bank "lost" my transaction

[hurricanegirl]

Hello again all

back in early June  I withdrew by my check a goodly sum of money from my personal account

and I used that same check in the full amount to make a deposit to my business account - and do have a valid receipt for the deposit

Long story short, neither the withdrawal or the credit ever took place

no account was overdrawn as a result

I requested an investigation when this was discovered by me via bank statements which arrived Mid July

the bank did investigate, and I was informed  that nothing could be located as records are destroyed after 45 days

the bank had quite a cavalier attitude, as I was not "out" any money, no checks bounced, etc, so it was suggested I simply re-do the transaction

I am upset, and I do wonder what your "attitude" toward this situation might be,,,or if I should be concerned that this could in the future come back somehow and bite me

FWIW;;; the evil BOA

thanks all

[gs11rmb]

I had fraud almost two years ago on my BoA account.  It took months to sort out and their attitude of "it's your fault" was what drove me to close the account.  I know chiver78 had a problem a couple of months ago.  I understand that stuff happens (computer error, human mistake, etc.) but it was the attitude that really made me angry.

I can understand why you're upset.  Considering that you're not out any money your decision on whether or not to move banks comes down to how much you want to deal with the paperwork.  That was cumbersome.
 

[Lizard Queen]

I've mentioned here before that I had to work with BOA at the job I had for a long time in the past. My company used to use another bank, that got taken over by BOA, so I had a baseline. There were hardly any errors made by the prior bank, over years of business. BOA made errors constantly. Even, I believe, violating HIPAA laws, as one of the errors involved our getting lockbox information, including documentation, for a health insurance company. And this didn't happen just one time, but constantly. The errors gradually decreased, but there still was a rare month that they didn't screw something up somewhere (I can't remember exactly, but we're talking probably 12 different lockboxes we had with them.) Fortunately, my company started using USB for it's new business ventures, and again, nary an error from them. All this to say is, BOA is the worst. I don't know why anyone would choose to do business with them.

[Deleted]

Aug 1, 2019 7:29:18 GMT -5 hurricanegirl said:

the bank did investigate, and I was informed that nothing could be located as records are destroyed after 45 days.

the bank had quite a cavalier attitude, as I was not "out" any money, no checks bounced, etc, so it was suggested I simply re-do the transaction

The part about destroying records after 45 days has to be pure BS. They may destroy paper records such as deposit slips but they'd have to scan and store them first. How would they ever pass an IRS or statutory audit of their financials otherwise?

I'd change banks. Whatever went wrong, they should darn well care about it and fix it. Next time it happens it might not be so harmless.

[Artemis Windsong]

Records are destroyed after 45 days.  That looks like a blatant lie.  Maybe the paper side.  Online, the internet remembers forever.

[chiver78]

ohh, I have lots to say about that bank, and none of it is nice. 🤬

first, there is no way they destroy records after 45 days. whoever told you that was trying to get rid of you that day. second, this sounds similar to my issue in that a transaction change I had made in their system didnt actually save. unfortunately, in my case, it fucked up a lot of stuff and took me 6w to clear up. basically, they refused to admit the error (sound familiar?) and absolutely refused to refund fees related to that error - which was where I dug in my heels. not that any of the similar posts of issues in here surprise me, but they just add to the myriad reasons why this is a horrible bank and I will never do business with them again once I'm fully paid off with a pair of cards on promotional rates.

I moved my checking and savings to a credit union, and have a separate checking account for day to day spending, with Discover bank. it was a huge PITA to move everything, which is why I hadn't yet pulled the trigger - I have more accounts/payees than I need to. this wasn't the first time I had this particular issue with them, but it certainly was the biggest dollar amount. ultimately, you need to decide whether periodic issues like this, their responses, and the potential impact to your own finances are all worth the trouble if you don't want to make the effort to move your accounts. for me, that was the fire under my ass to finally do it. good luck.

[Deleted]

I've given up on all the big banks.  Our local banks/credit unions are such a better experience all around.

[sesfw]

When I was a child (1948-49) BOA actually lost my savings acct, $10.  At that time it was a lot of money, especially for a kid.  I've actively stayed away from them since then.

I've never had a problem using credit unions and small local banks.

[hoops902]

Aug 1, 2019 8:14:32 GMT -5 Artemis Windsong said:

Records are destroyed after 45 days.  That looks like a blatant lie.  Maybe the paper side.  Online, the internet remembers forever.

