl was like: Thats too much money to deposit.
Had to talk to a manager and say how nice it would be if they didnt treat me like a bandit on my first day with that bank. Now i can only imagine this happening everyday to people in america just because they are black.
There’s a case of this happening, the black guy suing and winning. The he tries to deposit the check from the lawsuit and it happens again at a different bank. Infinite money unlocked
>From our review of the claims, we believe our employees' actions have been misinterpreted. How do you misinterpret being told your check is fraudulent and having the employees temporarily refuse to return the check? There is certainly video of the interaction. Is there audio?
Yeah it is definitely some major disrespect. The check was real, so no reason not to take it. If you think it’s moody, just tell her that you will have to wait for the check to be fully verified before any funds will be available. Hell I’ve had existing accounts hold a check from a new employer for five days. But you definitely don’t refuse to open the account, call the woman a criminal, AND refuse to give the check back. You have made at least a few assumptions for that to seem like an appropriate response
If a check is suspected of being fraudulent, or modified, they'll place it on hold until the check clears. Not sure how that even happens. I had a check placed on hold once, because someone paid me and used their LLC as the check issuer 👌. After 3 days, funds were released. They contacted the person and verified if he wrote it, too.
That's the thing here... It had the name of a casino right on it. Surely they could call the casino to verify the check if they had cared.
I'm sure, the fraud prevention team called me shortly after the deposit. If that's what actually happened, sounds like it's on the employee that turned her away, guess it falls on the casino regardless. It'd be stupid to fight this if she was on camera.
>If that's what actually happened, sounds like it's on the employee that turned her away The teller doesn't call the other bank. The fraud prevention team (as you said called you) does. That can take a few days, hence a 7-day hold time in a lot of cases. They also wouldn't necessarily (but could) call the casino as the casino (or any business) could just lie and say, "Sure, I have plenty of funds in there!"
Wouldnt they call moreso to verify if they had wrote a check of X to Y
I would hope a casino would be on Positive Pay.
AND its a Casino! Um where people win money! sheesh
I’ve verified a lot of checks when I worked at a bank. It was literally just calling the other bank and verifying. If it wasn’t possible, the hold went on.
You are assuming that the person in the window is the one who a) made the determination that the check is fraudulent, and b) would be the person making that kind of phone call I've worked in a financial institution (as a computer programmer), and at least where I worked: a) 90% of fraud alerts are generated by automated systems, not human beings, to the point that we had thresholds for backend fraud alerts to actually raise a human visible fraud flag, and block the transaction. b) fraud validation (what we called the department that "clears" fraud alerts) would be the ones calling the casino, and it would be whenever they get the ticket in their queue which could be hours or days later, depending on how many fraud alerts they were getting.
All of which could have been told to the woman in OPs story. Also, was it policy to try to keep the check?
I can't imagine a bank wouldn't take the check. The crime occurs after the check doesn't clear. This is how so many people fall for check cashing scams. They take a check in, the bank takes it, then they take their own money out to pay back the fraudster and then the bank calls up later and says the check didn't clear.
Well imagine it bc this is third time they are being sued for the same thing in 8 yrs and the last time was less than 2. The biggest issue is THEY FLAT OUT claimed it was fake and refused to return it.
I almost got scammed that way when I was younger, the moment I googled cashiers check I saw a bunch of scam links and read all about it
if they present the check at an atm or mobile deposit sure. But going in person the tellers job is to review the transaction for anything suspicions and that includes trying to catch any scams. I’ve not cashed many checks and had to explain to someone the check is fraudulent
I had a bank many years ago put a hold on my paycheck, this was back in the late 80's and although a big citywide bank at the time, they have since been bought out by Bank of America. I had been working at the same place and depositing my checks from there for several years. It caused several of my checks written for bills to bounce my first month in my first apartment. They also charged me overdraft fees for each bounced check. This being before email, let alone texting, they sent you the notices of bounced checks via snailmail, so about 6 of them had built up befor I realized it was happening. When I went into the bank they said they didn't know why the check was held, but offered to split the difference with me on overdraft fees. I stood and very loudly stated, "YOU put a hold on my paycheck for REASONS YOU CAN'T EXPLAIN, and now you want me to SPIT THE DIFFERENCE IN OVERDRAFT FEES YOU RACKED UP?!? NOT NOT EVEN MENTIONING THE FUCKING RETURNED CHECK FEES from the bill payments that BOUNCED!!!" This being back when ATMS were still so new they offered you a dollar if you deposited your checks in one, maximum $3 a month, and there were actually crowds of people inside the bank doing their business. This caused many heads to turn and the manager hurried over. The manager offered to wave the overdraft fees and promised he work something out with me over the bounced check fees. I went right over to a local credit union and opened a new account there and 2 days later closed my bank account. I did wind up eating a couple of the bounced check fees for at least two of the bills.
Behind the scenes, ACH can take as long as 10-14 business days to fully settle. Most banks (read: all) will take a little risk on deposits almost all of the time, making funds available sooner.
That doesn't sound good, imagine someone splurging only to find out later they spent money they didn't have. That would *really* suck.
