These people in the fraud department don't even deserve to get found in a river.
Seems pretty much a no brainer to me.
The fraud departments we have are so indistinguishable from actual phishing it’s amazing. They even send you a two factor code and have you read it to them! The text says they’ll never ask for it via phone! Embarrassing.
The branch manager who called had to authenticate himself over the phone (at least he was the one who placed the call) and waited on hold for over twenty minutes and even then he didn't talk to a specific person iirc.
The strange thing is the supervisor was clearly on a power trip. They made me waste hours of my life chasing this nonsense.
Which can be why it can be worthwhile to file suit in small claims court or even pro se.
Because then you’re in their legal department which often at least responds.
Or you get to foreclose on the local branch.
https://abcnews.go.com/Business/bank-america-florida-foreclo...
(Maybe it has to do with being used to dealing with clients that literally have no money.)
This is a situation where the Invisible Hand of libertarianism was supposed to manifest and gently nudge people to banks with more favorable terms in such numbers that no bank is able to do this and stay profitable.
If the bank would be liable, we all suffer. How much will banks charge if we would be both secured from fraud risks and indemnified from account closure damages? I would think 1% of your cashflow would not be unreasonable.
Also as a merchant I like a pro-active attitude of the bank to deal with fraud. But, more on-topic, bank accounts are definitely more stable than CCs. But they are not immune for seizures and fraud detection.
The issue is banking is highly regulated but a lot of the regulation is about AML, terrorism screening and such. Not actually protecting customers from abuse but rather the other way around - banks are taking precautions to protect themselves from customers. Some of the regulation is also the result of decades of lobbying efforts by major players, making it extremely hard for new ones to compete. Banks are rarely held accountable because for some reason most regular people are fine with this or don't understand it.
There is a solution - not sure if everyone's ready to hear it yet: Decentralized finance. Good luck to a bank trying to shut down your self-hosted Ethereum wallet. Banks provide important services and will continue to exist, but giving them full unchecked control over our life savings and finance is mad. There are a lot of other issues with the current system, and many people don't really understand the contracts they're signing, including that they don't legally own "their money" in the bank account in most cases (they're creditors). But the question of effective control over ones own funds is the most crucial one to me.
I want the pendulum to swing the other way. Everybody gets and gets to keep forever an account at the Reserve Bank.
> self-hosted Ethereum wallet
I'm sorry. The technology might be fine But I simply do not trust the people involved with cryptocurrency. Not just the scammers such as SBF, I don't trust the "victims" to make wise choices. They see this as a get rich quick scheme. They are not "victims". They are money hungry speculators. Most don't even host a full node. Even people who have a means to do so Such as this guy tech deals on YouTube. The miners want to turn a good profit when they should be happy to just break even. The transaction costs are still too high. It should be very close to if not exactly zero dollars. The block chain should not be a place to make huge profits. The prices should not go "to the moon". In fact, you shouldn't even be thinking of the price of your cryptocurrency with respect to the US Dollar. This already means we lose if we constantly compare Bitcoin oh sorry ethereum and the dollar.
Unfortunately, when trying to pick a coin, it's like trying to choose the best programming language. Each coin has its own ins and outs, there isn't one that is the best. They have their own time and place. A lot of people see this and want to use them in inappropriate places, but doesn't mean there aren't appropriate reasons for them, even if they're few and far between.
This is just wishy washy rubbish trying to appear "diplomatic" and "balanced". Oh sure, you can mint some monkey jpegs or construct a needlessly complex and public smart contract for some esoteric "use case", but the truth is the majority of people in the world don't want or need those things.
People just want a money that works. You can send or receive it instantly across international borders, that no one can stop, and it doesn't lose it's value over the years.
Bitcoin is the only game in town, the "crypto bros" just don't realise it yet because they can make obscene amounts of money from pump and dump schemes with flashy marketing about "use cases" and "yield".
Wake up or get burned, again and again.
Now BCH is closer to Bitcoin and still works great. BTC is just a ponzi scheme for morons at this point
Pure fantasy.
On cross-border trade that cannot be interdicted: There is no reason for any state to deny itself from sanctioning its adversaries.
On currency valuation: An economic zone has many many actors making independent decisions which in aggregate affects the value of the zone’s currency. The ability to debase a currency by over issuing it is identical to the ability to expand the supply to provide liquidity to a growing economy.
People don't want that. They do want their financial transactions to be stopped and reversed in the event of theft, fraud, merchant error, defective goods, unprovided services, etc. That's why Bitcoin and the other cryptos haven't caught on universally, there's no recourse when something goes wrong. (Really, Bitcoin just defines any redress as out of scope.)
99% are scam to be ignored, so really just looking at the oldest "coins" works.
Basically there is only BTC, BCH, XMR and ETH to choose from (of you cant tell the rest are scams that's on you).
