The bank is not involved here. They received a DD, and credited it. They then received notification from the employer of an error in the deposit, and adjusted accordingly. That’s what they are supposed to do.
The employer is probably in deep do-do. I wouldn’t think even Mississippi allows an employer to refuse to pay wages due for work completed over a claim that the employee owes for some item that was damaged. A quick call to the Mississippi labor commissioner, or whatever office has that job, would probably be in order.
Speculating on legal issues without having some legal knowledge is really a stupid idea. Even the legal eagles get it wrong, now and again.
How would the bank then go about recovering the money?
If I closed an account and the bank then re-opened it and sent out money to somebody else, I would not be particularly interested in bills the bank then sent me.
So I close the account in bank A, pull out all the money, go to the bank across the street (B) and deposit it all. Somebody tries to pull money out of my closed account at bank A. Bank A then re-opens the account and gives them $200. They then call me on the phone and tell me they gave $200 out of my account to Joe Blow.
My response is going to be “I didn’t have any money in any account at your bank, and therefore you didn’t give them any of my money. You may have given them $200 of your money, but that is none of my concern.”
They could sue me, I suppose, but once the account is closed, we no longer have any kind of business relationship, and therefore bank A is not authorized to dispose of any of my money.
It works as I said, it’s just the guy needs to click his little submit button by the start of business on the 14th or something. Knowing that, I still worked my entire 15th.
But you have a complete lack of understanding of conditions.
In a stop payment, the money hasn’t yet been put into the person’s account, or cashed to them. It’s a provisional payment, the stoppage of which if you’ve already received your goods can be a crime. Indeed, knowingly buying something and then stopping the check to avoid payment is fraud, in some states, it’s considered obtaining services under false pretense and is a felony.
In a direct deposit, it has been. It’s fully delivered; the transaction is wholly complete. To get the money back, you must take it back. It’s like cash. If I pay my waitress for my meal, in cash, and then decide I want it back; I’ll pretty much have to mug her to get it back. If I write a check and cancel it later to avoid payment, I can go to jail. If I pay it on a credit card, the only way to get back the money is to claim I didn’t make the payment and hope I don’t get arrested and convicted for fraud. If I directly deposit the funds to the store’s account, there’s no way in hell I’m getting back without breaking a law.
Also, it’s silly to equate an illegal taking of another person’s property (theft, or even robbery) as exclusively armed robbery. There are many classifications of robbery; most of them needn’t be armed. It’s particularly even sillier when the armed robbery claim hasn’t been brought up.
I wonder how much of it is the US banking system, how much that bank’s policies and how much a mistake from people who assumed the charge was kosher without verification.
After all, in Spain I almost wasn’t allowed to open a bank account for my nephew and godson due to not being the kid’s parent or legal guardian… that wasn’t the law, it wasn’t bank policy, it was just the cashier not understanding that yes, someone can open a bank account in two other people’s names (the nephew and my brother; kiddie accounts from that bank require a parent or guardian to “have signature”).
when the company needs to regain monies deposited incorrectly, they usually inform the employee that there was an error and that they will need xxx amount back.
employee usually is given 2 options; either they electronically withdraw the money, or employee can give the company the money via electronic, check, money order, or cash.
in all the cases that i know of, (in fact this did rear its ugly head today) the employee was notified of the error or deduction and had to approve any withdrawl.
merijeek’s company should have notified merijeek and gained approval before the withdrawl.
Because if I don't, my employer won't set up the direct deposit. And depending on which job it was, that could cause me a variety of problems. In one job, I could only have my paycheck mailed if I remembered to fill out a card in advance, they wouldn't release it to anyone else, and if it wasn't picked up within about 3 days after payday, it was sent back to payroll. I made certain my vacation never included a payday after one horrible experience. In my current job, I wouldn't have those issues, but I might be out of my office for days at a time near payday, and it can take forever to for the payroll people to catch up with transfers.
This thread is getting me scared. I’m seriously thinking of giving my employer an instruction to enter my home every two weeks and slide my pay, in cash, under my mattress.
Yep Joe if someone has your routing and account number they can make their own checks up. (Staples sells the stock) and put your numbers on them. It’s an old scam.