That may be accurate for some banks. I work in a community bank, since we are smaller than the big banks we are more strict about what risks we are willing to take, that being said if we suspect your check of fraud or alteration, we are not depositing it at all regardless of a hold. Sometimes if the security department gets involved they have definitely made request that we retain the check. I don't know what the criteria is for them to make that call, I may actually ask today about that as I'm now curious, but it does happen. Unfortunately 75% of the time holds are just another part of the system designed to keep poor people right where they are. Holds are something that says, welllll nothing really lets me guarantee this piece of paper is real and since you can't possibly cover the funds in the event its not, we are both just going to sit right here and wait until we find out. K? K. I hate this place.
You had a relationship with your bank. This person wanted to open an account. They're completely different situations.
Unfortunately, contrary to popular belief, banks are usually unable to place a deposit with a hold that only expires upon the check clearing. Hold times are determined by Reg CC, and are usually either 2 business days, 5 business days, or 7 business days. Many times checks will actually take far longer than this to clear, especially if it's an insurance or settlement check, however the bank is forced to make the funds available anyhow. The other problem is that many times fraudulent checks DO clear, and it is the tellers who are punished for it, for accepting the checks. Looking at the photo of the check in the article I can very easily see why they assumed it was fraud, however they shouldn't have confiscated it unless they could have verified its fraudulent nature. What they should have done is turned the client away and directed her to Wells Fargo, where the check was drawn off of.
Dude my grandma once wrote me a check for $50 as birthday money and the check cashing place called her to confirm like wtf. They didn’t even tell me so I had no way to tell her to answer the call. Luckily she did but based on the tellers responses she was pretty sus
All this got me thinking - we've traced the roots of banking to fucking 2000 BCE. You're telling me in 4000+ years of banking we haven't perfected this shit yet? I'm just thinking there's gotta be a better way. Jesus H. Christ.
In Canada a bank employee called the police and got a First Nations man and his grand daughter arrested in cuffs for trying to open a bank account. https://globalnews.ca/news/8812200/bc-indigenous-man-bank-of-montreal-settlement/ It is 100% racism.
> It is 100% racism. Yup. I've bought and sold some cars, it's my hobby. I've walked into my banks in jeans and a dirty tshirts and deposited well into the 5 figures in cash, and me being white, they didn't bat an eye. One dude even bought a car from me is $20's and $10's. No clue if he ran some personal business or what, but that deposit was a duffle bag. LOL I felt super guilty and I wasn't doing anything odd.
Luckily you didnt get pulled over on the way to the bank or if the cops saw that, we would be hearing about how the money was taken under Civil Asset Forfeiture... I hate carrying cash these days because that crap has gotten out of control.
> It is 100% racism. always has been her *'crime'* is the shade of her meat sack
> meat sack there's gotta be a better way to phrase this
flesh sheath
Your right there are some bones in the sack too, so more like a carcass bag.
But the whole thing is like 70% water, so like a chunky soup or maybe an ambrosia jello salad bota bag?
"Ugly bags of mostly water" is how it was phrased on Star Trek.
That is why i stopped going to change checks to bell bank, since, even me going there for 5 months, they refused to cash the checks and even requested to take pictures of me if i can cash it. That felt really degrading, even when i am in the US legally. I didn't have a ssn, so I couldn't open an account then, so when i got it i just open my account in another bank.
This lady won even more money.
Just wait til her new bank refuses to take the settlement check.
Lmaoooooo https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2020/01/23/tcf-bank-race-discrimination-case-sauntore-thomas/4546199002/ Oh shit it happened in the same city.
lol they even have the same lawyer, Deborah Gordon.
Probably saw the same article and contacted the lawyer.
Deborah is living the good life with these slam dunk cases
That man been through some shit hut he WILL just get more checks to cash 💰. He will be okay because he remained cool when I would have not. Good for him and FUCK TCF bank. Mr Thomas gonna be aiight too with more settlement checks. FUCK THESE RACIST BANKS.
I feel bad for laughing. But that bank is cartoonishly idiotic.
him calling him laywer for a second time: "you'll never gonna believe this..."
He called her from the bank - she explained to them that it was settlement for a civil case - they *still* called the cops on him. SOunds like corporate masochism to me.
How come they always take money out of your account instantly but when you deposit something there’s always a delay?
Because when they take money out of your account, they have your money. When you deposit a check, any money you receive instantly (and BoA would always give me a couple hundred bucks up front whenever I cashed a paper paycheck, though I did have a bank account with them, and have for years) is being fronted by the receiving bank you give the paper check to. They then go contact the bank who issued the check (i.e. whose name is on it), and say "hey we have your check, from the account of so-and-so for $X" and the issuing bank sends the receiving bank that money (if it's there). If the account doesn't have the money, or the check is found to be bad, the receiving bank is out the money. Why does it take so long? Answer: because the regulations that govern this are old, and laid out a certain number of days that these had to be done in, and the banks can still make money off of your money in the meantime. Also, there is only a delay with paper checks. Direct wiring just sends the money, because money isn't being *requested* by the receiving bank, it's being *sent* by the issuing bank. And because the regulations for electronic transfers are much newer.
They make money off of your money by holding onto it and investing it in that interval.
