The most trusted and popular consumer complaints website
Explore your opportunities! Create an account or Sign In

Wachovia Bank / overdraft fees are profitable banking

1 Blue Water Bay BranchNiceville, FL, United States Review updated:

After many overdraft fees($2000+) in the past, I began to watch my account closely and notice when it fell to a low balance
point, Wachovia ALWAYS found a fee to charge to cause an overdraft. So, on May 8, 2009, I went to the branch mgr. and discussed the problems that ocurred while I was out of town April 27-30, 2009, she agreed with me that the fees charged were NOT valid and refunded all $210 of fees that had posted to my account. In doing this she recomended that I open another checking account just for overdraft protection, place $50 in it and forget about it for back up. SO I DID. I already had a savings account for protection, but this would be extra insurance. Well it was NOT enough. On May 21, 2009 I went online to find my account $36 negative, with Wachovia taking $35 OVERDRAFT FEE and $10 OVERDRAFT PROTECTION TRANFER FEE !!! Are you kidding me, Wacovia is now going to charge me $10 to tranfer my money from one account to another ?????? THE ANSWER IS NOT ANYMORE, NOT TO ME ANYWAY !!! I deposited $60 to cover all outstanding debits informed the branch mgr. that when the account was cleared I would be closing it, she asked what she could do to make me happy, I said, they had over 4 years to do that but, just kept taking my moneyand if she wanted to make this time right she could refund my money to me, her reply was " WHY SHOULD I? YOU WILL JUST CLOSE YOUR ACCOUNT ANYWAY" my reply was " YES, BUT IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO AND YOU HAVE TO LIVE WITH THAT"!!

Sc
Sort by: UpDate | Rating

Comments

  • Al
      30th of Apr, 2008
    0 Votes
    Wachovia Bank - RIO-OFF
    Wachovia Bank
    3 Georgia Dr.
    Pensacola
    Florida
    United States
    Phone: 850-637-1651

    To whom this may concern: 31. 98 was taking out of my account, which a 35. 00 dollar feed charge to my account for over draft. I like for this to be resolved and the money put back in my account. I had no knowledge of this tranaction. What can i do too clear this up?

  • Me
      11th of May, 2008
    0 Votes
    Wachovia Bank - Overdraft Funds
    Wachovia Bank
    Main Street
    Keansburg
    New Jersey
    United States
    wachovia.com

    Wachovia over drafted my accounts on numerous occasions! When I called the Bank and went in to see the Branch Manager he assured me they had "taken care of it". Now it is on my credit report with the payment being owed to RJM Acq. This bank steals your money and lies to you!! We should all get together and take action!!

  • Al
      9th of Jul, 2008
    0 Votes

    Hi my name is ali,

    Few days back I have been overdraft in wachovia bank.i spoked to the customer service many time.as man time i spoke them as many as new policies i got to know.these people just lie.1st the told me that we will give you 1 week time to pay and they charged me in 9 hours.then when i spoked to the manager she told me that she will refund the amount when i deposit.now after i deposit they are telling we cant do anything.they dont even care about any customer.they are telling we are sorry we cant do anything right now to you.Wachovia customer service are liersssss.

  • Sh
      29th of Sep, 2008
    0 Votes

    I did not know about the funds withdrawn from my account, I would like a full refund, Please!

  • Ja
      2nd of Oct, 2008
    0 Votes

    wachovia bank is what I CALL legal comsumer robbers, only they rob the poor and give to the rich.

