LIVID with Chase…Accounts frozen pending closure

[Caught750]

At the end of the day it is what it is....

My biggest complaint is their inability to verify given where the check came from.  The issue would have happened whether it went in the first time or the second since font causing the BSA/AML flags.

Anything Chase leaves open they leave open.  I'll keep a few dollars in the accounts and will use the cards.  Sadly, Chase is positioned where they are.  AmEx/Cap1/USB AR fill in well but the UR ecosystem is, unfortunately, the best personal/biz fit for my spend.

While certain things about Chase may be incredibly reliable CHASE, as a whole, has shown me that they are not.

[ghgirll40]

---

@Brian_Earl_Spilner wrote:

---

@Caught750 wrote:

---

@AndySoCal wrote:

@Caught750  @northway  BSA/AML is there to protect the bank. No bank or credit union is going to release all funds from a paper check until they receive the payment for it. Once the funds are released they can leave the bank and the bank is out the money if they cannot get it back form the customer.. The customer may disappear after the funds do.   See link below. Any paper check over $5,000 will have a hold  put on it see my earlier link.

https://www.fdic.gov/resources/bankers/bank-secrecy-act/ 

The CFPB would not get involved with this decision. The way CFPB and or the FDIC would get involved is if the bank did not follow their process and procedures. The difference between Wells Fargo and Chase is Wells got a Wire transfer that also has the funds with it.  Chase executive office will not do anything to make an exception.  (not in the policy or procedures)  The banking system has regulations that must followed. These regulations includes protections for consumers and the banks or credit unions

---

@AndySoCal why so argumentative?

I clearly said that I understand BSA/AML.  I also said that I understand a hold (though I wasn't a fan of it).

What I don't understand is that a bank like Chase can't verify a phone number AT ALL for a CITY GOVERNMENT CENTER.

Fraud is fraud, this isn't...not to mention that Chase already received the funds that they are refusing to release.

Its that Chases attitude is F&$K off when they're the ones that can't handle a basic concept of banking.  If you require something then be able to to it.

Its that Chase has that attitude when it could impact someone's livelihood.

---

Here, let me try to shed some light. The people that have to review those fraud alerts probably don't have the power, or just don't have the time, nor care enough. I've seen all instances in multiple positions and industries. I'll give you an example. This example, btw, is something I've seen many times and isn't just in the banking industry or just the fraud department. 

Fraud team is on a dialer and in between calls they get alerts to review. Your check pops up as an alert. They check their database of phone numbers and maybe dial out, if the phone number is even correct or up to date. If it's not correct, they don't have the ability to Google it or maybe they have metrics to hit so they don't waste their time. Phone number leads to a complicated IVR system, cause government. Employee has a set amount of time to resolve or gets calls to interrupt them. They can put it back in a queue for someone else to try and resolve. Type of possible fraud isn't serious enough to escalate. See that 2 other people already tried and notated "on hold too long" (cause they have metrics to hit) so they set it as unable to verify and move on. Since unable to verify is selected, computer than decides if someone needs to be assigned for further review or if it should automate actions, such as closing account. The case is now out of the frontline worker's hands and all they can do is say sorry because there is literally nothing they or management can do about an automated process that has started. 

Having worked in chase's loss mitigation department the abilities of the frontline workers versus higher level are vastly different. As a frontline worker I had strict time limits to adhere to for calls and tasks. Once I was promoted, I was given extreme flexibility allowing me to work on one case all day if I wanted to. I could sit there and spend all day trying to Google a good number or wait on hold 15 mins to verify info. That was my job. But the reality was most issues were handled on the lower level. While they may be a huge issue for a customer, they weren't a big enough issue to chase to  necessitate my involvement.

---

Agreed. I have chased down a charge off payment that was in a pending queu for 6 months that was keeping an account restricted. If I wasn't me and chased that down it would have stayed restricted indefinitely but it wasn't a requirement of my position. I just enjoy clearing things up when I can and am detail oriented. This is what your dealing with when you are talking to an inundated frontline. 

[NoMoreE46]

---

@Brian_Earl_Spilner wrote:

---

@NoMoreE46 wrote:

TL;DR  The issue was the check's  FO N T...