This was my take though, they don't have a record of anything "online".  The only record which would exist of this phantom transaction that they have zero record of happening is basically the check, which is paper, and which is destroyed after 45 days.  

I'm sure they were referencing the paper side, which is the only side relevant to OP's complaint (if I'm reading it correctly).  

[chiver78]

Aug 1, 2019 9:19:58 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

Aug 1, 2019 8:14:32 GMT -5 Artemis Windsong said:

Records are destroyed after 45 days.  That looks like a blatant lie.  Maybe the paper side.  Online, the internet remembers forever.

This was my take though, they don't have a record of anything "online".  The only record which would exist of this phantom transaction that they have zero record of happening is basically the check, which is paper, and which is destroyed after 45 days.  

I'm sure they were referencing the paper side, which is the only side relevant to OP's complaint (if I'm reading it correctly).  

incorrect, there is also the receipt the OP says she has. I'm curious to know what the specific reaction to that was. how would the bank explain the receipt if there wasn't a transaction? also, does the OP have a record of the check in her statements? that one is a little more fuzzy, as it would require the check to be processed, so idk. but she does have the receipt of deposit, so how does the bank go about losing the transaction?

[laterbloomer]

The bank cashed 2 fraudulent cheques on our company account. In their mind it was our problem, even though they could not produce the original cheques they cashed. They had never actually had a paper copy of those cheques, just pictures. We ended up getting the money back but the bank acted like they were doing us a favour.

[hoops902]

Aug 1, 2019 9:37:00 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

Aug 1, 2019 9:19:58 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

This was my take though, they don't have a record of anything "online".  The only record which would exist of this phantom transaction that they have zero record of happening is basically the check, which is paper, and which is destroyed after 45 days.  

I'm sure they were referencing the paper side, which is the only side relevant to OP's complaint (if I'm reading it correctly).  

incorrect, there is also the receipt the OP says she has. I'm curious to know what the specific reaction to that was. how would the bank explain the receipt if there wasn't a transaction? also, does the OP have a record of the check in her statements? that one is a little more fuzzy, as it would require the check to be processed, so idk. but she does have the receipt of deposit, so how does the bank go about losing the transaction?

We're talking about the records the BANK has...because the bank isn't "researching" looking for records the OP has...I thought it was clear we were talking about the bank's records...but maybe not.  The bank can't explain the receipt obviously, because they have no transaction, and the paper copies are gone.  But we haven't seen the receipt the OP claims to have, so have no idea what the receipt actually is or what transaction data it may have.  

I have no idea what kind of deposit receipts BOA does, or what specifically generates it (ignoring that the receipt is not for the full transaction, but only for the deposit portion).  

[hoops902]

Personally, if it were me, and I had an actual deposit receipt, I'd make a stink.  You can only do that if you have  a clear receipt though.  Raise a stink and say your account is short $X that you have a receipt for.  If the receipt is good, they SHOULD have plenty of motivation to fix the entire thing, because the last thing they want is to have no proof of the withdrawal portion and a valid receipt for the deposit portion.  But again, I have no idea what the receipt says or how good of documentation it is.

[chiver78]

Aug 1, 2019 9:52:20 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

Aug 1, 2019 9:37:00 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

incorrect, there is also the receipt the OP says she has. I'm curious to know what the specific reaction to that was. how would the bank explain the receipt if there wasn't a transaction? also, does the OP have a record of the check in her statements? that one is a little more fuzzy, as it would require the check to be processed, so idk. but she does have the receipt of deposit, so how does the bank go about losing the transaction?

We're talking about the records the BANK has...because the bank isn't "researching" looking for records the OP has...I thought it was clear we were talking about the bank's records...but maybe not.  The bank can't explain the receipt obviously, because they have no transaction, and the paper copies are gone.  But we haven't seen the receipt the OP claims to have, so have no idea what the receipt actually is or what transaction data it may have.  

I have no idea what kind of deposit receipts BOA does, or what specifically generates it (ignoring that the receipt is not for the full transaction, but only for the deposit portion).  

I understand that. remember, I just went through this myself, but without the luxury of a receipt b/c my issue was contained within the online billpay system. if the OP has a receipt for a deposit made in-branch, it will be a slip of thermal paper, printed with the bank's logo on it as well as the pertinent information. the bank should have the original in their records from that day's transaction, the OP would have been given the carbon copy. so yes, if she has that receipt, she should raise a huge stink about this IMHO. 