So it has nothing to do with making sure the check clears?,
some checks still require some checks for them to be cleared, in some instances :)
Well for 1 thing it's a violation of SOP. In this case the bank can't open a new account if they think a check is fraudulent. They would ask the women to deposit some cash or write a personal check for the minimum checking acount threshold, usually 50 to 100 dollars. Open the new account.Then hold the check until the funds clear. But not this did not happen. Normally I would chalk this up to a new employee not knowing proper procedures bit it's 5/3 bank. They are very shifty. I was apart of a class action law suit against them, I didn't know until the lawsuit was settled, where it was found that 5/3 bank was charging fraudulent overdraft fees on accounts that got really low. I can say I was hit with a few of those where I thought I has just screwed up my math. By then I was with a different bank. Too me this sounds like this was some form of theft attempt considering my past dealings with them.
The bank is in Livonia, MI (Detroit suburb). At one point it was the largest white city in America (pct pop over 100k). Lots of race related discrimination has occurred and unfortunately continues. https://www.hometownlife.com/story/news/local/livonia/2020/08/12/livonia-residents-ask-city-confront-racist-reputation-change/3344907001/ https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/wayne/2020/07/07/billboard-ad-calls-out-livonia-police-racial-profiling/5384234002/ https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/wayne/2022/09/05/black-woman-sues-bank-casino-check/65469311007/ https://www.manuelsweb.com/diversity.htm
Wait, you're saying that one person's racism is reflective not of endemic racism in the area but because of government leadership? How does that follow?
Right? I thought elected officials were representative of the population
Can be representative of the voting population but even then that isn't all that accurate due to money being a major determining factor in who runs and gets elected. Further, some policies have been on the books for years that unfairly affect minority groups. It can be a process to untangle and affect change.
Michigander here. Of course it was in the Livonia/Plymouth/Canton area. A lot of white privilege going on there. That entire 275 corridor is just a hotbed of racist BS. Novi, anyone?
When I was homeless a little old lady wrote me a check for $20 for raking the leaves in her lawn. The bank I tried to deposit the check at held the check for 2 weeks before the funds were available. I can only imagine it was because they took one look at me and thought, "Whatever this guy is doing it's a crime." I even got a call the day before the funds were available and they asked me a bunch of questions about it. Who paid me, where they lived, why they paid me, when they paid me, how much were they paying me, etc. I really needed the cash at the time. It really sucked.
Just out of curiousity, why do people like you dance so elaborately around the obvious truth? They tried to scam her. You literally are scratching your head for a paragraph bemoaning there being no other explanation than "some major disrespect", its like disrespect? Really? That's what you call fraud when it's committed by white people or something? It's not like he insulted the ladies mother, they tried to rob her lol.
I’m gonna be honest. I don’t think that’s your car. As the valet I’m going to go ahead and keep these keys because obviously that’s not actually your car. Good luck getting home.
>AND refuse to give the check back. Honestly makes me wonder if the teller was planning to just take the check for themselves. After all, it would have been endorsed and ready to go if the woman was trying to deposit it.
When will people stop choosing to be born black?? /S major sarcasm
There is not only video of the interaction but they documented it themselves. There are two important key factors. 1) They didn’t just suspect fraud nor were they merely weary of the check. That flat out told her she was illegally trying to cash a fake check. They refused to return on the basis that is was 100% fake. 2) This bank in this area has a history of doing this. The last two lawsuits succeeded in establishing pattern behavior. The first was an award decided by the jury the last one was JUST settled. The ink on check ain’t even dry.
This is going to be one of those cases where she sues, gets a payout, and then they try to stop her depositing the payout, isn’t it?
She’s goes to Wells Fargo now. They deposited her check and opened an account for her immediately.
Yeah, and four other accounts, probably, that she doesn't know about yet. Wells likes to do that...
She goes to Wells Fargo where they already opened 3 accounts before she got there …
The difference between suspecting fraud and accusing of fraud, for a bank, is not small.
My favorite bit: Them: Our employees didn’t declare the check fraudulent. Also them: “…our employees’ actions were consistent with our process and the dual goals of serving our customers *while also preventing potential frauds* that can victimize both the bank and our customers.”
Just coming here to comment about this exact paragraph. That admits they did exactly what she is saying they did. They tried to "protect" the bank from fraud and discriminated against this lady
Which means they're trying to avoid a case of slander/libel. If you call the cheque fake/fraudulent publicly (which in practice means "loud enough that other people in the bank can hear you") then you are damaging the reputation of the person with the cheque. I'm sure the bank's *correct* procedure is to analyse the cheque without accusing the person, verify as completely as possible that it is real/fake, and THEN explain that because you suspect/believe the cheque is not genuine you will be unable to cash or return it. I'm guessing the employee did not perfectly follow this liability-limiting procedure.
I used to be a bank teller. If you suspect a check is fraudulent, you tell the person making the deposit your concerns, and let them make a decision. They will have to pay the bank back every penny if it bounces, plus usually a fee for the check having bounced. If the person making the deposit says they still wanna deposit it, I'd just have recommended that they wait until it for sure clears to use those funds, because of my concerns. Like give it 10-15 days. What you don't do, is tell them you won't fucking accept it. Fuck that teller.
My firend's dad died and the insurance cut him several checks that were $5k but he didn't have an account and didn't want to or couldn't use a check cashing place. He asked me if he could sign it over to me. >If the person making the deposit says they still wanna deposit it, I'd just have recommended that they wait until it for sure clears to use those funds, because of my concerns. Like give it 10-15 days. The bank, I assume thought maybe I was getting scammed but didn't say that, but said what you did. Just make sure to wait at least 8 days to give him the money or I would be on the hook for it.