---

Well considering that someone can walk into staples and buy business checks which allow you to manipulate what's shown from contact info to fonts to routing numbers, then yeah, a concern is raised if a check comes in comic sans instead of the previous helvetica. Most people aren't able to tell fonts apart so if it doesn't match what has been previously deposited it raises a flag. Hell you could write a personal check that can be refused because the signature doesn't match the other 100 checks you've written. Chase's imaging software is smart enough to see that. It's also dumb enough to cash a check with no signature which is what happened to me for 2k. 🤦

---

I know that my wet signatures on checks don't even come close to matching the ones on file with my banks....

[ChargedUp]

This is just another exhibit of why I love smaller, local CU's. Once you've built a solid, time tested relationship with them, you can actually meet face to face with the very people where the equivalent at Chase are in an office tower someplace on the other side of the country.

Mine has 3 branches and the branch managers have access and ability to make decisions if and when to override HAL 9000.  I'm on a first name basis with most everyone at my most frequented branch, including the branch manager... She's the one I see if something unusual pops up or I have a large transaction or deposit to make.

The Jamie Dimon equivalent for my CU is at the branch 12 miles from me, and from what I understand, very approachable and will give you the time of day should a legitimate issue arise.

If I'd won that $2B Powerball jackpot, would I have stuck the entire thing into a tiny CU? Heck no! That would be divided up mostly between NFCU, PenFed, City National, Amex and UBS while investment strategies are thought out. But would I let them hold a few million to keep liquid as a pocket account? Sure deal!

[ghgirll40]

---

@ChargedUp wrote:

This is just another exhibit of why I love smaller, local CU's. Once you've built a solid, time tested relationship with them, you can actually meet face to face with the very people where the equivalent at Chase are in an office tower someplace on the other side of the country.

Mine has 3 branches and the branch managers have access and ability to make decisions if and when to override HAL 9000.  I'm on a first name basis with most everyone at my most frequented branch, including the branch manager... She's the one I see if something unusual pops up or I have a large transaction or deposit to make.

The Jamie Dimon equivalent for my CU is at the branch 12 miles from me, and from what I understand, very approachable and will give you the time of day should a legitimate issue arise.

If I'd won that $2B Powerball jackpot, would I have stuck the entire thing into a tiny CU? Heck no! That would be divided up mostly between NFCU, PenFed, City National, Amex and UBS while investment strategies are thought out. But would I let them hold a few million to keep liquid as a pocket account? Sure deal!

---

Wow! I didn't even know a credit Union that small was still around. That's really cool!

[AzCreditGuy]

Sorry that happened to you, to big to fai or too big to care? Same thing happened to me with Wells, when I had a client pay her rent with a Western Union money order. Came back as fictious/fraud. Deposited 1 check through atm and 1 through mobile app. The check that I had in my had from mobile app, I was able to cash at the local grocery store. The one check that went through the atm, was returned as a photo copy check, US Bank stated, Had I tried to cash the check with them. My account would have been closed. I ended up opening a B of A account and will leave Wells open, but limit my use with them.

[Jrobertson1998]

Had a very similar experience happen to me recently, I had an incoming wire transfer upwards of 25k deposited in my chase account. I wanted to put money in there to establish a relationship with them. {Domestic wires take less than 24 hours, sometimes instant}. Chase put my money on hold for about a week, and then rejected the wire because they CLAIM it was fraudelent. I ask why did they think it was fraudelent they said the name didn't match on the account to the wire. I double checked with the sending bank, it did match. Chase then restricts my personal checking account and then about a week later closes it. Then tells my other bank Truist who I've had recently established a relationship with that the name didn't match and then they later investigates my account and closes it. 

[MarkintheHV]

I tried to bank with Chase, but, it got to the point when I would try to transfer money to my savings account over at Amex, they would put a hold on the transfer until I called in.   After the third time, I left them.  I dont have time to be on the phone with them authorizing a transfer that I initiated.

[iced]

Chase does hold larger deposits (wire or ACH) longer, but even then it was released in increments. Fraud's a very real thing and I'd rather they were slow but thorough than lose money to fraud.

For me, Chase is usually the one who offers to set up a three-way call to confirm information. I've had staff in-branch hunt down my underwriter for updates when I asked. When I had a question about my escrow account, they brought in someone from the escrow team to look into it, then followed up later with a call confirming I was satisfied. Is this a tale of two Chases, or are there more to these stories where they just shut someone down with no further conversation?