There is just no way in hell I am authorising my employer or anybody else to withdraw money from my account. No way in hell. And I cannot understand that anyone would find this acceptable. I cannot imagine that this would fly in Spain. No way.
And there is no way I would ever authorise direct payments from my account in America without my prior authorization as I have no recourse. I write checks or do electroonic transfers but no one is dipping into my account. In Spain I have my utilities automatically debited but I understand I am protected and can have the debit reversed. Suppose the phone or electric company decides this month they charge me several thousand euros. I call the bank and tell them to reverse it and that’s it. Then I can go and argue with the utility company (who are assholes who have the upper hand).
The banking system in America really seems like a bit behind the times. Consumers could use some protection.
Any employer in Spain (all of Europe probably) who asked access to an employees bank account would be facing very unpleasant consequences.
The paper checks will not get paid. They will get returned with “account closed” stamped on them.
Merijeek is not talking about paper checks – it’s the direct-deposit and its side effects.
It’s the reverse electronic funds transfer that seems to defy the “account is closed” rule. BubbaDog also mentions this.
Frankly, I’m also baffled as to what exactly “closing” an account actually does if it can’t stop an electronic funds withdrawal. That makes no sense to me. I wish we had a real bank person on SDMB explain it to us.
I closed some checking accounts in Florida 10 years ago. For all I know, those “closed” accounts are racking up “withdrawals” from my previous mortgage and utility companies?!?! If I drive back to Florida and I happen to get stopped by the police for speeding, I suppose their computer will say there’s a warrant for my arrest because I “owe” my old bank thousands of dollars? That’s interesting.
I went to my bank’s website to review funds availability. Funds from checks deposited and for electronic transfer are available for withdrawl anywhere from immediately to four business days depending on multiple factors. At least one case, electronic transfers aren’t considered to be in some sort of status that can be reversed for some period of time. To say they are immediately completed in a manner different from checks is not correct in all cases.
I’m not saying the original case is simply clerical error but in the case of clerical/admin errors on a direct deposit, are there any conditions where the direct deposit can be reversed unilaterally from the originator? If so, what are they?
Real deal clerical errors appear to be correctable, if done within the time limits set up by the various regulatory authorities (up to five days). This Connecticut Office of Legislative Research report responds to a legislator’s request for more information on behalf of a constituent.
The OP did also say “What this means is that if anyone gets ahold of those two numbers (numbers that are on the bottom of EVERY SINGLE CHECK YOU WRITE), they can then go ahead and empty your account”
And yes if the account is open someone can wipe out your checking account with the information provided on each check you give out.
When he said “empty your account”, I thought he was talking about checks written against the 1st closed account would empty out the 2nd account that was still open. I basically got Merijeek and BubbaDog examples mixed up.
yeah, but using the “print your own checks” method they also have to indetectibly forge your signature (otherwise the bank is on the hook, not you, if they let it through - right?)
Otherwise I expect this would happen a lot more often than it does.
When “girl” is used in a patronizing way, it is still insulting. Informal uses of “girl” in a business transaction are inappropriate and therefore, in this situation, insulting to the ears of those men and women who have put in a lot of time trying to have adult women recognized as adult women.. The only time that I hear it used in a near-neutral or affectionate way if when someone who has known me for fifty years or more uses it or when a handful of other gentle friends uses it to refer to a gathering of the likeminded.
The young woman at the bank may have been correct with the information that she gave originally and someone else may have made a mistake. Or perhaps she was wrong or should have double checked if she was uncertain. It won’t be the last mistake that she makes in her career. Imagine what an insulting and insecure world this would be if everyone were reduced in title each time she or he made a mistake. We would address each other as boy, girl, squirt, quack, and a few other putdowns that we can do without.
Why do you think that Kimmy needs anyone other than a mod to determine when to let go of a subject and when to explore it further? Why does using a phrase that you disapprove of eliminate her opportunity to discuss a very rational and reasonable suggestion in response to the OP?
White males may not put much stock in such a little thing as being addressed as an adult, but many men of color over the age of fifty know exactly what I am talking about.