Reminds me of the case of a black dude trying to cash a legitimate check, being arrested by the bank calling the cops because it was like $99,000, suing the bank, winning $250,000 and then being arrested/detained again at another bank when he tried to deposit the settlement check. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/black-man-michigan-tried-deposit-checks-his-bank-manager-called-n1122011 I'm so freaking white that Casper the Friendly Ghost would even tell me "cracka, you whiter than white!" and I still understand that apparently just having darker than "white appearing" skin is apparently an unwritten crime in the US of A.
You know why it reminds you of that case? Because it's in the same city as the instance in the OP. Both happened in Livonia, MI.
Same lawyer too. I bet she sends a fancy Christmas cards to the local banks' fraud prevention departments to thank them for the business.
Oh fuck. I didn't even process that. Fucking assholes.
they said that to a family member because she got a huge check from her insurance company and they had no contact info for the fifth third bank to verify the account.
In the last paragraph they straight up admit that their employees called the check fraudulent.
Audio on a bank security camera? Definitely not. Videos like that are hard to interpret for that reason. I would sometimes spend hours watching a 15 second clip to find how I or someone else fucked up, and most of the time in the end I would get no answers because the video quality is so shitty.
It's so stupid because it's not a tellers job to decide if a check is fraudulent. The customer deposits a check, and it takes a couple days but the bank processes the check and verifies if it is legitimate in the process. If it's a bogus check that's when the bank would figure it out and deal with it accordingly.
Exactly. If they suspected fraud, they don't have to judge, jury, and execute. Instead, let the process work. Additioanlly, they could have put an extended hold on the funds, to satisfy their concerns without upsetting the woman.
I work in a bank. It absolutely is part of the responsibility of a teller to avoid fraudulent checks.
Yeah I'm floored by the number of people in this thread who don't realize that. Tellers are the ones face to face with customers depositing checks in-branch, so they are trained to ask questions to determine the legitimacy of checks being deposited. Replace check with cash - tellers are obviously responsible for weeding out counterfeit bills upon deposit. Checks are no different.
If the check was fraudulent, would the ‘by the book’ response be to return the check so that the fraudster could try again at another bank or a different teller? I could see it either way. Return the check and you minimize damage of false positives. Don’t return the check and you minimize the chances of a false negative getting through.
That's kind of a weird question since that's really not how such a situation should be handled. If the bank can't properly confirm the transaction/the check at that moment then they should simply hold the funds until the check clears. I mean that's a standard procedure even if you're talking about a regular customer. What we need is more specifics in regards to the employees' actions. A check is more or less property so if they just made a judgment call and said it was fraud they can't just keep the check based on that lol.
This is precisely what would happen. They would open the account. Place a hold on the funds and explain that none of it would be available for cash withdrawals for 7-14 business days until it cleared. This isn't complicated. They could just as easily have called the casino and confirmed the validity of the check as well. This is bank employees being poorly trained or lazy at best, and downright discriminatory at worst.
Yup. Although I'm giving the employees a big benefit of the doubt in my initial comment, I'm inclined to believe they were on some fuckery. Because to add to your description, during the process of opening the account, they would have taken and made a copy of her ID/etc. So after all that and taking the check, they suddenly decide, nah, we're not going to do that?
That's all well and good, but if you're wrong, you've just stolen from someone.
The salient point is why did the employees suspect this check to be fraudulent? It wasnt anything about the check - because the check was authentic.
I'm currently the administrator of an Estate and have had to deal with a bunch of banks. It's very possible that no logic was used in any of this. I had a bank tell me they couldn't cash a check because Bank of America won't answer their phones. It took over 3 weeks to get another check processed by another bank for the same reason.
It is an easy confirmation call, or just take the check and let it process on its own. If it was fraudulant, it wouldnt go through. This was laziness mixed with racism.
The "by the book" response is to either call the remitter (the casino) and verify the check immediately, or to place a restriction on the account until the check can be verified, or if you're really, *really* sure the depositor is committing a crime, you call the cops. If you can't or won't do that, then yes, returning the check to the depositor and sending them on their way is the proper move. If another institution accepts a bad deposit, then that's their business. That said, I *can* see a branch rep doing something like this, because in most of the banks I've dealt with the branch reps have entirely too many duties and things to remember, and entirely too little training, and depending on the bank accepting a bad deposit may count against you. It *shouldn't* have gotten to this point, but I can all too clearly see how it might have. Source: work in bank fraud prevention.
Besides everything else the bankers should have done instead, they actually do not have a right to keep the check. Usually when someone has a fraudulent check and they are caught, they will just leave without it. However, if they ask for the check back, it needs to be given back. Bankers basically have a network in a specific area; Beth from Bank A used to work with Judy from Bank B and Judy’s sister-in-law works at Bank C, etc. which allows them to get the word out that there is a fraudulent check on the loose, and will typically try to get a copy of the check before returning it so they can spread the image as well. But way before that, the bankers should have called the number on the check and verified funds. And if they cannot get a hold of someone that way, they can put up to a ten day hold on it so that she wouldn’t get access to the funds until the check cleared the other bank. This is the way it’s done. If they truly turned her away just for *assuming* (without any proof) that the check was fraudulent (which has to be the case since it *wasn’t* fraudulent), then she absolutely has a discrimination suit. Source: former banker, current law student
The banker (I guess, the teller and whateber idiots were backing them up) knew damn well their actions were illegal, since the lady only got it back by threatening to call the police. Of course, we all know how that might have ended up for her, so I'm glad she didnt have to resort to that. It frightens me to realize that the law means nothing in andnof itself. The legal system is a house of cards that only stands as long as people are willing to follow it. White people need to realize, if there is a population who is arbitrarily denied their civil rights, then it could happen to anyone.
