bank of america fingerprinting to cash checks?!

[keith in RI]

here is a thread from a california board but the local tv station here in rhode island just did a story about a guy who tried to cash a check here and besides asking him to place his ink thumbprint on the check (which he did) they told him there was a 6 dollar fee to cash the check because he was a non member!!! apparently this all started last week...

"....just when you think it can only get better. I went to Bank of America to cash a check. I don't have an account there so I hand my license and the endorsed check to the clerk, she tells me they have to finger print me in order to cash the check. I look at her and blurt out "you gotta be shtng me. No sir that's our new policy as of today, we are protecting our customers. Ya right. I told her they should be finger printing the bank CEO's, they are the people we need protecting from.
I left with the check, called the person that gave me the check and told him cash only from now on or get a new bank.
Effective immediately I will refuse Bank of America checks as a form of payment..."

[Jared]

yeah. a buddy of mine at work was telling me that on Monday night actually.

[John Edward Mercier]

Since this is a contractual requirement for dealing with the bank... the customers will need to decide.

[Dave Ridley]

i just saw it happen to someone else in manchester.  i objected to the bank employees.

[Porcupine_in_MA]

Seems to me Bank of America might be losing some customers...

[lildog]

I don't see why you guys are viewing this as a negative.  This is a free market solution to security in regarding people's money.

You have a choice to deal with this bank or not deal with it.

I'd want to read more regarding privacy of finger prints but assuming they keep them private I see this as a good thing and would certainly feel safer keeping my money there.  After all people can (and have) forge signatures.

[John Edward Mercier]

Not for or opposed.
Just will be interesting to see how it affects customer acquisition.

[Porcupine_in_MA]

I don't see why you guys are viewing this as a negative.  This is a free market solution to security in regarding people's money.

You have a choice to deal with this bank or not deal with it.

I'd want to read more regarding privacy of finger prints but assuming they keep them private I see this as a good thing and would certainly feel safer keeping my money there.  After all people can (and have) forge signatures.

Personally I don't care, because I'm not a customer of theirs. But if someone is a customer they have a right to be upset if the company they're dealing with does something they don't like. Everyone knows they can deal with the bank or not deal with it.

[error]

Oh, I support Bank of America's "right" (so-called) to fingerprint non-account-holders who present checks. But since they do that, I won't do business with them.

As for checks, it's not all that hard to get a bank account. If you have bad checks in your history for some reason, many banks will now open "checking" accounts for you without checks, just a Visa/MC debit card. Citibank does this, for instance.

[grasshopper]

Can anybody confirm this on paper, or a story?  I want to get my witches on this asap.

[Romak]

Just dont bank there, much like insurance companies requiring your SS# for car insurance we found one that doesnt and we go with them. Or you can just pay a year in advance to avoid the credit check. My car insurance company has no right to look at my credit history. Recently we went with a local oil company that requires this for scheduled deliveries. We crossed out the entire section giving permission for credit checks and signed cash only. They still went ahead and ran my credit by getting my SS# from an outside party which is very easy to do since this is one of the things I do for a living. Long story short my attorney is working on it. Really pisses me off the amount of people who look at your credit and personal information.

[John Edward Mercier]

Most likely because you can not change a contract unilaterally.
The other party would need to cross out the section and initial it.

[Romak]

They did initial it, we both did. And they still obtained my SS# without me giving it to them.

[John Edward Mercier]

Since they have the cash upfront it should not have been necessary.
If you have an option, change suppliers...

I've done this to companies before to show them that I expect mutual respect in relationships.

[Pat McCotter]

Can anybody confirm this on paper, or a story?  I want to get my witches on this asap.

From the Fairfield (CT) Weekly
County Fair: The Fine Print
Thursday, September 25, 2008
By Dave Bonan

To cash a check you need two forms of government-issued ID, maybe a PIN number and...a copy of your fingerprints?

That's what Kevin Gallagher, of Bethel, says he's twice been asked for (and twice refused to give) when cashing a check. Gallagher, 44, is known locally for hosting Time Out with Kevin Gallagher on Comcast Channel 23 since 1996.

Back in 2006, he was working for a company (he declined to give a name) and went to cash his payroll check through his employer's bank, Wachovia. The tellers would only cash it if he paid $5 and gave his fingerprints, since he did not have a checking or savings account through Wachovia. He refused and complained about the policy to his boss, who subsequently withdrew his business accounts from the institution.

A month ago, Gallagher went to cash his payroll check at the Bank of America on Grassy Plain Street in Bethel, as had been his ritual for months, and was asked for prints. Furthermore, the bank wanted to charge him $6 each time he drew a check from his employer's account. He refused to pay or give his fingerprints. He has been providing two forms of ID and says that should be enough.

"My thumbprint is my property and I feel asking for it is a crime in order to obtain money that's been set aside for me," says Gallagher. He adds, "I cashed my check at a check-cashing place and their two percent service charge is actually less out of my pocket than Bank of America's $6 charge."

Gallagher is a bit cautious about banking because he was the victim of identity theft and continues to hear news stories about banks losing customers' information. He closed his checking and savings accounts (though he sometimes uses his wife's account). Hence, the cashing checks from his employers' banks.

Gallagher also referenced Bank of America's lending practices that sparked an outcry in February 2007 where it offered credit cards and mortgages to illegal immigrants without Social Security numbers or credit histories. In its defense, Bank of America said it's complied with U.S. banking and antiterrorism laws and was simply "meeting the needs of an untapped group of potential customers."

"I want equal treatment," says Gallagher. "If illegal immigrants can obtain mortgages without any credit, then why should I be charged a fee?"

Christine Lucsky, office manager of the Bethel branch, says this is part of a new policy that took effect on Sept. 16, called a "non-relationship customer fee," that charges individuals when cashing a check issued by business, not personal, accounts.

After scouring their Web site for close to an hour, I could not find this new policy anywhere, not even the news release section. One would think a new nationwide policy would be in plain sight. Bank of America's customer service center recalled no such fingerprint policy, but after a few minutes confirmed there was one. I was told that only some banking centers utilize the fingerprint policy at their discretion.

The logic is that a criminal wouldn't cash a stolen check while giving away his fingerprints, so the policy acts as a safeguard to check fraud.

Diane Wagner, spokesperson for Bank of America, says fingerprinting has been done for years by several banks. According to the American Bankers Association, it's not about identification, rather it's a tool of deterrence and verification.

"This fee is new to the former Fleet markets but not new to the franchise as we instituted a fee to non-account-holders since 2001," says Wagner. (Bank of America acquired Fleet in 2004.)

Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal was not aware that banks were utilizing the fingerprint policy. "I haven't heard about it, but we are looking into it," says Blumenthal. Recalling his crusade in 1998 against ATM's charging non-customer fees, he says, "These practices are abusive but not illegal."