  • Wa
      4th of Feb, 2009
    0 Votes

    I have been a customer of Wachovia for 13 years! I no longer care to be a customer of Wachovia. I have gone through different changes with Wachovia over the years but this time they have performed a blatant act of thievery. There is no way to make me understand how they can charge me NSF/Overdraft charges on an account that has an $.08(eight cents) balance, according to my online statement. There is absolutely no explanation that you can give to make me see how Wachovia can charge $210 in overdraft charges on an account with a positive balance. I have never really reviewed the complaints against Wachovia but I see there are many. I think a class action lawsuit should be started to stop these unethical practices. I honestly believe they have designed a system that actually targets certain accounts that carry a certain average balance. I have thought this for a long time but I didn't say anything. I think what happened in my case, the unethical system may have glitched with the $.08 balance, charging the NSF/Overdraft fees prematurely. I honestly think that there systems and practices need to be thoroughly investigated by the Federal Reserve, SEC and FDIC. Anyone that knows how to begin a petition or a class action lawsuit, please leave a blog on this complaint board.

  • Fa
      28th of May, 2009
    +1 Votes

    I've had a very similar situation with Wachovia however it tied into their "courtesy" overdraft protection. I figured out the end of last year that they were allowing transactions to go through even though the money wasn't in the account. They would go ahead and pay the charge and then charge me the $35.00 overdraft fee!!! When I called them, I asked them why didn't charges that would not clear be declined at the point of service. At least that's the way I remember charges being handled "years ago". If you didn't have the money, your transaction would be declined. Their representative advised that sometimes bills are due before people get paid and instead of risking having a utility get cut off, they would rather pay the $35 OD fee than risk having their utility disconnected. Okay, well I could see her point so I just left things alone.

    Well earlier this month, upon checking my balance, it was sinking faster than the Titanic. I could not, for the life of me, figure out what the heck was going on!! When I called their Customer Service Department, I was told that they discontinued the "courtesy" overdraft protection program. I was never given notice that this feature would be stopped. Her response was that because it was a "courtesy" they were not obligated to advise the customers. What?! She did not say that did she? So they basically tell you one thing and then turn around and pull the rug out from underneath you. I said that the courteous thing to do would be to at least give people a notice that this was going to occur and could affect their account.

    I find this interesting that this has happened this month as well as Scott's problems. After my paycheck gets direct deposited, I won't have enough to pay my rent so guess what? I'll have to pay about $250 in late fees on my rent because I will need to wait for another paycheck to get it paid.

    Did you know that the President/CEO of Wells Fargo makes over $13 mil a year?! That's pretty pathetic.

  • Ti
      6th of Jun, 2009
    +3 Votes

    I got a series of overdrafts one week (7-- @$35 ...all for purchases under $3 each!), totaling more than that week's paycheck. My employer had neglected to inform me that my Direct Deposit was going to be 2 days late that week. It was partly their fault.

    I go to Wachovia in person to sort it out, explain the situation. Despite my print-outs, full documentation of what I was saying, they gave me the brick-wall compulsory rhetoric (which allows them to buy their marble floors) - "If it's not a bank error..." And so forth. Eventually my employer offered to cover 2 of the 7 overdraft fees. I despised even being put in the position of having to ask them. It was quite embarrassing.

    I am appalled that these banks have all the rights clear over working men/women. We ought to be ashamed of this. I was certain that labor laws would have been broken here, yet nobody could actionably assist me in recovering this money. There was nowhere to turn, and still all responsibility was being placed at me, the alleged 'customer.' After much dead-end conversation with indifferent bank employees / managers (and here we will be ignoring several condescending sleights these people let slip) I left an infuriated message with the district manager, and never heard back. I was later told by my employer, a former bank manager, that "banks can do whatever they want."

    I was awakened to the rather explicit greed of banks. They literally -can- just take your money, and they've also been firmly instructed to uphold the policies which argue all responsibility right back into the customer's corner. That these 'legit' business are allowed to trample all over working people, who may as well be forced to keep their money under a mattress, I began to feel quite angry that nothing was being done about this unconscionable conduct. There really are no protective laws barring banks from taking a person's income, thereby depriving them of what they need just to get by. They can literally just help themselves to your account, based on their rules (which can and do change without the customer's knowledge, I might add). For instance, if an employer pays below minimum wage, there are strict laws against that - they are forced make good, and even pay penalties. If a bank's policy takes $700 in overdraft fees due to outside errors, there is no comparable law to which an individual may turn-- even though the net effect on the individual is the same. And the public, often prideful in whatever mild competences, hears this and simply says "well, don't overdraft" or: "always keep a balance in there" and other passive blame-displacements that only enable banks to continue with their racket, to continue exploiting hard working people, many of whom walk the fine financial line. Imagine what it feels like not being paid for more than a week's worth of physical work. It's low-paid work, punctuated by semi-slavery. That is what is happening in the USA. And so many people will try to tell you "it's your fault!"