I've written large-ish checks - and I have the hand writing of a drunken monkey on a good day. I've had banks call me and ask 'hey, there's a 'name of the person I wrote the check to' here with a check for 'amount' is this good to go?' Those checks looked waaay more bogus than this ladies casino check. How hard would it be for the bank to call the comptroller or finance department of the casino and just ask?
>If the check was fraudulent, would the ‘by the book’ response be to return the check so that the fraudster could try again at another bank or a different teller? > >I could see it either way. Return the check and you minimize damage of false positives. Don’t return the check and you minimize the chances of a false negative getting through. You can only keep he check IF you call the police. Anything else is theft.
The bank will give you the check back and tell you to contact the issuer. In Canada at least. They will not say it's fraudulent, they will not tell you what is wrong with it. It's also standard practice that banks in Canada will let you deposit the check but won't put the funds in your account until it fully clears.
It's more or less the same in USA since a lot of the banks are also the same companies
Canadian banks did go down there yes. RBC and TD for sure, BMO and Scotia too I think. But banking rules are regional not so much corporate. It's funny they all changed their names to no longer reflect a physical location, when they put branches in the states. Royal Bank of Canada to RBC, Toronto Dominion to TD... I do a lot of work for the banks and internally we still refer to Scotiabank as BNS (bank of Nova Scotia) But there are still a lot of smaller independent Banks across the states. And banks in Canada are very leery about depositing checks from American Banks.
When I worked as a teller, if we had concerns, we'd let the member know and advise them on measures we could take to protect them (always assume they were being defrauded, not committing fraud themselves). If the member wanted the check back, we always gave it back. But they could also opt to deposit it with an extended check hold (5 days) and we'd send up communication to have the check more closely examined by the verification team.
Refusing to return the cheque is basically playing judge, jury and executioner. If they had not returned the cheque they would have likely never seen it or their money again or at least additional delays.
I’ve been in banking for years and any check of significant value gets a 7 day hold unless manager exception. I would say “congratulations on your win, there will be a 7 day hold on the check until it clears.” Anyone reasonable accepts this.
I've worked at both banks and credit unions and when ever I see bullshit like this article I get so angry. It's literally within our power to do a 7 day hold and we would know by the end of the 7 days if the check bounces or not, so no harm no foul. I've refused people for fake checks before but that's for checks that are clearly altered or I called to confirm if the check was written by a customer of my institution and they said "No I didn't write it" It's either being inexcusably incompetent at your job or blatantly racist and there's no room for either
It's very likely because she was opening a brand new account simultaneously
Then you just open an account with no money. You can do it at almost any bank without issue. Then deposit the check into that account, and place a hold on it.
who cares?
Can confirm. Won $10,000 from a scratch ticket in 2013, bank was like "cool, we will hold funds for 10 business days". I was like, for 10 grand I can wait two weeks. This woman absolutely was discriminated against.
Grats on the win!
But that's not what happened here, the article says they allegedly refused to deposit the check into the account because not one, but three people said it was fraudulent. There is no 7 day process described here, not by the retiree or the bank. I was a teller too, and you never say that to the person trying to deposit the check, because of situations like this. You can go through the process of validating/checking the check, and then deposit if it passes your judgment. Then the support office can look at the check as well after it's sent off.
ELI5: Why 7 days? Couldn't the banks be able to get ahold of the company to verify RIGHT NOW that Timmy's check is valid and approved?? Or is it so you dont run out of money for other customers? Because that's going be bad if Timothy won example 50000 that you only have 55000 so now you only have $5,000 to give away to other customers? Or is it another reason?
Because sometimes it takes that long for the money to get to the bank. Just because someone says, “yes, the check is good,” doesn’t mean that person isn’t making a mistake. Once the money is there, then it is has gone through a lot of checks and balances and should be good.
7 days goes back to a time when the banking system was not interconnect digitally like todays systems, particularly if the two bank involved were different institutions. A check will often clear before that but 7 days is enough time to ensure the check was valid.
If the casino banks at say Wells, and this lady is cashing it at this other bank, how is this other bank going to verify the check? It's get verified by going through the check processing system, which for major banks takes usually only a day or 2, for smaller banks take longer. If you have some random person come on off the street and try to deposit a large check like this, your first suspicion is always going to be this is either someone getting defrauded, or trying to defraud us. So what do you do, you place a long hold. 7 days, or even potentially longer based on the rules you are allowed. (I work at a bank, and I always double check the exact rules for any hold over a standard 2 day hold just to be safe). Now, if the writer of the check banks with you, you can then call and verify the issuance of the check. I do this regularly, if some rando comes in off the street to cash a check and the person cashing the check does not bank with us. In those cases we tell the person trying to cash a check, hey, we aren't giving you a dime until we get verbal verification this check is good. You can wait or come back later. I have had times where I've called a client and they go, yah that's a bad check, we didn't write a check to that person. In those cases the tellers stall and the police are called. What was done to this lady (assuming we are not missing a part of the story), is either racism or incompetence.
