Citi "reserve the right to require (7) days advance notice before permitting a withdrawal"

[DJ13]

Seen on a recent Citibank (C) statement: "Effective April 1, 2010, we reserve the right to require (7) days advance notice before permitting a withdrawal from all checking accounts. While we do not currently exercise this right and have not exercised it in the past, we are required by law to notify you of this change."

http://stockwidget.seekingalpha.com/article/189605-citi-warns-of-withdrawal-gate

:crazy:

[gkhouston]

1. Sounds like the community banking movement is putting a crimp in their style.

I predict this announcement will accelerate their loss of customers. Yeah, I'd better go wipe the sweat off my brow after expending that monumental mental effort.

[Newsjock]

2. What the holy hell?

From the story:

I called Citi about it and they said the warning applies only to customers in Texas and that the notification had been mistakenly included on statements nationwide. Whatever the explanation, it doesn't exactly inspire confidence in Citi.

So, yeah, Texas only. But again, what the holy hell?

[Canuckistanian]

3. When does contract law enter into this?

I doubt whether people sign on to a bank knowing that THIS is a precondition.

This will be an account-killer if Citi starts enforcing this.

[wroberts189]

16. Good question ..another one.. they can clear checks in minutes these days. wtf? nt

[Subdivisions]

4. If I had a Citi checking/savings account, I'd get my money out of there right now. n/t

[elehhhhna]

50. lol right now = next Monday

don't spenfd it all in one place.

[Newsjock]

5. OK, here's a little more info

http://www.futureofcapitalism.com/2010/02/citi-warns-of-withdrawal-gate

Update: Citibank has now released the following statement by way of explanation: "When Citibank moved to unlimited FDIC coverage in 2009, we had to reclassify many checking accounts to allow for immediate withdrawals in order to ensure all customers qualified for the additional coverage. When we moved back to standard FDIC coverage with most major banks in 2010, Citibank decided to reclassify those accounts back to make them eligible again for promotional incentives. To do so, Federal Reserve Reg D requires these accounts, called NOW accounts, to reserve the right to require a 7-day notice of withdrawal. We recently communicated this technical requirement to our customers. However, we have never exercised this right and have no plans to do so in the future."

[Bigmack]

8. Ya know... people like you...

probably don't trust those guys at banks like Citi. You probably think they speak with forked tongue.

No me... I trust them in whatever they say. Why would they lie?

Deep, dark, shafted-by-the-banks :sarcasm: intended.

[laughingliberal]

34. Oh, gobbledygook! Move your money. nt

[geckosfeet]

6. Two words: Credit Union.

[blonndee]

7. Ugh. These big banks are out of control.

Here's my little anecdote. It might not be the biggest problem, though for me it sure was, as I was down to about $13 in my checking account, but I'm still furious about it and flip off the BofA building every time I drive by it. It helps a little. It's all I can do, really, as there's no way to call the bank directly and their 800 number is impossible to navigate unless I want to be on hold for 30 minutes just to talk to some anonymous customer service rep who doesn't give a shit about my problem, anyway.

During a period of about three months, Bank of America put three of my deposits on hold (they were from a branch of a nationally-known real estate company and approximately $1200 each) for varying lengths of time. The first time was for about a week because I had a new account; I let them do it a second time for just a couple of days with no question because my account WAS relatively new and I didn't want any hassle; the third time (I guess this must have been month three since these are monthly checks) I had had it. I needed to pay my credit card the next day and had been told when I opened the account that only during the first few weeks might large (is $1200 large to them?) deposits be put on hold; otherwise, deposits would be in my account the next business day. The teller told me she didn't know why the money was being held.

