Current Events > Bank teller refuses to give black girl her own money

(+) Yeah! (+)

LordMarshal posted...

Someone post the guy demanding money in his hand with red eyes and green explosion please.

---

Irony posted...

YESSSS!!!!!

---

Bleuets posted...

bull shit.

I see it happen all the time. The check will be deposited, placed on hold for a day or two and then the funds are made available. Then later on the check is flagged or not cleared for whatever reason, and then the funds are taken back out of the account, most of the time leaving it negative because they already spent the money they initially got.

---

Jagr_68 posted...

Hell I've seen retail cashiers literally take minutes out of their stupid time checking $20 to $100 bills like they're the FBI, all because someone of color used cash instead of a card.

That happened to me TONS of times! I remember one time I was buying a book, and I gave the cashier a 50. She looked at the bill all strangely, and holding it up to the light. I said to her "Its real". She then look at me and said how do you know? I then said to her smiling. "Cause the ink still wet!" She stopped what she was doing, and call the manager. When he showed up, I told him what happened, and he laughed .

---

Lots of banks, including TD updated to processing checks under a day about 2-3 years ago. Which means you can deposit a check before the cut off and have it the same day or next. Larger checks/new customers can have the balance available, but not have the checks cleared since they're doing extra verification. This means the funds would NOT be available through the ATM or another branch, which they clearly were. Which means the teller was using some made up discretion.

I mean, I've faced similar shit, so I definitely believe it.

---

DarkRoast posted...

You are literally wrong, the article straight up says the teller told her that the check cleared and the funds are available

checks dont clear in a day buddy. Available does not equal check cleared. Learn this lesson well my friend.

Bleuets posted...

checks dont clear in a day buddy. Available does not equal check cleared. Learn this lesson well my friend.

You should be telling this to the teller, then

---

Bleuets posted...

checks dont clear in a day buddy. Available does not equal check cleared. Learn this lesson well my friend.

Really doubling down on not having reading comprehension, aren't we?

---

This topic exists on the Politics board so I'm just gonna post what I posted there:

I am currently a bank teller.

Nothing about this situation makes any sense. If I saw a check cleared and money was available in their account, she had her id and her bank card that all matched the numbers and addresses on her account in front of me, there is absolutely no reason why she wouldn't be able to get her money. I have to trust that the back office people made the right decision in clearing her check and thus can feel comfortable with the decision.

Even if in 3 weeks or whatever when the check eventually goes through a more rigorous breakdown by back office people to make sure it's really good, and it turns out it's not, I as a teller wouldn't be held responsible because I'm only dealing with the information that I know of at the time, and that is that the check at that current moment is good, so we're all good.

However, even if the teller felt like something was off with the check (which they wouldn't really know about unless they personally saw the check at one point in time) or there was some hold situation on the account summary screen, any teller would go to their service manager and bring them into this to try to get this woman her money, or at the very least give her a reasonable explanation as to what is going on.

Two days ago someone came in with an out of state ID to my Branch to withdraw the same amount this lady did. Anytime I deal with someone out of state is a little weird, but at the same time this man gave me his id, his bank card, and everything matched and everything was all good. Even though I was initially skeptical and a little uncomfortable cause he was out of state, to play some sort of arm chair analyst as to why this guy would come to my little branch so far away is irrelevant, the info I was presented with was good and the man got his money.

This whole thing is pretty bad from the teller point of view

---

I know people gonna be like youre victim blaming but Id have gone full Karen asking for a manager and requiring a further explanation. Why do people leave places just to complain later when it likely could have been resolved right then and there. Or at least step away from this teller to not go off and then come back composed.

Again, she got her money by seemingly going out of her way and being inconvenienced, but I still never understand why these stories never do what Id consider common sense and escalating right then. Like, Id have probably said, If my money is available, I verified my account, Id like a withdrawal and if youre not comfortable doing your job then you need to get someone that is or you shouldnt be in your position. It is not your money to make decisions with, so please get a manager. If a manager argued about it, Id take it further...IF I needed the money for anything urgent.


---

I hate checks. Takes forever to process at work, clogs up my lines, fraud is easier with them, and there's too many nuances.

That being said it's still part of my job to do it correctly and professionally, and that teller was way out of line.

---

she was probably confused about available balance vs. current balance

---

Crazyman93 posted...

Really doubling down on not having reading comprehension, aren't we?

i read, I work in the financial institution and explained it to you already. So maybe its you who is having the trouble?

Just wondering - do we actually have any other sides of the story, or is it entirely based on what the person who tried to cash the check is claiming?

Because I kinda agree with NoMeLx22x. The story, as it is currently told, doesn't actually make a lot of sense. If the check really did clear the previous day and she had all of her standard bank ID stuff, this really is a problem. Especially if the teller literally told her "it cleared but I'm still uncomfortable." But logically, the teller wouldn't have any reason to do that. It's not even her money, and the person trying to get the money passed the clearance requirements.

But that's assuming all those claims are 100% true with zero nuance. Playing Devil's Advocate here - what if the teller said "yes, they got the check from the ATM" and the lady interpreted it as "the check cleared" when, in reality, that's not what she meant?

