[ethbr0]

Branches are equally powerless.

See: Bank of America's policy on two-party "and" checks.

I walk in, having had a checking account with them for decades: "Hi, I need to deposit a two-party check into my account here. This is the other party with me, and we're happy to show ID."

Door greeter / agent: "Sure, I can do that for you." {Proceeds to verify my information and set up deposit on her tablet} "Hmm." {Walks over to her manager, discusses}

Manager: "Hello. I'm sorry, we only allow two-party checks to be deposited into joint accounts that list both parties."

Me: "I have the other party standing right here, with ID."

Manager: "That's our policy. Even if I pushed it through, the central system would kick it back out."

... which is a policy they can have. But the annoyance to me, is that it's a policy they choose to have, rather than a policy they're required to have. Corrections welcome, but there's no law that mandates this handling of two-party "and" checks. It's just risk mitigation on BoA's part.

Which, if a multi-decade relationship with your customer doesn't facilitate taking additional risk (over a <$1k check) in the interest of customer satisfaction... why would I do business with you?

Needless to say, I closed my BoA accounts.

[reaperducer]

Needless to say, I closed my BoA accounts.

I've read a number of BoA horror stories on HN, and didn't think anything of them. I just assumed there were a lot because BoA is big in California.

Then, recently, I tried to deal with BoA customer service.

- I'm saving up a few thousand dollars for a Christmas present, but don't want my wife to see the money in our joint account at another bank.

- Since I have BoA credit card with almost nothing on it, and a BoA next door, I decided to open a savings account.

- End of the month, I go online to pay my BoA credit card, and I can't. There is no way on the web site to pay with anything other than the savings account, and no way to re-add my previous external account that I've used with BoA for the last 10 years.

- Call customer service. Wait on hold for three hours, getting transferred twice.

- Finally get someone at BoA to tell me that because I added the savings account, my status changed and I have to add new payment accounts all over.

- Explain again that there is no way to add an external payment account.

- Two more transfers, and someone confirms that the web site is screwed up. Hold on while I transfer you to that department.

- 20 minutes later, someone comes on the line to tell me that tech customer service doesn't work on Saturdays anymore and to check back in a few days and maybe it will magically fix itself.

- I decide to go to the branch. Open BoA app to check its hours, and it's marked "Temporarily closed." So is the next closest BoA. And the one after that. The nearest BoA that is going to be open on Monday is two hours away, according to the app.

- Monday I go out for coffee, which takes me past the BoA branch next door. It's open. People inside. Everything looks normal, contrary to the app telling me it's supposed to be closed.

- I go into the branch, pay off my BoA card, empty the savings account, close both accounts.

Bank of America doesn't deserve to represent itself as the bank of America. It should be called the Bank of Dipshits.

[_jal]

> Bank of America doesn't deserve to represent itself as the bank of America

Oh, this story is quintessential US Americana, right down to the name.

I've long maintained that one of the biggest gifts to US corporations is how few of their customers visit other countries. If more of them ever saw functional banking (or humane healthcare, or competitive telephony and broadband, or a number of other things), a lot of rents would evaporate.

[b3morales]

It is, indeed. BofA is only as big as it is because it was allowed to Kirby up dozens of regional banks in the late 90s/early 00s. It did nothing to earn its position and has done nothing but exploit it since. It is a poster child for anti-customer consolidation.

[kbelder]

A tangent: Reading your comment, at first I smiled at the verb 'Kirby', thinking it was a reference to the vacuum company... then I realized that it may be a reference to the videogame character.

Then I wondered if the video game character's name is derived from the vacuum company, or is it a coincidence? Am I an idiot for never noticing that before?

Like most of my trains of thought, it ends with me cursing myself for being an idiot.

[b3morales]

Oh wow, I did not know about the vacuum company at all, only the video game character.

[Root_Denied]

Even before phone apps and internet banking BofA was godawful. They'd process debits first, issue overdraft fees, then process credits at the end of the day. As a poor college student in the mid 2000's I got screwed over twice before I closed my accounts there and haven't used them since.

Then at one point I was between jobs and filed for unemployment - which conveniently came on a BofA debit card. 10 years later and I still get an email about some kind of monthly statement for the $0.43 on there. I tried to close out the account and gave up after several attempts, and just marked it as spam.

[drdec]

Respectfully, you are doing it wrong. :-)

Don't set up a payment option on the credit card's website. Use the bill pay ability at the web site of the bank where your checking account lives. Now all your payment information is in one place and, more importantly, under your control via pushing payments from your checking to whomever instead of allowing a bunch of companies to pull money from your account.

[willcipriano]

Me and my wife have an account for IRS checks exclusively due to this, otherwise we have our own accounts.

Funny thing is she was able to open the account without input from me so I'm not sure what this policy is actually doing.

[Beltalowda]

> which is a policy they can have. But the annoyance to me, is that it's a policy they choose to have, rather than a policy they're required to have.

The problem isn't necessarily with the policy as such; it's perhaps an entirely sensible policy to have – I don't even know what a "two-party and check" is so have no opinion on that as such – but the real problem is that there is no way a human applying basic "common sense" judgement can override the policy.

A lot of things are now like this: "this is the rule", "computer says no", with little recourse. The complexity of reality can't be captured in a rulebook or computer program, so lots of people in different "unusual" (although they're usually not that unusual) situations hit brick walls for a lot of basic stuff.

It's slowly crushing out collective souls and stripping us of our humanity.

[mring33621]

I have found that, as long as your name is on the check, they will allow you to deposit a two-party check via the BofA app.

[vageli]

I've deposited checks that were not even signed and made out to another (and the person who gave me the check didn't sign it over either!) on mobile banking apps. I never sign the check for mobile or check the box on the check if there is one.

[bombcar]

Our credit onion mobile deposit is obviously checked by a human and they’ve actually bounced a check back as needing both signatures.

[refurb]

Yup. I had someone make out a check to a education savings account instead of my name. Online check deposit worked fine.

[dmoy]

It's not supposed to, but it does go through sometimes

Incidentally a BoA teller just told me yesterday that the phone all is not supposed to accept two party checks at all.

[reaperducer]

It's not supposed to, but it does go through sometimes

Actually, it is supposed to.

The 1990's-era legislation that made phone deposits possible shifted the liability and some other regulatory details a bit to make it possible. The verification and liability is less strict with an online deposit than an in-person deposit.

At the time, it was a big news story. The rule change was originally intended to allow businesses to deposit checks from their offices with a device over a modem for speed and security.

When it was in the news, people were up in arms because it shifted the liability for certain types of fraud onto the consumer, and away from the banks. Consumer advocates saw it as a big money-grab by the evil mustache-twirling bankers.

The result is that now when you get something like a random unexpected electric company refund check in the mail, you can deposit it with your phone.

[midasuni]

What the hell is a check? Are you referring to those pieces of paper people used to write 40 years ago to shift money around?