I really needed that money. I was SERIOUSLY broke, just having started a new, lower-paying job and having moved two states away. So this time it pissed me off and scared me that they were essentially refusing me MY money for the third time for no reason at all! So I left the drive-thru, went inside and talked to a manager, who, like the teller at the window, could not or would not explain why this was being done. I'd never had an overdraft, ever, not just not at B of A, but anywhere! I'd never had any problem with checks I deposited not clearing. I'd had the account for a few months and had used it regularly. I was dumbfounded that there was NO explanation. She wasn't concerned in the slightest. I told her to give me back my check and close both accounts now. She did, and we both sat there in almost complete silence as she did all the paperwork to give me back my measly little $13 I was down to in checking and $25 in savings I'd used to open the account. Not once did she apologize or express any concern or even interest in helping me, she never attempted to contact anyone else who might be able to explain the problem, nothing. I wanted to punch her in the face. I'll NEVER use a big national bank again, ever. I hope they all dry up and the sorry fuckers who make these sorts of policies DIAF. Fuck them for making me feel so shitty and helpless and putting me in a really difficult situation.

[DebbieCDC]

9. BoA are the biggest fucks on the planet

I had more battles with them over ridiculous stuff than I can count. I finally saw the light and switched to a small-ish regional bank. Never a problem with them. REAL PEOPLE answer the phone -- can you believe it? Best decision I ever made, I'm just sorry it took me so long to wise up.

[cliffordu]

10. Ah, banks.

Chase just yesterday refused to cash a check drawn on a local computer store's account -125.00- because I only had 60 bucks in my checking account.

I've been a customer of WaMu for 10 years and Chase since they took over.

I demanded to see a manager and when one finally did see me I threw a very quiet sputtering fit.

NEXT week I'll have an account open at the credit union down the street.

Fuck 'em.

She eventually cashed the check, telling me she was doing me a favor.

[SmileyRose]

14. Your credit union will not handle this any differently

When you "cash a check" from someone else at your own bank - TECHNICALLY you are making a withdrawal from your own account and depositing the check at the same time. The teller CANNOT allow you to withdraw more funds than are in your own account.


You have 3 choices.

1. Cash the check at the bank it's drawn on.
2. Have enough in your own account to cover the check in case it bounces.
3. Purchase overdraft protection for your account.

[Edweird]

24. Uh, ok, so when I tried to cash a check from my employer AT THE BANK IT WAS DRAWN ON -

at the branch that my employer opened the account at - meaning the signature cards were at that location - and they refused, how was it my fault? This was at 'Great Western' before they became Washington Mutual.

[SmileyRose]

44. My post had nothing to do with blame

I stated a reality of life. Good, bad or ugly.

Your case is entirely different. If you had ID to prove the check was made out to you and there was enough money in the employer's account to cover the check, it should have been cashed.

[varelse]

29. Mine does

I guess it depends on the bank.

[laughingliberal]

36. Well, I know I have had tellers who scored a check right then and made funds available immediately

Happened to my husband a few months ago. Which made me all the madder when I asked them to do that yesterday with a customer's check and they refused. Generally, we go to the customer's bank but this one had no branch in town. We were down to the wire and sweating to finish that job so we could put gas in the vehicle and eat this weekend. Thankfully, I was able to take it to a check cashing place and negotiate with them for a lower fee than normal for cashing personal checks or we'd have been sunk. I never buy the 'we can't' story from the banks cause I know they can. It's a question of if they want to or they will. They were going to hold this check for 7 business days!

[KILL THE WISE ONE]

11. I would pull most of my cash immediately after receiving a notice like this

maybe I am paranoid but this smells of "we are afraid of a run on the bank".

The Big banks are welcome to carry my debt, IF THE TERMS ARE ACCEPTABLE. I did keep a small checking account at wellsfargo because I need to have easy access to a checking account in several states but MY REAL BANK IS A CREDIT UNION.

[Bitwit1234]

12. OK so I need a thousand bucks for an emergency

I have to give 7 days notice...so the emergency will happen and I can't prevent it. If I had my money in CITI out it would go...I used to have Bank of America and when I moved to Minnesota, since I was disgusted with the fees etc I changed to a small state Bank. I have excellent service and not one problem. And my checking account if free.