    It is beyond me to hear these banks getting support of the complacent public (and usually people who are well off). It is beyond me why anybody has an ounce of respect for these one-sided policies, and their attendant financial "mugging." People need to be politically active on this issue. The public has been lulled into an attitude that the banks' behavior is somehow OK or acceptable. It is not. In many common circumstances it is downright unconscionable. Remember; the banks do not make the distinction between "low-paid, stapped for money" and "financially irresponsible." To banks, people with little money are of no value, and are treated with a kick in the face for being so. It is not OK for a bank to arrogate hundreds of dollars from a person - and go about their business with the attitude that if they "learn their lesson" it shouldn't happen again. It's NOT their money to take in the first place.

    I encourage all people reading this to ponder the implication of what we are allowing banks, such as Wachovia, to do- most egregiously to those who are working at or near minimum wage. Maybe you have not been financially 'mugged' yourself-- but at least consider the activity for what it is. It is our culture, it is a grand class-based financial faux-pas'. It is disrespectful, and it is shameful that greed is permitted to go this far. It got there inch by inch, because people were not so concerned-- now it's just plain out of hand, and totally out of line.

  • Sw
      6th of Jun, 2009
    -3 Votes

    Cut up that debit card and you won't be tempted to swipe swipe swipe away when there is no money in the account. The end.

  • Ti
      9th of Jun, 2009
    +2 Votes

    Banks and retailers strongly advocate debit card use nowadays. It's the 'norm."

    I think the more basic issue is that banks arrogate egregious amounts of money from working people, and the ones most explicitly affected are those who get paid the least. They are also, incidentally, the most likely to overdraft. So in this light, banks are supporting and enabling a social stigmatism towards "being poor, " "being low-paid, " or, as statisticians eloquently put it, "lower class." Myself, and many people I know, have had their money siphoned not because they we were financially irresponsible, but due to other unavoidable reasons. As in my case-- where my employer did not alert me to my Direct Deposit being 2 days later than usual. As I was walking a fine line at that time, it resulted in a $700 series of overdrafts, all on purchases under $3 each.

    The bank's retaliation clearly does not fit the situation. There is no crime here, and no need to be treated --fined-- like a criminal. It's not a crime to be broke, is it? And we all have to keep our money somewhere, don't we? Financial misconduct such as this is conspicuously offensive towards people like me, and I might argue it is the banks' social statement. By most appearances, it is "designed" to weed out the numerous lower-stst bad customers (poor people), and encourage stable, or wealthy people to have accounts. Less work for Wachovia.

    I know "all banks do it" ... but -why- do they do it? I can guarantee they banks give pretense on the motive-- it is not because they're giving a "risky loan, " or because "they don't want people to be embarrassed by being declined." These are two reasons they often state. Who in their right mind would rather be charged $35 extra to save face? (and, why is 'saving face' this so valued in society?) Seriously now. In this, they also send the message that we ought to be ashamed of being strapped for money, of being in this position. Well, I'm not-- and I refuse to let the bank define these superficial social matters to their benefit.

    Banks do this -only- because there is no explicit law preventing it. Greed is unrestrained, that is the nature of it, it goes where it can. They only follow the law to the letter. There have no conscionable objection, as you can see. WE have to make the statement to them, or this will not change.

