- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 84,552
- Reaction score
- 33,372
Anybody use Wells Fargo and pay $6.95 a month for billpay? if you have WF you might want to check your monthly statements to see if you're being billed for it without knowing it.
2 weeks ago my girlfriend found out on a call that she was being billed and when she asked what it was and why she was being charged the operator admitted there was no record of her signing up. THey credited her for 35 months of wrongful charges and that was it, but they convinced her to sign up for online banking to keep better track of her account(I've been telling her for years to do that). So tonight using online banking she went back looking at old statements and discovered that 6.95 has been billed monthly since 11-17-2001, a total of 80 times, not 35 and they owe her another $312.75.
So she called up and spent an hour on hold, transferred etc only to eventually be told they were launching a fraud investigation and disabling her online account because of the fraud. Note, she signed up online 6-15-2008, the alleged fraud(someone signing her up for billpay) occurred in November 2001. I think we can all agree that when people commit fraud with bank accounts they do it to steal money from the account, not to sign them up for billpay?
She admitted that the ONLY way to sign up for billpay is online, she confirmed my girlfriend had NEVER used billpay, but she refused to credit the other 45 months without this fraud case. My girlfriend eventually got so frustrated she hung up. We then confirmed they had indeed disabled the online account which of course prevents us from using it to prove she was billed since 2001.
So I got mad and called back, 25 minutes on hold before I get a human who essentially said that's our policy, when there's a fraud suspicion we disable the online. We are not accusing her of fraud but someone signed her up. When I asked why they credited 35 months she said that was a mistake it should never have been done without the fraud investigation.
My take is the first person did it correctly but only had access to records so far back thus the 35 months, she likely didn't have access as far back as 2001. WF likely figures if they just make it difficult, we'll ultimately give up and settle for the partial credit.
Net result we have to wait up to 10 working days for their results, online is disabled during that time, and when this is over even if they give her the credit, we'll be pulling her money out of WF and putting it into a different bank.
Yet another reason why we all need to check our statements carefully.
2 weeks ago my girlfriend found out on a call that she was being billed and when she asked what it was and why she was being charged the operator admitted there was no record of her signing up. THey credited her for 35 months of wrongful charges and that was it, but they convinced her to sign up for online banking to keep better track of her account(I've been telling her for years to do that). So tonight using online banking she went back looking at old statements and discovered that 6.95 has been billed monthly since 11-17-2001, a total of 80 times, not 35 and they owe her another $312.75.
So she called up and spent an hour on hold, transferred etc only to eventually be told they were launching a fraud investigation and disabling her online account because of the fraud. Note, she signed up online 6-15-2008, the alleged fraud(someone signing her up for billpay) occurred in November 2001. I think we can all agree that when people commit fraud with bank accounts they do it to steal money from the account, not to sign them up for billpay?
She admitted that the ONLY way to sign up for billpay is online, she confirmed my girlfriend had NEVER used billpay, but she refused to credit the other 45 months without this fraud case. My girlfriend eventually got so frustrated she hung up. We then confirmed they had indeed disabled the online account which of course prevents us from using it to prove she was billed since 2001.
So I got mad and called back, 25 minutes on hold before I get a human who essentially said that's our policy, when there's a fraud suspicion we disable the online. We are not accusing her of fraud but someone signed her up. When I asked why they credited 35 months she said that was a mistake it should never have been done without the fraud investigation.
My take is the first person did it correctly but only had access to records so far back thus the 35 months, she likely didn't have access as far back as 2001. WF likely figures if they just make it difficult, we'll ultimately give up and settle for the partial credit.
Net result we have to wait up to 10 working days for their results, online is disabled during that time, and when this is over even if they give her the credit, we'll be pulling her money out of WF and putting it into a different bank.
Yet another reason why we all need to check our statements carefully.