[SmileyRose]

13. This legaleze is necessary.

The FDIC *requires* all FDIC insured banks to include this in their agreements. My credit union has a similar clause in their agreement as well.

[wroberts189]

15. Or in other words you will be charged 39 dollars unless you pay us a week in advance. nt

[Wizard777]

17. Take all your money out of the bank and trade it for gold. Paper money is a scam!

What the banks are doing now is the entire reason Americans didn't trust the federal reserve at it's inception. Once you give your money to the bank. It's no longer your money. The banks have grown so arrogant. Now they will be the first to tell you that.......for a fee of course.

[smoogatz]

18. Wow.

How glennbeckian of you.

[Wizard777]

19. No it's the truth. I don't think you understand how difficult it was to get America to trust banks.

Now banks are basically betraying that trust. But this is America where anything can be justified by unbridled greed. What this policy is designed to do is prevent a run on the bank. People fearing the instability of the financial institutions and markets all withdrawing their money at the same time. The banks handled that by only opening for an hour a day or remaining closed altogether. I know all about this. I was born in the wake of the Great Depression in 1931. I opened my first bank account in 1937 with Union Trust & Fidelity. As my parents explained the best reason for me to trust them with my money is because that was the bank my mom & dad trusted with their money. They did seriously look into the matter of how they can be sure they could get their money back. They got screwed by their bank in the Depression. I agreed with them. Good enough for mom & dad was good enough for me. It wasn't just kids that banks had to go to great lengths to entice to trust them with their money. That was aimed at the adults. Remember the banks had already screwed America once. Now the banks would say sure we screwed you! But you still haven't convinced us as to why we should trust YOU with your money. Personally I quit trusting banks when they quit putting things like "Trust" and "Fidelity" in their names. I considered that a warning. I was right. Now you can only trust a bank to further restrict your access to you money and assess you new fees. Unlike Glenn Beck. I'm not a young punk talking out my ass. I'm an old man speaking from experience. Okay?

[smoogatz]

22. Okay, old man speaking from experience.

Ever heard of the FDIC? That's why I trust my bank, to the extent that I do. And that's why people felt safe depositing their money again after the bank runs of the 1930s--because they were insured by the federal government. This "put all your money in gold" nonsense is straight out of the Super Wingnut Playbook of 1971, when Nixon took us off the gold standard once and for all. Now Beck's reviving the same old shit again, in a loony partisan attempt to shake public confidence in the government.

[Wizard777]

27. Okay young p......person.

http://online.wsj.com/video/day-ahead-fdic-low-on-funds/199F8620-ACC7-4F57-B0D8-FD6DD959E76E.html">What happens if the FDIC runs out of money? The FDIC was running low on funds and seeking a loan.

I'm well aware of the FDIC. It's just another insurance company. Like any other insurance company. It couldn't pay a simultaneous claim on every policy it has issued.

[Wizard777]

28. Okay young p......person.

http://online.wsj.com/video/day-ahead-fdic-low-on-funds/199F8620-ACC7-4F57-B0D8-FD6DD959E76E.html">What happens if the FDIC runs out of money? The FDIC was running low on funds and seeking a loan.

I'm well aware of the FDIC. It's just another insurance company. Like any other insurance company. It couldn't pay a simultaneous claim on every policy it has issued.

[Taitertots]

26. You do realize the gold standard is somewhat responsible for the great depression

And abandoning the gold standard is one of the main reasons we got out of the great depression.

Going to any specie based money is inarguably sure to cause another great depression.

[Wizard777]

31. Not really. It was more about that hedonism fest of lavish luxuries that was the Roaring 20's.

The Gold Standard will not allow you to live beyond your means. Many people were doing that in the 20's. Especially in the easy come easy go up swing of the market. Yes the new system is more elastic and that will allow you to somewhat live beyond your means. But that's also what caused the recent crisis that was being called the depression that nobody would call a depression. It was banks and other financial institutions lending beyond their means so people could live beyond their means that caused the crash. Just like the first time. This time they stretched the elastic until it damn near broke. Some people say it did break. But neither system is impervious to people living beyond their means. The only real difference between the Gold Standard and the Federal Reserve is the length of the leash on people living beyond their means. How far beyond their means they can go. The federal reserve is a much longer leash.