[hoops902]

Aug 1, 2019 10:27:01 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

Aug 1, 2019 9:52:20 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

We're talking about the records the BANK has...because the bank isn't "researching" looking for records the OP has...I thought it was clear we were talking about the bank's records...but maybe not.  The bank can't explain the receipt obviously, because they have no transaction, and the paper copies are gone.  But we haven't seen the receipt the OP claims to have, so have no idea what the receipt actually is or what transaction data it may have.  

I have no idea what kind of deposit receipts BOA does, or what specifically generates it (ignoring that the receipt is not for the full transaction, but only for the deposit portion).  

I understand that. remember, I just went through this myself, but without the luxury of a receipt b/c my issue was contained within the online billpay system. if the OP has a receipt for a deposit made in-branch, it will be a slip of thermal paper, printed with the bank's logo on it as well as the pertinent information. the bank should have the original in their records from that day's transaction, the OP would have been given the carbon copy. so yes, if she has that receipt, she should raise a huge stink about this IMHO. 

And just to be clear, my "stink" would be "my account is short $X, look, I have the receipt", not "I moved money from this account into this account and I'm out no money but I want you to fix it".  Raise a stink about one specific account being short and absent money you have a receipt for.  It's a lot more motivational if you're complaining about an account being short with documentation than if you're complaining about a missing transaction which has no real financial impact since it came from and went into 2 different accounts owned by the same person.

[chiver78]

yes, exactly. 

[TheOtherMe]

Aug 1, 2019 8:52:02 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

I've given up on all the big banks.  Our local banks/credit unions are such a better experience all around.

This is what I've done.

My money is in a credit union and a local bank.  So far, so good.  

[busymom]

If it were me, I'd insist on sitting down with the bank manager.


For the future, it's obvious they're sloppy, so it's time to move onto somewhere else.  I like the credit union suggestions here. 

[CCL]

Aug 1, 2019 8:07:03 GMT -5 @athena53 said:

Aug 1, 2019 7:29:18 GMT -5 hurricanegirl said:

the bank did investigate, and I was informed that nothing could be located as records are destroyed after 45 days.

the bank had quite a cavalier attitude, as I was not "out" any money, no checks bounced, etc, so it was suggested I simply re-do the transaction

The part about destroying records after 45 days has to be pure BS. They may destroy paper records such as deposit slips but they'd have to scan and store them first. How would they ever pass an IRS or statutory audit of their financials otherwise?

I'd change banks. Whatever went wrong, they should darn well care about it and fix it. Next time it happens it might not be so harmless.

Exactly!

[pooks]

I am confused as how a receipt can be generated without the transaction being processed.  But then I don't claim to understand how banking software works.  I thought the receipt showed what had been done, not what was going to maybe happen.  

[Deleted]

I've had two lost transactions.

The first one was in 1974.  I opened a small savings account with $25 cash from my first paycheck.  Back then, these were passbook savings, and you got an actual book with the transactions recorded and initialed by the teller.  You also received a receipt and a quarterly statement so you could balance it.  When I got the statement, the initial deposit was not included.  I never knew what happened, but they fixed it.  I had the receipt.

The second one was this year.  I used the overnight slot to make a deposit.  It did not show up in my account so I called the bank.  They couldn't find it.  I knew I had deposited it, knew approximately what time, and so on.  They kept telling me they didn't have it, and I kept telling them that I knew I had deposited it.  Of course, it was a cash deposit.  Finally, the bank manager stepped in and said he would call me back.  He did and said he found it where it had fallen into somewhere that he didn't think anything could fall into.  That's great, but it was not so great that it was possible in the first place to physically lose my deposit.

I no longer use the night depository after that experience.

[hoops902]

Aug 1, 2019 13:51:31 GMT -5 pooks said:

I am confused as how a receipt can be generated without the transaction being processed.  But then I don't claim to understand how banking software works.  I thought the receipt showed what had been done, not what was going to maybe happen.  

A few theories (clearly only theories since I don't work at BOA, but I do have some experience with banking-like transactions).