  • Ti
      11th of Jun, 2009
    +2 Votes

    Did I not just describe how the public inexorably goes on ignoring the social root of the issue? Only to see it again, and again, and again? The public is always prideful of whatever mild competences, often wholly ignoring the root of the issue with banks. "Well, then just don't do it!" : "Haven't you learned your lesson?" : "Learn to keep track!" Or whatever blatantly obvious rhetoric, parroted ad nauseam -- as if we hadn't thought of this. In a way, always rather condescending to hear.

    Not all overdrafts have to do with register keeping. In my case, it was a totally different scenario, where the register was irrelevant-- as in the case of many people I know, and have conversed with on the issue. Still, as though they haven't even heard the content of the scenarios, or can't imagine any other reason, people such as myself are simply told "just don't overdraft!" It's really getting ridiculous when people don't even listen and presume it's always the customer's fault, that the bank merely offers automatic punishment, no matter what. I don't accept this. It's morally egregious & unwarranted. Nobody can take $500, 1000, 2000 from a working person. If it were anybody other than banks, it would be outright stealing.

    I'll never understand this passive enabling of the public, allowing banks their pass to orchestrate this social inequity.

  • Ja
      11th of Jun, 2009
    +2 Votes

    I have been having issues with wachovia too. They charged me 220 dollars overdraft fee. I am not letting them go with this one. You can actually file for small claim at your local state and get the overdraft charges back.
    They called me today asking for the overdraft fee -95 to be paid immediately or else they would close my bank account.
    What kind of nasty service is that? They gave me 35 dollars overdraft credit btw. But what about the 220-35 = 185USD overdraft?
    I deposited 90 when my account was at 9.95, so i had 99.95 AVAILABLE BALANCE and in 2 days, the overdraft fees started kicking in when the account was on POSITIVE.
    Banks going after consumers that use their DEBIT CARDs, they must make money some how... right?
    Anyways, file for small claims at your state and dont use your debit card. Don't close your bank account because if you do, you cant get that money back. Report your story to BBB. Open a credit union account rather these crappy banks. Regions, BOA, Wachovia etc all these banks are scam. Hopefully they all go bankrupt.

  • Ja
      11th of Jun, 2009
    0 Votes

    My answer to all of this is, the DEBIT CARD is now plays the roll of CHECKS. When you purchase something, it actually clears 3-5 business days afterwards. Even if it shows at the statement (available balance), its actually on HOLD. Example, if you bought something that costs 100 dollars and you have 300 dollars in your account, you got a car payment 190 dollars, you basically will have 10 dollars balance right? WRONG!!!
    You purchase 50 dollars of goods, 20 dollars gas. You currently available balance is 130. All those transactions are all pending or some on HOLD. Car insurance AUTOPAY kicks in at 110 dollars for example. You have 20 dollars left AVAILABLE BALANCE right? Correct!!!
    BUT, when all the other 50 dollars, 20 dollars clears from Pending and Hold, you get overdraft fee billed automatically. so 35+35= 70-20= -50 IS YOUR AVAILABLE BALANCE. and 1-2 are on hold too somehow, boom another 70- overdraft fee, you get 70+50 = 120- NEGATIVE ACCOUNT. PLUS the CAR PAYMENT is a higher fee so that kicks in too. So basically your 300 bucks becomes like 180 dollars.
    So the bank makes 120 off of your 300 bucks deposit. That is 36% profit from that week transaction. This must stop

  • Ja
      12th of Jun, 2009
    +2 Votes

    Maggie - I am not talking about checks. This morning, I got an email from WACHOVIA and they said that their system is 3 day delayed in updating the available balance.
    What kind of fantastic Service is that?

  • Ti
      12th of Jun, 2009
    +2 Votes

    This "inaccurate balance" seen at the ATM is not the case at BOA and several other banks. Their subtractions and additions are instantaneous. Obviously, we could just "do our banking there" and believe me, I am now- but what Wachovia does is a bit more complicated than simply "keeping track in a register." Wachovia is a perpetrator of social inequity. That is why I left that bank.