Between those 4, BTC is a ponzi scheme for morons that doesn't really work as cash, eth is a hobby security but has equal potential to break or go to $1million.
That leave BCH and XMR, the only two cryptocurrencies that are not obvious scams.
While that is true, they were redeeming them 1:1. So you could buy them at a 6% discount on the exchange, but redeem them, for free 6%.
Few people did because enough of them thought that USDT is going to the ground, causing the discount.
Overhauling the financial system to ensure that citizens cannot have their accounts revoked on a whim sounds like a nice pipe dream. I am cynical we will ever see that in our lifetime, as countries prefer to have full control over their citizen's wallets (e.g. see Canada enacting Emergencies Act to curb protests).
Not to mention all of crypto on and off ramps are incredibly centralized.
The major ones, yes. That's because most of the decentralized ones got shut down or closed voluntarily out of fear of getting prosecuted on ML charges. LocalBitcoins is a good example, first they got their site blocked in authoritarian countries like Russia. Then they had to restrict service in some US states and other more liberal places as well. Finally they shut down operations completely.
The question is if people still want to fight for such liberties or not. There are multiple countries working on CBDCs and to abolish or at least severely restrict cash payments. In many EU countries this is already reality. For example France has a limit of 1000€ for residents.
Cash is a quasi anonymous form of payment, in self-custody. Throughout history something similar has always existed, be it metal coins or even earlier forms of money. There is a real danger as we're on our way to go fully digital to lose control over this freedom to governments and/or banks.
I guess that happened years ago and we are fully in the "and then they fight you" portion of the timeline.
Anyone without a good portion of their net worth in crypto is making a huge and obvious mistake.
For everyone whose Bitcoin wallets get stolen, there is no recourse. There is no customer service number to call, no court in which to file suit, and no service agreement over which to sue. Unless you live in some war-torn country where you don't know what government you'll live under tomorrow, putting a good portion of your net worth in an asset so easily stolen (or lost to something as banal as a forgotten encryption key) is a fool's errand.
Disambiguating the above sentiment from another context, we had a huge problem with Indian immigrants becoming victims of home invasions once it became apparent to opportunists that they accumulate and hoard large amounts of gold in their homes.
If you live in a first-world country, playing by third-world rules will pit you against third-world opponents.
We're doomed if this type of crowd sourcing of scams sets in without people noticing and calling it out.
I bought $100 of BTC about 1 year ago when it was at $24,000, just the other day it was at $34,000 and my account said my crypto was at $102. That's all I needed to know about it.
I believe this would result in more instances of funds being frozen when under the suspicion of doing something/being associated with someone doing something illegal.
Just as Social Security was promised to never be used as a national ID, but was ultimately used as an identification mechanism[1], accounts with the Federal Reserve would be sold as a way to have a permanent bank account, but would ultimately be used as a way of implementing financial ruin upon those who choose non-compliance.
Conversely, I also believe crypto serves the same end. There is nothing a financial regulatory body would enjoy more than having every transaction take place on a publicly auditable ledger.
[1]: https://www.nytimes.com/1998/07/26/weekinreview/the-nation-n...
Now I can walk to a half dozen places that won't do business with you if you have neither.
It would likely be defacto required, just line SSN is today. Sure you can "opt-out" - but at severe expense to your life.
https://web.archive.org/web/20220127202620/https://www.treas...
Carrying some emergency cash is also a solution for this sort of thing.
Anyway lots of countries seem to think they are soon going cashless, so good luck with that.
This is from extremely hard won personal experience.
Yes, it's a lot of cash. I don't mean keep it all under your mattress.
Certainly no form of wealth storage is without risks!
Having multiple cards would too (I have a debit card and two credit cards, kept at home, but I don't want to be stuck with no money if my wallet/phone gets stolen)
I have no idea why a university which had received multiple on time payments would suddenly drop someone off the role for paying a few days late (especially with a reasonable excuse like "my bank put my account on hold")
The $200 would've helped guarantee food and gas, it wouldn't cover shelter, i was studying in California, the cheapest hotel was $130~ a night. I also tried explaining the situation to the university, but unfortunately you are considered a current student only if you paid your tuition.
There were also programs to help students in crisis (provide them with place to stay, food) but its only available to students who paid the tuition.
Please refer to the FAQ from the university i was studying at. #10 to be exact https://sbs.fullerton.edu/about/FAQs.php I was late to pay the tuiton, only because the bank account was suddenly frozen, on a long weekend.
This is the program i was talking about, you can review the eligibility, which states that the student must be currently enrolled. https://www.fullerton.edu/basic-needs/
To me that says "talk to us before the deadline if you've got problems paying". What did they say when you said your bank was having problems?
Basically this happened at the worst possible time and by then the university had had enough of them not paying the bill and not following required policies.
Yeah, I am not believing this story at all.
No University is going to disown you if you are late 1 week. The rest of the story is just as weak.