-The receipt is for the deposit, which simply notes that $X was handed over.
-The receipt does not occur AFTER the transaction processes (as an oversimplified example...I am your landlord, you hand me $500 for rent, I hand you a receipt...our "transaction" is done, but I haven't entered it into my record-keeping system at the time).  Not to get all technical here, but it's possible that while people think "receipt" really means "transaction confirmation", they may in fact be different things here in terms of timeline of the generation.  The "transaction" is done between the person and the bank's representative...not necessarily recorded in the recordkeeping system though.
-The transaction was removed, either intentionally or mistakenly (i.e.  the person took the money out of the account, intended to put it into the other account but put it back into the same account, which meant the same "transaction" had a debit and credit both for the exact same amount which isn't logical, hence the transaction was removed either by the person or the system).
-The receipt is something less automated than we think it is (like hand-written).
-There is some manual process getting in the way (i.e.  My wife works at a bank, they need a deposit slip for all deposits, but you can show up and deposit without one and the teller just writes it out for you...it's a paper documentation, but I suppose it's possible the receipt generator functions outside the transaction system...hence you could generate a receipt and then lose the deposit slip you just wrote out and forget to ever enter it).

[Lizard Queen]

Aug 1, 2019 13:51:31 GMT -5 pooks said:

I am confused as how a receipt can be generated without the transaction being processed.  But then I don't claim to understand how banking software works.  I thought the receipt showed what had been done, not what was going to maybe happen.  

Everything is processed/settled at the end of the day.

[Deleted]

BOA is the worst possible bank. Period.  Refer to previous rants by me on that. They can invent totally new ways to screw you and blame you.  If they put 1/2 that energy into customer service, they would be America's #1 bank.

[chiver78]

Aug 1, 2019 14:03:08 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

Aug 1, 2019 13:51:31 GMT -5 pooks said:

I am confused as how a receipt can be generated without the transaction being processed.  But then I don't claim to understand how banking software works.  I thought the receipt showed what had been done, not what was going to maybe happen.  

A few theories (clearly only theories since I don't work at BOA, but I do have some experience with banking-like transactions).

-The receipt is for the deposit, which simply notes that $X was handed over.
-The receipt does not occur AFTER the transaction processes (as an oversimplified example...I am your landlord, you hand me $500 for rent, I hand you a receipt...our "transaction" is done, but I haven't entered it into my record-keeping system at the time).  Not to get all technical here, but it's possible that while people think "receipt" really means "transaction confirmation", they may in fact be different things here in terms of timeline of the generation.  The "transaction" is done between the person and the bank's representative...not necessarily recorded in the recordkeeping system though.
-The transaction was removed, either intentionally or mistakenly (i.e.  the person took the money out of the account, intended to put it into the other account but put it back into the same account, which meant the same "transaction" had a debit and credit both for the exact same amount which isn't logical, hence the transaction was removed either by the person or the system).
-The receipt is something less automated than we think it is (like hand-written).
-There is some manual process getting in the way (i.e.  My wife works at a bank, they need a deposit slip for all deposits, but you can show up and deposit without one and the teller just writes it out for you...it's a paper documentation, but I suppose it's possible the receipt generator functions outside the transaction system...hence you could generate a receipt and then lose the deposit slip you just wrote out and forget to ever enter it).

I'm on my phone, can't see the whole post now that I'm replying. I want to comment specifically on the 2nd point here. in regards to the receipt for deposit, it says on the receipts that it is a transaction record. it will also list the available balance as well as what the balance will be once the deposit clears. if the deposit is cash, the numbers match. if the deposit is a check, they don't. but if the OP has a receipt from BofA, it is a transaction record of the deposit being initiated*. so I'm still confused as to how the bank lost that one.

*choosing the word initiated, since it was a check deposit

[wmpeon]

Escalate to the district manager if you have to.  

Many moons ago, I had moved to another state, and opened an account with Northwest Bank.  I deposited a $110 check from my old car insurance company, and I had the receipt from the deposit.  About a week later, I received a notice in the mail that the money was removed from my account, because the bank didn't have a check on file (as in, they lost it).  The bank actually included images of the deposit slip when they sent the letter.

I spent four months going back-and-forth with the bank to get my money back for the missing check.  Two months into the mess, I had contacted my old insurance company to re-issue the check.  This is when I learned the bank already cashed the check, but apparently DEPOSITED IT INTO SOMEONE ELSE'S ACCOUNT.  I managed to get a scan of the check, which clearly showed it was processed by the bank.  However, the customer account# where the money went was a little blurry, and the bank couldn't tell for certain who received my money.  They said sorry, nothing they can do.

I finally called the bank's 800# asking for help.  They gave me the number for the district manager, and I left an angry voice message demanding the issue be resolved, and that the bank stop asking me to fix THEIR error.  Within two hours the district manager called me back and told me it was fixed.  True to her word, the money was in my account by the next day.