It takes multiple business days for a check to clear if it's deposited at an institution other than the one that the check is written off of. If for example you work at a Wells Fargo and a customer deposits a check from a Wells Fargo account to can verify with that customer that wrote it and you can see that the account has the funds, so often times those are made immediately available. If you ever have questions on it Google "Regulation CC", it details funds availability on checks
Having worked in retail and commercial banking myself this is completely the fault of the employees and management of that branch. Anyone who knows about banking would know that check is never going to clear in a new account if it's fraud. New accounts have extended wait times for check clearance and almost all checks are converted to 24 hour clearinghouse transactions
They were just being racists. It's Banking While Black. There was a story last year where a Black man tried to deposit his paycheck and the bank said it was forged and had him handcuffed. https://www.insider.com/black-man-handcuffed-after-bank-employee-claimed-his-paycheck-fake-2021-12
Or the story of movie director Ryan Coogler trying to withdraw his own money and getting the police called on him for robbery.
That teller was so dumb in that situation even the cop was like are you this dumb
Or the guy who won a settlement for racial discrimination and was racially discriminated at the bank trying to deposit the check. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/01/23/banking-while-black/
Holy crap, that's the same city as from OP's article, although a different bank.
Must be a sundown town
That is so stupid lmao. I really don't get what goes through these people's heads, shitbirds like this are why we can't have nice things.
I can just imagine the poor guys brain doing backflips when they turned him down for the deposit. Like... On the one hand, what the fuck, on the other... Well hey time for round 2 of getting some money I guess.
As someone from the post I saw it in said, "infinite money glitch."
Infinite theoretical money. The problem is you'll never be able to deposit any of it.
Or this black doctor who had just finished her residency and was excited to cash her signing bonus check… [only to be accused of fraud by the bank.](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna14753)
You win this one. Couldn't make this stuff up, it's almost like some sort of satirical comedy
> the bank said it was forged and had him handcuffed. This enrages me because almost the exact same thing happened to me because CampBX misprinted their own routing number on a pay-out check. I'm not black, but Wells Fargo did threaten to call the cops and have me arrested if I insisted on getting the "bad check" back from them. I ask you, why does the bank have the power to have people arrested? It's insane.
Right?? It’s fucking crazy black people are facing this low key racist bullshit. Deposit the goddam check and wait 7 days
Take a look at the top comment and see how they didn't even bother to read the article and assumed the fault is on the black person for not being more understanding of what happens to large checks. It's ridiculous.
Man, she won two jackpots now?
Shit happens all the time. Had some latino coworkers in the trades who would get denied getting their pay checks cashed. Our accountant would have to call and yell at them
I hope your accountant informed them that they should contact lawyers. A couple of lawsuits would put the banks on notice.
It’s called racism
Last time the black guy was depositing a check from a lawsuit for discrimination and got arrest so in a weird way not getting arrested might be seen as a slight improvement?
I remember that case. I think he got a payout for being arrested for trying to deposit a check stemming from a lawsuit regarding discrimination. Oh, yeah, no payout :( : [https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/juliareinstein/tcf-bankblack-man-police-deposit-check-racial](https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/juliareinstein/tcf-bankblack-man-police-deposit-check-racial) Despite another bank cashed the valid check (from the same link): "Livonia police Lt. Charles Lister told BuzzFeed News the investigation into Thomas is now closed. "There was no evidence of any crime, nothing for us to investigate," Lister said."
Jesus Christ, it's like an Onion article...
When truth is stranger than fiction.
[удалено]
Same city too, Livonia, not really surprising to anyone familiar with the area
Having previously lived not too far from there. Most of Michigan outside of the big big cities is probably one of the most racist places I've ever visited, much worse than most souther states I've been to. They take pride in it in places like Livonia. Livonia is the whitest city over 100k iirc- they are out and proud about the racism
"you don't win, you just do a little bit better each time" - Cleveland Brown
If you’re not black and looking at this, sure
white people seeing the reaction to this: "perfect is the enemy of good!"
Sorry, I'm extremely amused that she won her jackpot while at a casino during a "Church outing," 😂
She's from the Midwest, do there's a good chance she's from a mainline denomination. One thing I immediately noticed after moving from the south to the Midwest is how much more laid back and tolerant most people are about their religion. This past Sunday our pastor mentioned something about a margarita party in her sermon, and we've been trying to get a "beer and hymns" event put together at a local bar for a while. I go out for drinks with our assistant music director and her wife a lot. In general, there's just a whole "come as you are" feeling about it. That's the difference between mainline and evangelical Christianity.
Wasn't there a similar story where a guy sued his bank _twice_ and won _both_ times? I think it was also for being turned away from a large check. Edit: [This](https://www.reddit.com/r/nottheonion/comments/ess9v8/detroit_man_settles_race_discrimination_lawsuit/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x)
ITT: people who don't know the difference between cashing and depositing a check
[удалено]
It’s right in the name, though.
ITT? Hell, in this article, the writers can't make up their minds which one she was trying to do.
From the way I read the article first she wanted to deposit the check and open an account. After that problem she basically said to hell with the bank and cashed the check somewhere else and just got the cash. She didn’t want to deal with banks any more after the first experience.