---

I dont feel comfortable? Lmao, watch her get a go fund me after shes fired too. Fuckin stupid ass country.

---

DarkRoast posted...

Just wondering - do we actually have any other sides of the story, or is it entirely based on what the person who tried to cash the check is claiming?

Because I kinda agree with NoMeLx22x. The story, as it is currently told, doesn't actually make a lot of sense. If the check really did clear the previous day and she had all of her standard bank ID stuff, this really is a problem. Especially if the teller literally told her "it cleared but I'm still uncomfortable." But logically, the teller wouldn't have any reason to do that. It's not even her money, and the person trying to get the money passed the clearance requirements.

But that's assuming all those claims are 100% true with zero nuance. Playing Devil's Advocate here - what if the teller said "yes, they got the check from the ATM" and the lady interpreted it as "the check cleared" when, in reality, that's not what she meant?

Your first mistake is expecting reason when bigotry is around. No one has any reason to do anything racist or offensive but they choose to do it anyway. In her mind the teller might have thought she was saving the bank from a potential crime for whatever asinine reasons were running through her head.

---

She literally got her money from an ATM outside that branch and at another branch in the area, so you can kindly shut the fuck up with your bullshit Bleuets. She obviously had the money in her account and the money was obviously available.
---

VipaGTS posted...

Your first mistake is expecting reason when bigotry is around

literally lol'd

---

Stuff like this makes banking seem so pointless. "We don't want to give you your money sorry"

????????

---

Malcrasternus posted...

I hate checks

i'm in agreement.
than again, some of us haven't gone on board with direct deposit.
---

VipaGTS posted...

Your first mistake is expecting reason when bigotry is around. No one has any reason to do anything racist or offensive but they choose to do it anyway. In her mind the teller might have thought she was saving the bank from a potential crime for whatever asinine reasons were running through her head.

Totally agree. I was just asking about the story's source, and if the journalist went to anyone else.


---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

She literally got her money from an ATM outside that branch and at another branch in the area, so you can kindly shut the fuck up with your bullshit Bleuets. She obviously had the money in her account and the money was obviously available.

dont ever tell me to shut the fuck up when clearly you dont know what youre fucking talking about. Having money available isnt the same thing as saying the check cleared.

ledbowman posted...

she was probably confused about available balance vs. current balance

No she wasn't. Stop trying to defend this bullshit.

---

Perascamin posted...

Stuff like this makes banking seem so pointless. "We don't want to give you your money sorry"

????????

I also explained this in another post in the same topic, but banks would never succeed if there wasn't any fail-safes in place to make sure they are giving out money when it's actually available.

If banks just took every check and assumed it was good without doing any background investigating on the subject, banks would fail, and they would fail fast.

Even when someone hands me a check for $4 I gotta make sure they have $4 in their own account just in case that check bounces, so the bank can get their money back. Obviously I'm willing to override it if they only have like $1 cause who cares I'll take the hit on that, but that changes drastically when we're talking about hundreds or thousands of dollars.

---

Bleuets posted...

dont ever tell me to shut the fuck up when clearly you dont know what youre fucking talking about. Having money available isnt the same thing as saying the check cleared.

fuck off dude.

---

The surprising thing I found out (well, more, was reminded of) today is that the USA still uses checks lmfao

---

There's some real SSJ powering-up stuff going on in this topic

---

Darkninja42 posted...

I see it happen all the time. The check will be deposited, placed on hold for a day or two and then the funds are made available. Then later on the check is flagged or not cleared for whatever reason, and then the funds are taken back out of the account, most of the time leaving it negative because they already spent the money they initially got.

this disgusted me reading this. As a bank teller, you are the first line of defense against your customers getting scammed or depositing bad checks. You are their financial advisor. I ask questions and I cant tell you how many people Ive saved against depositing a fraud check. Ive had people come back and thank me.

it may seem nosey, but you have to ask questions. Its like going to the doctor, they ask questions to try and help you.

you are doing your customers a disservice by not asking questions and knowing letting people deposit bad checks and go into the negative. Part of your job is to educate people with their finances, do your damn job.

Trumble posted...

The surprising thing I found out (well, more, was reminded of) today is that the USA still uses checks lmfao

Not really. Old people do. Even most employers prefer direct deposit but the check option is available for said old people. And I guess for big cash exchanges like this.

---

WTF is wrong with people?!
---

How is this a race issue? Just manufacturing racism at this point

---

Well, that whole thing is fucking stupid and confusing. I imagine that the teller caught hell for the decision and the ensuing negative press.

Irony posted...

She should sue

Iwin2013 posted...

The fuck? Hopefully she sues the teller and the bank. That's just fucking horrible.

For what? She got the money from another branch of the same bank almost immediately afterward. Even if she could find a lawyer stupid enough to take the case, the judge wouldn't bother hearing it because there was no real hardship, just a minor -- and stupid -- inconvenience.

---

Fire the atm

Edit: eh I didn't think about this before i posted it lol

---

Zeus posted...

Well, that whole thing is fucking stupid and confusing. I imagine that the teller caught hell for the decision and the ensuing negative press.

