“womyn”?
In any case, yes, everybody should be able to zero in on the smallest misstep and use it to vault onto their personal OT hobbyhorses here in Great Debates.
Oh, wait . . .
Hmm…seems to me that I’ve been the one who has provided factual, on-topic research and analysis and you’ve just been making some off-topic quote-unquote “point” about what you’ll allow us to talk about.
You’re so great. Can I have your baby?
No.
While money is fungible, the transactions and contracts that fix payment rights and obligations are not.
Absent anything more you cannot do this:
Person A: I’m going to buy your lawnmower. Here’s $200 bucks.
Person B: ok. Accepts $200 bucks.
the next evening…
Person A: dog gonnit, I forgot that Person B owed me 50 bucks!
Person A then goes over to Person B’s house and takes 50 bucks from his front doorstep (why does person B have this money laying out there, we won’t know)
a week later after person A is prosecuted for theft (lets ignore charges of tresspass and burglary), this would not be a good defense:
Person A: but he owed me the money!
the two transactions (paying for his lawnmower, and repaying a debt) while they involve the same commodity are legally distinct, and, absent more, can’t just be fudged into the same transaction on someone’s say-so
I was told that if you refer to the cashier as “girl” the bank has the right to donate all the money in your account to a charity of their choice and they don’t even have to tell you. It is in the small print of your contract.
I hope the situation with the OP gets resolved. Beyond a general wish for things to go well for fellow human beings, I really don’t care about that case. Perhaps I should have started a parallel thread asking the more general questions.
Can you do this:
Person A: I’m going to buy your lawnmower. Here is a check for $200.
Person B: Okay. (Accepts the check).
While pushing the mower home, Person A is stopped by the police who are investigating lawnmower theft. The lawnmower is taken by the police as evidence.
Can Person A stop payment on the check? Not asking any of the irrelevent strawmen as to whether they can go take the check back by theft, force, breaking and entering, etc.
Which leads us back to the relevent two parts of this question from my perspective.
- Can a company make a unilateral correction to a erroneous direct deposit?
- Is recovering damages to a loaned laptop a valid reason to consider the deposit erroneous?
If I understand the comments in this thread, the answer to 1 is Yes with restrictions, especially in timing and the answer to 2 is no unless there are some special written agreements that don’t otherwise violate local law.
I agree with this, and most of your post.
I was not determining, I was suggesting. I’m sorry if the tone came across as imperious. I’d never “eliminate her opportunity” to discuss it. I was referring to her language in the specific post I quoted, the deliberate use of “the boys and girls down at the bank,” not the banking content.
Someone used “girl” to mean “woman” out of ignorance, not malice; in a sexist society, sexist use of language is not always consciously noticed. Kimmy_Gibler attempted to fight that ignorance by showing why that was not acceptable. Great.
It was only because (a) she went on about it after she had made that point, to no effect, as we are doing now, and (b) she used the phrase “butt-hurt,” which is a stronger substitute for “gay.” Think of the way you’d have to customize that phrase for women (c—hurt or v—hurt) and tell me that wouldn’t be offensive. I now pause to wait for the chorus of gay men chiming in to say “Hey! I think it’s funny and I use it all the time.”
If you want to pit me over this, I’ll participate in that thread. Otherwise, I’d much rather hear about the direct deposit saga.
(a) I am not a lady.
(b) For reasons that I have discussed elsewhere, I am impervious to all charges of homophobia, therefore, let me chime in with “Hey! I think it’s funny and I use it all the time.”
(c) If you like, I can throw “vajayjay hurt” into the mix, if you think that will bring about a fairer and more just world.
OP did not use “girl” in a patronizing way.
OP did not call or refer to the teller as “the girl” during a business transaction. (Where the hell did you come up with that?)
I hear it used by women all the time. It’s a double standard I can live with but I can see how the OP might slip while typing out a post. Lesson learned. That said, Kimmy’s given some great advice here, but the initial comment…
…could have been worded better, as not to accuse him of actually referring to the teller as “girl” while at the bank.
One common problem that banks have is people close an account and then start writing checks (on paper or electronically) on the old account. They forget, were not told by the other account owner or maybe are just crooks. So the bank reopens the account. A lot of checks bounce for NSF, fees are added, etc. The bank has no idea if this is you or just someone random jerk. It is your job to work with the bank to prove who did what and try to clear up the mess as much as possible. If a small amount they’ll just ding your credit record (and good luck opening a new account after that), if a large amount lawyers might become involved.
Update:
Just checked my account this morning and the money is in there. By the end of the day I will need to act one way or another.
Is there a way to remove the ability for them to access my account without closing it? From everything we’ve seen in this thread, won’t it just get reopened if they try it again?
Sorry, a couple different streams of thought going at once there. Basically, the girl at the bank told me that “once they have your account number and routing number they can take money out”. My point was that any check anyone writes has those numbers on it. Therefore, anyone in the world, once they have glanced at your check, can then take any money they feel like from your account electronically - because those magic numbers are on every check.
-Joe
…and this shows why I’ll never make it as a politician. One little faux pas and a nice, helpful little thread is in danger of going down to shit.
I called her “girl” because she was easily ten years younger than me, which would put her probably in her early twenties. Yes, I suppose “young woman” would have been a more polite way to put it, but I didn’t do it that way and therefore it’s all my fault.
How about we all agree to accept that I’m some guy who worked for a shitty company and can occasionally be accidentally sexist?
-Joe
(FTR, if it had been a male, I would have said “guy”, which to me was always equivalent to “girl”)
Which reminds me. If this was respectable company/boss and they had some point about the laptop and its condition, I’d probably not get bent out of shape and try to work out a financial compromise.
However, since they were/are royal jerks, if I were you I’d do everthing within my power to get them in a shitload of legal and financial trouble if possible from pulling this stunt. That karma train doesnt move unless somebody is pushing it.
You need to contact your state’s wage and hour regulator. They will know if any labor laws have been violated and if so, will prosecute your former employer.
Didn’t see the second page. On review: What DSYoungEsq said.
In addition to the bank (and the AG!), you should also contact the payroll processor, since it sounds like it is a separate organization from your employer. Tell them your employer has abused the account information and the correction procedures and that you are terminating your employer’s authority to access the account.
Fun fact: Mississippi doesn’t have one (something about “preferring to remain a pre-industrial hinterland”), you have to go to the federal Department of Labor.
I doubt that anybody that would be so offended at some harmless idiom can be very helpful in a professional situation.
ISTM that there is a significant difference between me writing a check against a closed account, and someone else trying to get money out of a closed account.
If I write a check, I am giving consent to having money withdrawn from my account. If I do so knowing there is no money in the account, then I can see giving implied consent to have the account re-opened,
But not for anyone else. If I close an account, I am saying more or less clearly that I do not wish to use that account to pay any debts. Nobody else gets to overrule that decision, even if it is a legitimate debt. Because that puts the bank in the position of deciding which of my debts are legitimate and which are not.
There should be no such thing as irrevocable consent. This is like laws about marital rape. It used to be the case that women did not have the right to refuse sex from their husbands.
This is even worse - it is like saying women cannot refuse sex from their husbands even after a divorce.
Regards,
Shodan
The bank is not psychic. It doesn’t know if you tried to use the account again or if it is someone else. Their default behavior is to assume it is you. Hence the onus in many such matters is on you to show that you didn’t authorize the withdrawal on either an open or closed account.
Take a common example: You wrote a check to someone, forgot about it. You close the account. A couple months go by and the check is cashed. The bank doesn’t know or care if this is an old/new/forged check. Your account is back on and they start hitting you with NSF charges. You have to go in and clear things up.