    They took $700 from me, on a technicality that my Direct Deposit was 2 days later than usual, and I was unaware. I kept track of everything in the register perfectly fine. Even with perfect documentation, they refused to give back the money, stating "well, it's not a bank error." I might be able to understand this rhetoric it it truly was the customer's negligence or miscomprehension, but in this case, taking the money is entirely unwarranted. How can they justify this? In this social climate? In this economy?

    I am not the only person to have such amounts siphoned from my hard-earned money. It has happened to many other people I know. All are working class, working near minimum wage. Most have a scenario similar to mine, where the register is irrelevant.

    Wachovia conducts unconscionable business practices. The only reason they do it is because there is no law preventing them.

    Everybody knows it is not right to take more than a week's worth of pay from a person who is working just to make ends meet. Only unchecked greed can ever fathom such a trespass. I fear US citizens condone punctuated instances of slavery, if we allow this activity. Just imagine yourself not being paid for 10 days of work! (If here, you say to yourself, "I keep track of everything, so this would never happen." then don't bother responding, you clearly don't get it.)

    I, for one, will not tolerate it. And I certainly won't defend the bank, who would just as soon do it to me, as to anyone, for automatic, soulless reasons. Be glad for your competence with your register, for understanding the bank's workings precisely, or having enough buffer funds to keep yourself away from the pool of sharks... Most working class people do not. You're be surprised how many people out there have trouble with basic math, let alone all the crap Wachovia throws at you. Yes, most work minimum wage. Yes, the net effect of overdrafts on them, often merely for walking a thin financial line, is not being paid for their work. It has to stop -- it is a huge social inequity.

  • Ti
      12th of Jun, 2009
    +1 Votes

    I wish it were so simple. If only that were the only factor! Everything is customer negligence in moneyland isn't it?

    That's precisely the attitude surrounding money-- there's a rationalization in the bank's favor for just about every scenario imaginable. When, precisely, did banks acquire all the rights to their account holders' money? How is every single case of overdraft unilaterally the customer's fault? How is this so, when the banks make all the rules? When the overdraft industry is part of the banks' design? When they don't disclose all the details? When they lead you on saying "we'll give you overdraft protection" and don't follow through (as in my case)?, When their vague or confusing policies seem to encourage these account defaults? Is the world populated by people, or by wallets?

    My position is that there is more than one concerted effort going on here. Customers who have experienced overdrafts in the past are -obviously- trying to avoid them. It not something you forget, or take lightly. Why do they still get them? Well... it's not because the obvious hasn't occurred to them.

    For instance, I cannot help having to pay bills, food, etc in this economic climate. I do not spend money needlessly, I have never been delinquent on any bills. Even so, with the rising cost of everything, my account nears empty once a month. I have no savings, as there is always something breaking, or something unexpected to pay for. I live the modern precarious circumstance, ever more common as minimum wage does not keep up with rising prices. Do you have any idea how many people these days have no savings at all? How many people live paycheck to paycheck? It's a huge fraction this day and age.

    This is why I must state that taking $500, $1000, $2000 from a working person is just downright unconscionable. Anyone with a basic conscience knows this, it is quite obvious. The fact that bank policies are so bureaucratic as to negate all factors of circumstance, and the very human impact of what they are doing-- this is disheartening, and a terrible shame for our nation. I do not, and cannot condone the bank's activities. It's bad money, bad tactics, and in any other context would be indistinguishable from -crime-.

    The social issue is that it openly exploits (and highlights) the lower class population. I know several working people who struggle just to handle routine numbers. Nearly -every- dyslexic person I know has had a series of overdrafts ! Some people have low a IQ, and can't adequately manage their money. Some are just very disorganized. ALL these people I know work near minimum wage. Yes, obviously there's the knee-jerk "well, that's not the bank's problem" ... but these are the sorts of people receiving exorbitant overdrafts. Do we not care anymore how money is made? Is there no recognition of the human being anymore?