For what? She got the money from another branch of the same bank almost immediately afterward. Even if she could find a lawyer stupid enough to take the case, the judge wouldn't bother hearing it because there was no real hardship, just a minor -- and stupid -- inconvenience.

It's illegal to discriminate based on race

If the teller has no explanation then she can sue

She'd lose the case in theory but the cost of lawyers and bad PR might make them settle

---

UnfairRepresent posted...

It's illegal to discriminate based on race

If the teller has no explanation then she can sue

She'd lose the case in theory but the cost of lawyers and bad PR might make them settle

First problem, she has no damages. The amount of money that she might receive would be less than what it would cost to hire a lawyer. Second, it wasn't on the bank (which ultimately gave her the money), it was on the teller. So the lawsuit is even harder on those grounds. Third, and most importantly, they'd have to prove discrimination, which would be a fucking hard thing to do. Basically it'd be a huge amount of work for (in a best case scenario) almost no money.

Even if the bank was worried about bad PR, they'd be even more worried about settling because it would encourage *anybody* who's had an issue to try to sue them.

---

tote_all posted...

Sure pal. Like all the times you accidentally defended Trump.

Uh

Who are you?

---

UnfairRepresent posted...

It's illegal to discriminate based on race

If the teller has no explanation then she can sue

She'd lose the case in theory but the cost of lawyers and bad PR might make them settle

No explanation could be excused for any number of reasons. Itd be nearly impossible to prove discrimination when she could just say something like, Based on the timing of the deposit and the withdrawal amount, I did not feel comfortable processing the transaction. If they asked her why she didnt get someone else to take care of the customer shed probably just say, The customer left without issue and did not request another person.

Thats why its not the smartest choice to just leave if youre confronted for no reason like this. Like I said in my previous post, she left after an inconvenience and solved her own problem instead of escalating to a manager or someone that either would have given her the money or shed have a stronger case depending on how that would have gone.

---

Bleuets posted...

this disgusted me reading this. As a bank teller, you are the first line of defense against your customers getting scammed or depositing bad checks. You are their financial advisor. I ask questions and I cant tell you how many people Ive saved against depositing a fraud check. Ive had people come back and thank me.

it may seem nosey, but you have to ask questions. Its like going to the doctor, they ask questions to try and help you.

you are doing your customers a disservice by not asking questions and knowing letting people deposit bad checks and go into the negative. Part of your job is to educate people with their finances, do your damn job.

Calm down, I'm not even a teller. Also yes I'm aware there is some probing and due diligence required but there's only so much you can do on that front end when the deposit is first made and there are other systems and checks after that.

---

TD bank... DT bank... donald trump bank...
---

It's weird that people are taking the word of a racist teller over Bleuets on how checks work. The tellers story is clearly inconsistent/ignorant here on top of being racist.

---

Zeus posted...

First problem, she has no damages. The amount of money that she might receive would be less than what it would cost to hire a lawyer. Second, it wasn't on the bank (which ultimately gave her the money), it was on the teller. So the lawsuit is even harder on those grounds. Third, and most importantly, they'd have to prove discrimination, which would be a fucking hard thing to do. Basically it'd be a huge amount of work for (in a best case scenario) almost no money.

This is very true

Even if the bank was worried about bad PR, they'd be even more worried about settling because it would encourage *anybody* who's had an issue to try to sue them.

This isn't however.

America already has a sue happy culture and most big businsesses don't fear "encouraging" lawsuits, they fear long drawn out lawsuits and are happy to settle

I've seen businsesses settle over the most asinine things because they know the guy suing isn't going away and continuing the case will cost fortune

I can't go into details for obvious reasons but I was personally involved in a case where a dude was mad that his pension was smaller than he thought it was, so he sued, he had absolutely no argument or point. He was just mad

But because it was important to him they knew he would take it all the way to court and it would cost 6 figures just to go through all that. So they literally paid him to go away

Which pissed me off since he basically just got given a huge wad of cash for being a male Karen


---

I'm not saying this teller isn't racist but it's also entirely possible their just a fucking idiot.

Also why would she just leave? I'm not big on karening out in public but if you are refusing to let me withdrawal my money you're gonna give me a concrete reason why and then your manager is going to be convincing me why I shouldn't be moving all of my accounts to a different bank tomorrow.

---

Lol ATM can't see race.

I would withdraw, walk back in and tell them I am closing my account and making them infamous for not giving customers their money then go to their competitor.

Titty bank?

---

DarthDemented posted...

Titty bank?

TD bank!
---

Bleuets posted...

this disgusted me reading this. As a bank teller, you are the first line of defense against your customers getting scammed or depositing bad checks. You are their financial advisor. I ask questions and I cant tell you how many people Ive saved against depositing a fraud check. Ive had people come back and thank me.

it may seem nosey, but you have to ask questions. Its like going to the doctor, they ask questions to try and help you.

you are doing your customers a disservice by not asking questions and knowing letting people deposit bad checks and go into the negative. Part of your job is to educate people with their finances, do your damn job.

I use the bank atm for all my deposits that aren't direct just so I don't have to deal with arrogant assholes who think their bottom of the ladder job is more important than it actually is.

---