Alert - Bank of America wants fingerprints to cash checks - action Friday Manch.

[MaineShark]

I'm reasonably confident they're doing this because of Federal regulation, though, if not specifically the PATRIOT Act. Jack showed me some of the history he'd collected on this when we talked about this yesterday. The Feds have set some sort of minimum identity-verification standards that banks must use, and then left it up to the banks to actually figure out how to implement this. That's why things like fingerprints, DNA samples, and blood tests are suddenly so en vogue with these faux private companies.

The plethora of banks that don't do anything of the sort would tend to disprove that assertion.

As I said, I've been banking for years, and have not had to deal with this at any bank which I used.  I've rarely even had to show ID.  I've even opened a new account since the "Patriot Act" nonsense, and not had to do more than flash a driver's license at them.  Either every bank I've dealt with has been engaged in civil disobedience, or there really are not legal requirements.

Off the top of my head, the only bank I can think of that does it is BoA.  I'm sure there are others... does anyone have an actual list of banks that require fingerprints, or even know what percentage of them do?

Joe

[J’raxis 270145]

Instead of continuing this in two places, I'm just posting over here now.

[jaqeboy]

OK, we met at Panera at 10:30 AM today to review the research to date and the process to go through at the bank. One person was designated as the "Civil Rights Observer" to notate a checklist of items and take other notes.

We went to the teller window at about 11:10AM  to try to cash the check and explained that I tried to cash it Thursday afternoon, declined to give prints for religious reasons and was refused and was insisting that they honor the negotiable instrument draft (check) that was drawn on their bank. The teller said we'd have to take that up with Nate, the branch manager.

Nathaniel Chapman, a chipper young "Banking Center Manager" cheerfully met with us and I insisted 3 times during our half hour meeting that the bank honor the demand deposit draft drawn on their bank. He explained their policy and that they don't make exceptions, so wouldn't make one for me. I countered with reference to the UCC paragraphs on Presentment and that I had met the "reasonable identification" requirements of the law by showing him my New Hampshire drivers license, so now he was bound by law to honor the draft.

Also reviewed with him the Commerce Committee's bill prohibiting the practice of fingerprinting as ID and he said he was familiar with the bill. He had attended a meeting with Jerry Little of the Bankers Association on that.

I mentioned that I had contacted the New Hampshire Commission for Human Rights and that he might be hearing from their investigator.

Stated to him that I believed that his dishonoring of a check drawn on his bank was a violation of New-Hampshire law - he stated that they weren't bound by New Hampshire law, but federal (United States) law, since they were a nationally-chartered bank. We both admitted that we weren't lawyers, but I told him that I believed he had mis-spoken in that they are regulated by a federal agency since they were nationally chartered, but they are still bound to obey New Hampshire public laws and that I believed he was in violation of those laws.

Also reviewed with him the media interest in the human interest angle, so he gave me the media contact for the bank: Anne Pace, Senior V.P. of Communications, tel: 646-855-5996, email: anne.pace@bankofamerica.com. Noted to him that this was a very unpopular policy, that I get 10,200 hits when I Google: Bank of America thumbprint, that I know several people who either intend to close their BoA accounts or refuse to accept BoA checks from now on.

He asked if I would like to further discuss the matter with his boss, and I responded affirmatively, so he gave me: Dawn Champiny, Consumer Market Executive for New Hampshire, tel: 222-3023. This is probably the person to direct calls and mail to to express your opinion about their fingerprinting policy, since her influence would be state-wide, rather than just concerning one branch.

At all times I was courteous and he was a cheerful, friendly guy who said things like "that's what's so great about the freedom in this country - you can choose which bank to deal with." He also mentioned that he'd be glad to open an account for me and would gladly accept the check as a deposit. I told him that especially because of this policy and many bad experiences my daughter had with them, I would not possibly consider opening an account with them.

Report to go out to concerned reps, media, CASPIAN and other interested parties. Dave Ridley says he would do a Ridleo, especially if we did a demonstration out front and he'd throw in other stills, interviews, etc. I know there is a lot of opposition to this policy, so maybe we can organize a protest (would have to be some time after Liberty Forum/Alt Expo, for sure). Hmmm, might make a good Alt Expo topic!

[jaqeboy]

Oh, one more thing: I asked Nate, my good buddy by now  to see a printed statement of their policy. He gave me the packet that they give to new account applicants with a booklet inside entitled "Deposit Agreement and Disclosures", 91-11-2000B (11/08) ©2008. In the section entitled Processing Withdrawals (p.19), it states:

Cashing Your Checks for Others

If a person wants to cash your check in one of our banking centers, we may:

     • require identification satisfactory to us,

     • charge them a fee for cashing the check; and

     • impose additional requirements, such as requiring their fingerprint or limiting the locations where we will pay the check in cash.

If the person with your check fails or refuses to satisfy our requirements, we may refuse to cash the check. We are not liable to you for refusing to cash the check or for charging a check-cashing fee.

[D Stewart]

we may charge them a fee for cashing the check

Wow!  I think I need to have a word with my Merrill rep about this.  At least thus far along the companies' integration, Merrill Lynch checks are not drawn on B of A.  However, if this becomes their policy for written checks, I will probably cancel my accounts.

I must remember not to accept Bank of America checks from anyone.

[KBCraig]

Good work, Jack.

Just curious: did he ever address you as "Jack" or "Mr. Shimek" or otherwise acknowledge that you are the person you present yourself to be, which matches the name on the check?

[jaqeboy]

Good work, Jack.