[Taitertots]

40. That had absolutely nothing to do with it

This crash had nothing to do with people living beyond their means. It was a direct result of the securitization of mortgage debt. It had NOTHING to do with the individuals getting loans, it was what the banks were doing after getting the loans.

The Great Depression crash was a direct result of the monetary policy supported by the Federal Reserve as a direct result of the gold standard. It didn't even start in America.

If we adopt the gold standard:
With our current trade imbalance we would be exporting trillions of dollars in gold to pay for our imports. We will either see rampant deflation or we will become insolvent. Neither will result in anything but economic collapse.

Where did you get this crazy hypothesis? Have you ever taken a single economics course? I'd really like to know who so gravely mislead you.

[Wizard777]

42. I'm not suggesting we go back to the gold standard. Only that people put their money into Gold.

I think you need to learn about the sociology behind the economics. It wasn't so much mortgage debt as it was bad mortgage debt. Banks lending people money to buy 500,000.00 Mc Mansions on a Mc Donald's salary. That combined with bad business practices caused a system wide failure. That amounts to businesses lending and investing beyond their means. Bush & Cheney transferring tens and hundreds of billions on a handshake didn't help anything. They were spending beyond their means. You can't solely blame business. You have to equate it to a behavior or practice of the people in the business. That's exceeding their means.

[Taitertots]

45. Without securitization every sub prime mortgage could have foreclosed without collapse

Only when there are CDOs, CDO Squared, and CDO Squared Squared (cubed) does this become a problem. Banks were leveraged beyond the total value of the property because securities have a value beyond the value of the houses, because people pay interest. When people can't pay the interest and housing prices decrease the banks are screwed and need a bailout.


It has nothing to do with the people getting houses "beyond their means". It has to do with government failing to regulate what every knew would be a collapse if housing prices dropped. Mortgages should never have been bundled and sold as asset backed securities. Even worse, they never should be divided into tranches and get AAA ratings.


Do you have some evidence to support your claim that people who worked at McDonald's were getting $500,000 McMansions? Exactly how many times did this happen?

[Wizard777]

48. Your assertion is correct and PROVES my claim. It does nothing to disproves it.

You have quite deftly explained the mechanisms by which the banks and other financial institutions exceeded their means. As for the people getting Mc Mansions on Mc Donald's salaries. Not always the case. Sometimes it's just a 300,000.00 row home on a Mc Donald's salary. As for how frequently it happens. Do a search on "Predatory Lending." That effects much much more than homes. But it's all about people living beyond their means. The ultimate finite common cause of both collapses, past and present, is people exceeding their means. If you do not exceed your means in personal or business finance. There is little or no risk of collapse. People and businesses must exceed their means before a collapse can happen. It really THAT simple.

[Wizard777]

43. One other thing. You study economics. Then you should know the banks are making 500%.

This is simply by placing their money on deposit with other banks. That 500% is before they even write their first loan. There is no reason they should be charging fees by the dozens and in crisis. Except for one. It allows them to live and invest beyond their means.

[Taitertots]

46. That is just plain wrong

I think you are referring to the money multiplier created by the fractional reserve system. They do NOT make 5 times the values of a deposit without lending. The money supply might increase by 500%, but the banks are not getting 500% return before lending.

Do you really think that when you put deposit $100 the bank makes $500 without lending? Who told you this?

[Wizard777]

47. I never said they were getting a 500% return. They are indeed increasing capital by 500%.

Then they start writing loans. That's when they receive higher returns by lending 500.00 instead of 100.00. If they write one 100.00 loan at 10% they make 10.00. But they will be writing five 100.00 loans at 10%. They make 50.00 instead.