    This is why I look also at the social angle, after my own experience. Working people clearly need protection from these kinds of bank practices. Banks do not have immunity, nor should it be granted to them here.

    Now, I know I will not overdraft in the future. I found a bank which actually made good on it's assurances of OD protection. Wachovia did not. The experience still sticks with me, as I do not wish to live / participate in a nation that permits such egregious arrogation of funds from working people. It is not a crime to be poor, or to live paycheck-to-paycheck. The bank knows full well these kinds of people will overdraft. They are building an industry on it. I think it is despicable.

  • Sh
      12th of Jun, 2009
    0 Votes

    Most big banks are known for this practice. Try to find a small hometown bank to deal with or a federal credit union.

    I have my monthly inheritance checks deposited into a federally insured debit card. I no longer have to deal with any bank.

  • Ti
      13th of Jun, 2009
    0 Votes

    As I said; it's not because we aren't trying. It's quite obvious we don't want' $2000 in fees, either. You cannot observe the capacity / organization of yourself, and presume your level of competence in that area applies to all people.

    I'm glad numbers come so easily and obviously for some people. Good for them. It's the same with schooling, too. And social interaction. I've worked with people long enough to know that the human race is diverse, dynamic. Skills and capacities vary immensely. What is like breathing for one person, might be like 12-step algebra for the next. Haven't you met a denizen of the population of fully-grown people who still can't spell of their own accord? They're everywhere. Well, guess what... it's the same with numbers. They don't all fit in the bottleneck, and they never will.

    Banks know this. And they are exploiting these people under a passive guise of "policy." Maybe you might see why this is a rather pressing social issue, and not a matter of making sure everybody conforms to the whims of the gargantuan, (presumably) immutable banks. I see a bigger ethical issue here.

  • Ti
      13th of Jun, 2009
    0 Votes

    You think I -don't- carry a calculator around?

    It's a non-answer (and still vaguely insulting) to say "well just be like me, and don't." "I take responsibility, that means you must not" / "I was where you are until -I- took responsibility." If you cannot imagine anything other than your own particular competences, why bother to respond? Of course you're perfectly aware of your own abilities. Why judge all other people's based on that? I'm rather aware of mine, too.

    We live in a democracy, we can make the laws we want. Why not take -social- responsibility? These kind of rules are avoidable, as they are mutable-- if people want them to be. We can't do much about the fact of drunk driving because it's perpetrated by millions of individuals around the nation. With banks all it would take is one binding law. It's far more centralized.

    Why is everything in this culture some form of perimeter defense the individual has to take? Nobody wants to "rock the boat" anymore. Even on blatantly immoral things. This isn't some large fight, or some major law-- it's just a periphery change. Just to protect working people.

    I'm tired of pulling my hair out over it. I'm sure millions of other people are, too.

  • Sh
      13th of Jun, 2009
    +1 Votes

    Maggie, I agree 100% with you. I learned the hard way not to write checks depending on a direct deposit, which is why I no longer use banks. The direct deposit sometimes doesn't get there, but years ago, the banks would reverse the fees. Today, it's slam, bam, thank you for your $2, 000 overdraft fees (wow he writes a lot of checks).. You get notices within 2 weeks following an overdraft in the mail and then it's too late to do anything.

    You can check to see what cleared online, but you can't always tell if that's accurate. Banks are getting more and more desperate for money. My friend went on vacation and her check was supposed to be a direct deposit. The bank cleared all her checks first, then put the deposit in. She came home to all those overdraft fees, plus fees to pay to the people she wrote checks to, plus it took 2 paychecks to even out.

    That is NOT the way the system used to work. It's a brand new world out there. ergo: I dislike dealing with banks and am glad to be free of them. I'd rather pay .39 for a money order than $35 to my bank for their policy changes. Ridiculous.

    This is why a small hometown bank is best. Some don't charge if the check is under $10 and most all will reverse the fees with no questions asked.

Post your comment