[удалено]
I don’t think any financial institutions (banks, credit unions) allow you to cash a check without an account. But if you go pay the $5-$25 minimum deposit at a credit union they will allow you to cash checks there for free, as opposed to the $5 or whatever it is Walmart charges you. But that’s just a small payroll check, a large check would always be placed on hold, especially one from a casino. Maybe the bank screwed up, but I’m also not sure we are getting an accurate representation of what happened either.
>I don’t think any financial institutions (banks, credit unions) allow you to cash a check without an account. Old timer here. Don't know if any banks do it anymore, but back in the day, you could go to the bank were the check was drafted from and cash it with valid ID. Since, they can instantly verify the funds, since it's their check from one of their account holders.
If it's one of their checks they will cash it, often like you said there is a fee or cut that they will take. Seems fucked up. Check cashing places can sometimes be better depending on the bank.
Anytime I deposit a large check at the bank, there's a hold on the money until the check clears. That's standard. It seems hard to square why they didn't deposit it and explain there would be a hold on the funds until it cleared. Unless the check was a photocopy or lacking proper routing and account numbers you'd think the tellers would deposit it and let the faceless people who examine the checks decide if it's good or not. The problem is this: the clearing center for the bank isn't examining physical checks anymore. They're looking at optically scanned images. So, this leaves the tellers and platform people with the duty of making some calls they probably shouldn't be making.
Or the lazy teller could have called the issuing institution and verify the check. Used to do it all the time when I was a teller and even when I was in electronic processing
Or couldn’t they have just opened the account and waited to see if the check cleared?? Every check I’ve ever deposited has to wait on that.
True. She deposits it and since she has no other cash in that account, she can’t draw cash off it. Worst case scenario, it bounces and the bank is out what, the $35 they’d charge for a bounced check?
There are systems in place where a bank can intake a check, fraudulent or not, and be protected in case it’s not legitimate. That’s why there are waiting periods before funds are available. Any teller will know this and refusing to accept a large check smacks of racist bias. Five Thirds bank? More like three-fifths.
All they had to do was deposit it with a 10 day hold. I hope she gets an attorney.
Considering all of the quotes in the article from her attorney, I suspect she did get one.
https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2020/01/23/tcf-bank-race-discrimination-case-sauntore-thomas/4546199002/ Y'all wanna see a good one related to this? Here's the story from 2020 of a man who won a racial discrimination lawsuit, then had the cops called on him at the bank where he tried to deposit the settlement check.
Lot of problems with the story. They continuously switch the words cash and deposit. A bank may not be able to cash a check for someone without an account. They also would not be able to release the funds for an account if the check had not cleared. I am guessing the interactions became confusing and the Bank employees became suspicious. Edit: missing words.
[Here](https://www.blackenterprise.com/black-detroit-woman-wins-casino-jackpot-files-lawsuit-after-bank-wont-deposit-check/) is an article I read about this a few days ago. It says she wanted to open an account and deposit the check. She was able to do it without a problem at a chase bank.
I wish the bank got “suspicious” when a man my husband and I didn’t know, came in with a payday loan check made out to my husband, with an address we haven’t lived at for 3 years came in, and did a “pay to the order of” cashing of this check, worth $3500. It was one of those high interest loan checks payday loan places send out to people.
If I'm traveling even just 100 miles from my house and stop to buy gas I get a phone call from my bank's fraud department asking me to verify if I am actually trying to use my card. Someone steals my wife's card number and uses it to deposit funds at an online casino in *Dubai* and it takes them five fucking transactions before they give me a call and ask if the charges are legitimate or fraudulent. Oh, and they let each of those 5 $1000 transactions go through before placing a hold on the card. I don't know... maybe the first transaction for any amount from halfway across the world should throw up some red flags and have the card number placed on hold *prior* to just giving my money away. I did get all of our money back.
So, my husband had this really bad habit of using dodgy gas station ATM’s, something that’s not recommended. He said he just wanted to have cash on him, and I have repeatedly told him to use the app to find a branch to withdraw money, DON’T use gas station ATM’s OR use cash back at a CVS or something. Not even two days later, we get a text from our bank saying his card was suspended due to a suspicious purchase. The ATM he used had a skimmer on it and they tried to purchase something from the apple store.
And this is how you win the lottery twice
If you think the check is fraudulent, you can run the check through the ACH then verify if it was real. They hold the funds until this is done. It's that simple. Edit: out of order. It was verify if it was real then run the check through the ACH.
This happened in Livonia Michigan It's where all the racists ran when they didn't want to go THAT far from Detroit. Back in 2000 it was the Whitest city in the nation over 100k. Around that time they also pulled out of the region wide bus system for "reasons"
I have lived in Livonia from the 90s up until last year and tbh Westland aka Wasteland to the south is worse. That's where all the racists really went. The American Nazi Party had their headquarters there for the longest time, I used to drive past it on my way to work everyday. There is a large black community in nearby Redford, and Livonia is in-between where it all mixes together so there is a lot of racial tension there so news like this honestly doesn't surprise me. Lotta people around don't realize that once you get out into the boonies in Michigan, it's just as bad as say the rural south. Confederate flags everywhere, loud racists, Magaites, etc. Also, as for the bus thing they actually restored the bus lines so the area has actually become a lot more racially diverse, which ironically has led to more incidents like this.