Just curious: did he ever address you as "Jack" or "Mr. Shimek" or otherwise acknowledge that you are the person you present yourself to be, which matches the name on the check?

Oh, yeah, he did. And, by the way, I went to a friend who volunteered to cash my check by depositing it in his BANK OF AMERICA account and withdrawing cash. The deposit went smoothly and the ATM he deposited it in makes a scanned mini copy of the check and prints it on the deposit slip, which he gave me for my file. Too funny - no print required.

[dalebert]

I cash lots of checks at clients banks.  If you don't have an account there, they want a thumb print pretty much everywhere, doesn't bother me. 

If this is true, then there's no point in me moving my money out of Merrill Lynch, but this is the first I've heard anyone say someone other than BofA did this to them. I'll have to check TD Bank North's policy on this.

[D Stewart]

I cash lots of checks at clients banks.  If you don't have an account there, they want a thumb print pretty much everywhere, doesn't bother me. 

If this is true, then there's no point in me moving my money out of Merrill Lynch, but this is the first I've heard anyone say someone other than BofA did this to them. I'll have to check TD Bank North's policy on this.

First Union does it.

[jaqeboy]

I've cashed many client checks at various banks in N.H. and Mass. and BoA is the only one I've run into that required it. Nate, the branch manager at the So. Willow Street BoA said they have been doing it elsewhere for a while and just started implementing it in New England recently. Maybe we can push that policy out of NH, at least and let those southerners fight it out w/ BoA if they don't like it in their areas.

I think Wachovia also requires it somewhere, but my reporter in Connecticut hasn't mentioned it there, but she has mentioned the BoA requirement there.

[Keyser Soce]

I'm reasonably confident they're doing this because of Federal regulation, though, if not specifically the PATRIOT Act. Jack showed me some of the history he'd collected on this when we talked about this yesterday. The Feds have set some sort of minimum identity-verification standards that banks must use, and then left it up to the banks to actually figure out how to implement this. That's why things like fingerprints, DNA samples, and blood tests are suddenly so en vogue with these faux private companies.

The plethora of banks that don't do anything of the sort would tend to disprove that assertion.

As I said, I've been banking for years, and have not had to deal with this at any bank which I used.  I've rarely even had to show ID.  I've even opened a new account since the "Patriot Act" nonsense, and not had to do more than flash a driver's license at them.  Either every bank I've dealt with has been engaged in civil disobedience, or there really are not legal requirements.

Off the top of my head, the only bank I can think of that does it is BoA.  I'm sure there are others... does anyone have an actual list of banks that require fingerprints, or even know what percentage of them do?

Joe

Ummm, this only applies to people trying to cash a check who don't have an account with the issuing bank, not to opening an account or cashing a check if you have an account. Most banks require this these days.

My personal story - I confronted B of A on this four years ago in Phx. My angle was that when x signed up for an account with them, they agreed to cash his checks if there was money in the acct. By refusing to cash the check, they were breaking the contract with their client. The end result would be that they were costing their clients time and money because I was going to refuse to do business with them in the future.

They tried to fall back on the security nonsense which is easily debunked. I ended up downtown at the corporate office talking to one of their lawyers. He spewed out a bunch of non-sense but in the end admitted that it was not corporate policy and was up to the discretion of the branch manager (that appears to no longer be the case).

With these words I headed to the branch down in the lobby, had the company which issued the check call the branch manager directly and tell him that they knew who I was, had issued the check, had the money in their account and they expected him to make good on the check without forcing me to give a fingerprint.

I did finally get the check cashed without the thumbprint but since then have used the glue / smear technique to get around the hassle.

[MaineShark]

Ummm, this only applies to people trying to cash a check who don't have an account with the issuing bank, not to opening an account or cashing a check if you have an account. Most banks require this these days.

I've cashed customer checks at banks on several occasions.  Never had an issue.

As I've asked elsewhere, it would be useful if there were a list of which banks do and do not require fingerprints or other biometric ID.

As far as the check being a contract, it is.  But it's a contract between you and the individual who signed it, not between you and their bank.  That individual promises to pay, and engages the bank as their agent.  If there is fraud, it's on the part of the individual who hands the check to you, without warning you that they have contracted with the bank to require a certain level of identification.

Requiring that checks be labeled to indicate that they will require biometric ID would, at least, be vaguely-excusable as a means to prevent such fraud, versus an outright prohibition, which is no different than smoking bans or any other interference in free trade.

Joe

[jaqeboy]

I'm moving any strategy info for this continuing action over to the secure forum here.

I'll continue to post news here, tho, just to keep people up-to-date.Will be posting a stock report to the reps who were interested, the UL, WMUR and mebbe the governor's office.

[bigmike]

Moneygram wire transfers are able to be picked up without even showing ID if the amount is less than $900 (maybe has changed to a lower amount). The sender is required to show ID but the receiver only needs the answer to the security question. No thumbprint, no ID, no SSN, no DNA, no anal probe.

Of course it costs about $50 to wire $900 and that's a fee the user would have to pay deducted from the total amount of money you're expecting but you may consider paying for your privacy. I haven't tried saying I'm Donald Duck yet, but having the sender send it to "Bob Smith" when your name is Chris Jones feels kind of satisfying.

[Skram]

Bank of America sucks.  Not only will they fingerprint you, but they just announced at my local BofA (Portsmouth) that they would start to charge a $6 fee to cash a paycheck drawn on a BofA account if you do not have an account there.  It's a goddamn Bank of America check and they want to charge me $6 for the trouble of giving me my money that they have.  Grrr....