Ha. The same problem applies there too, and burned me at some random gas station in the middle of nowhere on the way to Spokane--8pm at night on a Friday--the bank raised a fraud alert on my credit card. The customer service agent said I had to talk to Fraud, who wasn't in until Monday. There were no hotels (not that I could pay for one of those either), nor any other customers to beg for change. We had to buy gas with change found in the seats and a miraculous disbursement of pity from the attendant.
Separate incident before that related to poor credit on my part at the time, but the issuer reduced my credit limit on a credit account without my knowledge.
You can't trust anything in the "cloud" will be there when you need it. Rather than hoarding gold or traveling with large amounts of cash (welcome back, literal highway robbery) the meddling to protect themselves needs to stop. Every bank is becoming PayPal.
But cash can't be used for lots of things, even though legally it needs to be accepted anywhere. I can't imagine it would be easy to pay your $6,000 school tuition with a stack of $20 bills. You might be able to get a hotel room if you paid a hefty deposit on top of what the room actually cost, but you'd be just as likely to run into some 20 year old desk agent who can't be bothered to find the form for that, if it even exists.
I wouldn't say fintech or neobanks are very trustworthy. Wise, a fintech platform, blocked my company's account for four weeks for "further investigation" right after the war as well. This caused me to miss bill payments.
I think the only way to mitigate the risk of a bank taking over your funds is to not store all your money in one account. Now, I have over 20 different accounts.
The point is more about banking specifically though, and about taking back control. Grandpa should obviously not swap his life savings for BuzzwordCoin, it's not ready for him. But for someone tech literate like I presume the other user is, holding some emergency funds in a way they have full control could have saved them. Hopefully there will be more integration with the established financial system and easier and safer ways people can move in and out of self custody.
A government bank of last resort is probably something we need.
For basic necessities to modern life, there needs to be a state provided minimum quantity of access, so that you can't be screwed over by corporations just deciding you aren't profitable enough, or cornering the market and price gouging, etc.
Until that’s fixed, this will only get worse.
It does appear necessary to spread your risk across multiple unrelated financial institutions. Make multiple bank & ccard accounts, and do not link them. Far less convenient, but should improve your safety.
Another good option is to have checking accounts in more than one bank. Whatever triggers bank A to close your account is unlikely to also trigger the same action by bank B. It requires more funds, but you decentralise your finances within the classic financial system.
If something triggers a close of your accounts on multiple banks at the same time, odds are you have much worse problems than access to liquidity.
Maybe we can go back to bartering?
The useful applications of crypto are illegal (buying narcotics) and the majority of the ecosystem today is both illegal and completely economically nonproductive.
Regardless of that, you've stated that crypto can be used to buy things. The parent post said "Let's transition to cashless society". Why can crypto not be used?
Soon we will have to stop having sympathy for people who get screwed by the banks as the alternative is just too easy and obvious.
OTOH we did stop having sympathy for people who get screwed by crypto bros as the alternative has been just too easy and obvious for quite a while now.
What is not being said is that many folks are operating at the limits of their executive function. Add something like this to an already stressful period of time to such people, and they simply will not be able to advocate for themselves in an effective manner or make logical decisions in the moment.
I say this from personal experience. Small stuff like this, in particular gatekeeping kafkaesque stuff, absolutely kills my life in a way that is not logical or explainable. It effectively shuts my brain down. I've lost many years of my life due similar issues, where in the end someone else could have handled them as a minor annoyance.
The “why did he do this to himself?” meme seems appropriate.
Also, yes. I’ve gotten better over the years at taking a breath and just doing it but it still sets me off. Employers exploit this in people by adding hurdles in expense systems. It’s an oft forgotten corporate dark pattern.
I don't think this can me understated. I didn't pay income taxes for two years. Not because I was dodging them, but because I was going through a divorce, single-parenthood, and depression and was barely able to hold onto my job.
2 years later, I got my shit together, paid back taxes and fees (I had the money all along), and it was easy... when I had the bandwidth for it. I just couldn't at the time.
Most things are easy in isolation, it's having patience for someone-who-can't get-your-one-simple-thing-right-because-they-have-too-many-other-simple-things-on-the-go-right-now that is hard.
Everyone's says it's easy to wake up at 4 am for a flight. Just wake up, duh.
But actually doing it is another thing.
All this idiocy could have been prevented by a communication stating "come here before one week or we will close your account". They simply do not care about people.
I had to go back to my country, without a degree, was not able to land any job. Unfortunately, good places require degrees. Stayed unemployed, hit with chronic depression as anyone would. Lost 4+ years of professional progress. When covid came, i was able to complete my degree online and graduated in 2021, but because all fresh grad programs require a certain age; i did not qualify. Was able to finally land a good job in 2023.
This issue needs a resolution, what happened to me might not happen to everyone, i know my situation is different. but financial institutions should be held responsible for actions like this, imagine someone else who needs to pay for his/her medication...