[Odin2005]

52. Fiat currency is the shit, but a return to the Gold Standard is not the answer.

[WeDidIt]

20. If I had a Citi account, I'd pull every penny out of it today.

I would not wait.

Every last dime.

[Missy Vixen]

21. Close your account. Today.

If you have an account at the bank and can prove who you are, and show up during business hours to remove funds from your checking/savings account, I can't see how this policy is legal.

IMHO.

[upi402]

23. Track you bank's health here;

http://banktracker.investigativereportingworkshop.org/banks/

Thanks dixiegrrrl for the tip!

[old mark]

25. We used to have 4 Citi credit cards. They always treated us like shit,

never gave us a break or any grace periods, etc, despite years of on-time payments.
They have been a terrible company to deal with, and we used an agency to pay off all of our Citi bank credit cards as of almost 2 years ago.
We will never have anything to do with them again.

If you are not rich, or if you get sick and are late paying,they will not make arrangements with you, they will max your rate in a heartbeat.
They are a terrible company, and I urge anyone with a City account or credit card to investigate alternatives for your own good.

mark

[pitohui]

38. surprised to hear it, we've been v. well treated by citi for over 20 yrs

of the major credit card companies i've dealt with they've been by far the best

we've had problems such as someone stealing my husband's credit card and running up bills on it, people stealing his number, etc., and it has always been dealt with fast and fairly

we are not rich, not by any means

we don't have any of the banking services but some of the incentives they have been offering look good and i was thinking abt looking into it, they have been offering cash bonus or airline miles if you open a checking and/or savings acct, and some of those accts are fee free, so it's like being paid to have an acct there

i'm just surprised you had so much trouble w. them, for my money they're abt a million lightyears ahead of the evil chase!!!

[Liberal In Texas]

30. Get thee to a community bank or a credit union.

Been with a CU for years. I would never go back to a bank.

[imnKOgnito]

32. I keep just enough money...

in my Chase Free Checking account to ensure it costs them money to maintain. Everything else has gone through my Credit Union for years, including my one credit card and mortgage. Never had problem one with them, which I could never say about any bank I've ever been a customer of.

[marmar]

33. What the FUCK ????

May this bank rot in pieces......

[Yurovsky]

35. But I thought it was MY money???

7 days??? WTF???

We shouldn't have had TARP... we should have just nationalized the banks and ended their corrupt practices.

[laughingliberal]

37. See? You have it all wrong. All our money is their money and all their money is theirs, too.

Have we learned nothing the past couple of years?

[Yurovsky]

39. Silly f'n me...

good gawd I don't know how the banking SOBs sleep at night... on a pillow full of other people's money, I assume...

[Randall Flagg]

41. Holy fuck.

I can only say that if I hadn't stopped doing business with Citi several years ago I would do so again.

They are positioning themselves to be a bank of, by and for the uber-wealthy.

[Capt. Jack]

49. Want to see how these slimy bank operate?

Check out this 10 minute video and pay particular attention to the final two minutes.

If this were a game the score would be: Wall Sreet $29 Trillion - Main Street $0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZ6lPaiKmwg

[Dappleganger]

51. These days we get instant withdrawal from our safe...

Looks like we made the right move.

[Capt. Jack]

53. Fight back!

I, for one, am sick and tired of the greed and fraud being perpetrated on this country.

We need to fight back!

http://www.foreclosurehamlet.org/profiles/blogs/paul-l-muckle-v-president?xg_source=activity

We all seem to forget the word “mortgage” derived from French means (“mort” = “death” and “gage” = “gamble”).

Death Gamble.

Usually the borrower dies first and the lender wins the gamble. Once in a while the lenders die en-masse, which without taxpayer support, would be the case here and now. If it’s they who are proved to have committed fraud via bogus Credit Default Swaps, outcome-based appraisals, Yield Spread Premiums, exotic mortgage backed securities, etc….I say let them die.

http://www.foreclosurehamlet.org

http://4closurefraud.org