No Credit Check Computer
Just in case anyone cares, Chase recently started a check to
ACH/ARC debit conversion program. Like Citibank they didn't
bother to give me advance notice. Unlike Citibank (and all the
other card-issuing banks I've asked) they were rather argumentative
when I requested them to opt my account out of the process.
They had a variation of the lecture I've received from my own
banks about how Check21 authorizes this process, but they went
a little further claiming that what they were doing was not an
ACH transaction at all. Their most interesting point, though,
is that the text string consisting of the date and "O" followed
by the check number constitutes a legal substitute check image for
Check21 purposes. It's hard to believe that the reps make this
stuff up on their own, so I have to wonder who is writing the
scripts (and why
Although they did eventually (supposedly) set the flag on my
account to suppress their own conversion they claimed that I
would see exactly the same behavior anyway. Makes me wonder
if they set anything at all...
Online bill pay still does not (at least at Citizens Bank) provide
sufficient proof of payment to enable me to sleep well at night, at
least for those payees that I feel may require such proof. (Such
payees are pretty much limited to credit card issuers and various
branches of government, though there are also cases where I want the
check for proof of basis.) Also, there is no reason to believe that
using online bill pay in any way restricts the payee's access to my
account number.
On the one occasion where Citizens Bank screwed up an online bill
payment they demonstrated that they do not stand behind the process.
This was a simple utility bill payment that had worked fine for many
months. It showed up as "processed" in the bill pay history, but I
noticed that the money was not debited from my account even after a
few days. (And you might ask why I have to spend time watching such
things at all.) Of course, the payment had not shown up at the utility.
I called the bank's customer service to inquire what had happened.
The rep's first response was that this indicated that they had sent
a paper check rather than made an electronic transfer. (At this point
you probably need to know that they work in terms of payment dates
which can never be scheduled fewer than 5 business days in the future,
supposedly to give them time to send a paper check if necessary. So
even if they had sent a paper check the utility should have received
it by then.)
I asked the rep why they would have sent a paper check this time when
in the past they had always used an electronic transfer. This elicited
a somewhat stern response that this is a decision that they make on a
case-by-case basis and I have no control over it. I then asked what
the check number was (since that column in the history was blank). The
rep said that he really wasn't familiar with the system and would have
to get somebody else to call me back.
The rep who called back (who sounded a lot like the original rep) had
a completely different story. He claimed that I had canceled the
payment. He couldn't really explain in any detail, but he assured
me that the "codes" on the computer had been explained to him and
this is what they meant. No further investigation was possible, or
so he said. I asked why the transaction history showed "processed"
rather than "canceled" if I had canceled. After some mumbled conference
he explained that this is because "the two systems do not talk to each
other."
The above incident had no practical impact since no money was missing
and there was plenty of time to schedule another payment to the utility
before the due date. (Even if there hadn't been enough time I doubt
that the utility would have done anything bad.) But I worry that if
there were a serious problem (missing money, dispute with payee, audit
by third party) the customer service would be just as unhelpful. With
my primitive canceled paper checks I can make a copy myself and generally
at least shift the burden of proof back to the complaining entity.
Now I know people are going to point out that my bank(s) "suck(s)". And
as I said in the past, I don't dispute this. Trouble is, I've looked at
other banks and talked to account holders and as far as I can tell all
banks "suck" in one way or another, at least for consumer accounts.