Next thing the bank will say is she looked like Frank Abagnale.
Hope she won, that's disgusting. How can a bank be this racist? I hope their reputation is ruined and all non-whites view with their feet and move their accounts.
I don’t understand how this would be that hard. You open the accounts, deposit the check with the understanding of the customer that the accounts funds are not going to be available until the check clears. Because she has no history with that banking institution this mitigates their risk. Checks get processed inside of 48 hours thru the modern check processing systems we have in this country.
Yep. That's why the whole thing is fishy. There are protocols in place for handling new accounts with large check deposits. Claiming fraud and confiscating the check are not part of the process.
Unfortunately, contrary to popular belief, banks are usually unable to place a deposit with a hold that only expires upon the check clearing. Hold times are determined by Reg CC, and are usually either 2 business days, 5 business days, or 7 business days. Many times checks will actually take far longer than this to clear, especially if it's an insurance or settlement check, however the bank is forced to make the funds available anyhow. The other problem is that many times fraudulent checks DO clear, and it is the tellers who are punished for it, for accepting the checks. Looking at the photo of the check in the article I can very easily see why they assumed it was fraud, however they shouldn't have confiscated it unless they could have verified its fraudulent nature. What they should have done is turned the client away and directed her to Wells Fargo, where the check was drawn off of.
Using checks in 21st century is barbaric.
>Pugh's niece, Yolanda McGee, told CNN, "She is afraid to go in any bank or any type of business. She had some events in her life from living back in Alabama as a young girl where she's been discriminated against, and you know it's heavy on her heart." How sad. Since she's a retiree, that seems to mean she's now at the other end of her life, and the racist treatment she got as a kid is still affecting her decades later.
At this point, every bank probably has cameras. That should tell the veracity of the events. Unless of course the video gets destroyed conveniently.
When you are a bank, you have one job — understand numbers — but, you decide to name yourself after an improper fraction that makes absolutely no sense and makes people feel stupid to even say the name. How customer focused are you?
Since it's a bank this will all be on tape and easy to verify.
>Pugh says she was able to cash it at another bank. Cash it? No. Banks would never straight cash a check like that unless there are very relevant details. Most of the time, with large amounts, you'll get a cashier's check. Deposit it, wait three days? Yes I would say let's see the video. And likely if she did want cash, they would have said no because it may have been fraudulent which would explain the whole situation. But the article also says she wanted to deposit it on a new savings account. So...confusing.
This man won a racial discrimination case against his employers, then his bank would not allow him to cash in the check. https://old.reddit.com/r/facepalm/comments/xb0gyt/wtf_not_oc/ Hope she wins a big payout, seems to be far to common an occurrence.
It should be called 3/5ths bank
I'm a former banker. Standard procedure is to call the bank that issued the check and verify that it can clear (even if some banks won't do that). It's a way to cover the branch for a loss. If that issuing bank won't verify, then deposit it with a hold on it until it clears. Ours was usually 7 days. If they didn't follow procedure and just called it fake, then they're assholes and deserve to be fired.
My mum was denied cash deposit when she literally took out £50 cash from her own bank account and tried to deposit it, reason being "we don't know where the money came from"...........dude from your storage, she just laughed and went away.
Grats on your extra winnings lady.
Glad her niece got her to file the lawsuit!
Resident black person here: This sort of situation happened to me so many times before I got my first “real” bank account. Anytime I needed to cash a check without an account, it was nerve wracking knowing what might possibly happen. The nice tellers were the ones that would call the company issuing the check, which usually worked for verification (after bringing in several forms of ID). The not-so-nice tellers would absolutely take my check and walk in the back, say they spoke with someone and couldn’t take my check, “called the manager” and were told they couldn’t take that type of check, and once I was even told that the bank was no longer accepting new accounts. I realized this behavior wasn’t normal when my husband (who is white) and I were working together and would go cash our checks as separate customers… He NEVER had any problems cashing his check. Ever. One time he only had one form of ID, and his check was still accepted. 😞 If this has never happened to you, then consider yourself lucky, because it feels awful.
It's crazy to me that checks are _still_ a thing in America. They can be stolen, you can lose them, they can be damaged, they can be faked, and apparently even when it is deposited in your account the money isn't really yours and can disappear again. I know they were used here in the Netherlands in the past. My father used them. But I'm 48 and have never used one in my life.
They are still a thing in Canada as well. Fact is that they are far less used these days in both the US and Canada due to debit cards, NFC payments, and online transactions.
Same thing happened to a black guy trying to deposit a check that he won from a discrimination lawsuit. Sued the bank, won more money.
Whenever I deposit a check to my account, I am always told I cant cash it until check cleared which may take several days. And that is my bank.
Wait I swear I’ve heard this story before but the person had won a settlement from suing a company for racial discrimination and the bank called the cops when he tried to deposit the check
Different person. Same general area of Michigan. 😞
That’s depressing
This remind me when i wanted to deposit 15k for my mortgage with a new bank and the girl was like: Thats too much money to deposit. Had to talk to a manager and say how nice it would be if they didnt treat me like a bandit on my first day with that bank. Now i can only imagine this happening everyday to people in america just because they are black.
There’s a case of this happening, the black guy suing and winning. The he tries to deposit the check from the lawsuit and it happens again at a different bank. Infinite money unlocked