[X]
Feedburner count

Washington Mutual - Page 2


56 Reviews & Complaints


Most Popular | Newest | More Options >
More filter options:
I would have been better off NOT contacting my lender for assistance! I did exactly what I was told to do and now I'm going to be
Posted by Mariah1 on 08/01/2009
BAYVIEW MEADOWS, FLORIDA -- I've been laid off for 1 1/2 years now. I'm still looking for work. My husband has a job so we watched every penny and still made our $2,800.00 a month house payment. I thought since we've been a WAMU customer for 15 years w/ a perfect payment history they would help me Modify our loan as the ARM was going to adjust in 8 months. THAT WAS THE WORST DECISION OF MY LIFE. I called WAMU, they said to download a form, fill it out and they would see what they could do. After 2 months waiting I finally got a response in writing Federal Expressed to my home. It stated to make zero payment for February and March, April & May pay $800.00 p/m. They told me we needed more funds in the bank for a modification and when they re-qualify us in 3 months they don't want to go thru the process of a Modification if were are not able to make our payment. She stated any deferred interest will be charged in the back of the loan. I was so happy.... I thought after 23 years of hard work and ALWAYS paying our bills on time, that somehow we deserved this help. NOT TRUE.. At the end of the 3 months I was unable to talk to anyone! I re-applied for the Modification as promised,(beginning of May) and still it was like talking to a brick wall. I was allowed to talk to no one. I felt like a criminal. I kept saying what do I pay and what is the status? They stated over and over to wait for someone to call. NO one called. I receieved a Federal Express letter stating ... it read: REPAYMENT AGREEMENT. NO where did it address our Modification. It states pay $10,597.30, (which is the deferred interest), or pay us $1,000.00 MORE a month for a YEAR! which is $3,450.00 !!!!! Our credit score was 752 before I contacted our lender, now I don't know what it is. WAMU acted like my entire process did NOT even happen. We now have horrible credit, no house and now need for file BK.. They stated they DID NOT KNOW MY LOAN WAS UNDERWRITEN BY FANNIE MAE, THEREFORE ANY DEFERRED INTEREST MUST BE PAID UPFRONT. PERIOD. They would rather lose a loan of $483K plus a second for $69,500.00 instead of working with us. Had WAMU hired employees who knew what they were talking about back in February we would still be making our house payment and still have good credit. I expect the person on the other end of the phone to know what they are talking about... after all this is my HOME. My Security. My future and my kids' home.
Now we are facing Foreclosure and Bankruptcy and there is nothing else we can do. Thank you Washington Mutual for all your help.

     
Read 4 RepliesAdd reply

User Replies:Close comments

Posted by Soaring Consumer on 2009-08-01:
So the only thing they actually did was demand higher payments?

This site may help you:
http://www.makinghomeaffordable.gov/
Posted by madconsumer on 2009-08-01:
this just sucks.
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-08-01:
I agree mad, it does suck.
Posted by moneybags on 2009-08-02:
Write to the President and to your Congressman. The Congress ok'd this mess!
Close commentsAdd reply

Overdraft scams
Posted by Wamucheats on 07/10/2009
I have noticed that Wamu cheats on there overdrafts. I had a debit transasction pending in my checking account and I got up at 230am and checked my account and noticed it was still pending about 230am. So I quickly transferred some money from another account (wamu acct.) to more than cover it. when I checked the computer at 10am, the debit was still pending, showing my transfers pending as well. Now usually when I transfer it immediately post to my account. It didn't this day, but the account was still showing everything pending. When I looked at my account later that day, the debit charge had went through and not my transfers leaving them to charge me an overdraft. They told me they process between 12am and 6am. Well, if that be true then why did they not process my transfer between 12am and 6am when I did it. THE CATCH...WHEN THEY PROCESS ON A CURRENT CALENDAR DATE BETWEEN 12AM AND 6AM, THEY BACK THE TRANSACTION UP TO THE DAY BEFORE! YOU CAN VIEW YOUR ACCOUNT ALL DAY AND IT SHOW POSITIVE, SAY ON THE 9TH, BUT THE NEXT DAY YOU LOOK AT YOUR ACCOUNT...THAT DATE THAT IT APPEARS POSITVE, COMES UP NEGATIVE WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT AGAIN ON THE 10TH. These people are money sharks and there is no way around the fees. This is how they SCAM the people. What happen to the good old days of grace periods and the banks giving you til closing busiess day to get your account right before they charge you an overdraft. With WAMU, you don't. We need a class action suit against these people or everyone simply need to close their account and go somewhere else.
     
Read 30 RepliesAdd reply

User Replies:Close comments

Posted by Anonymous on 2009-07-10:
As soon as the banking expert here arrives, she should be able to explain this to death.
Posted by tnchuck100 on 2009-07-10:
Is this a scam? No. It is creative accounting. If you look at your account terms you will probably find statements to the effect that they can process transactions in any manner they choose. Granted, they are going to use this to maximize the fees they charge you. One other point, you should never rely on balances or transaction dates shown on any online banking system. Use your own written check register. But, even then, most of your big banks will still nail you with transaction rearrangement and unexpected deposit holds. Legal? Yes. Ethical? Absolutely not.

Do yourself a favor, close your accounts and find a credit union. At least there they only charge overdraft fees in a logical manner. They do not rearrange transactions for the sole purpose of screwing you to the max.
Posted by MaggieMcT on 2009-07-10:
And when you start your account with a credit union, don't spend money that isn't ALREADY in the account. That's what happened with WAMU, you tried to beat the debit with a later transfer.
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-07-10:
Chuck, do you think the credit unions want this kind of headache? I can assure you they do not. If you truly are a supporter of the CU movement, encourage people like him to stay at a bank.
Posted by yoke on 2009-07-10:
CU's also do not put up with people who overdraw their accounts either. Some make it sound like CU's give you a lolipop when you overdraw your account and tell you it was not there fault, but that it was the CU's fault.

Posted by Suusan B. on 2009-07-10:
Transferring money from one account to another at 2:30 a.m. to cover a pending debit is risky business. The bottom line is that you spent money you didn't have and transferred money to late to cover it. This is in no way a scam. You were charged the fees as outlined in your account holder agreement.

And, as always - - two words: CHECK REGISTER
Posted by kisa64 on 2009-07-10:
Suusan B; Best Answer!
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-07-10:
As always - - two words: Credit Union.

My wife's credit union will transfer money from any account she has with the credit union be it savings or even a credit card to cover any overdraft. And they do it for free. Yes, free. Absolutely no charge. There are no silly fees, no silly games, no "gotcha's" or other bean counter conjured up traps.

There are so many better options available today to handle your banking needs why in the world would anybody RISK doing business with one of these big unscrupulous national banks.
Posted by yoke on 2009-07-10:
The CU can only transfer the funds if the funds are there to transfer.

Posted by Anonymous on 2009-07-10:
Any way you look at this the debit transaction hit the account before your transfer so it was processed first. However, even if the transfer was done first they would still send the debit transaction first. They do this to maximize their profits (and screw the customer at the same time.)
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-07-10:
Indeed yoke which is the case for this review. The OP had enough money in another account to cover the debits but due to WAMU's chicanery and "milk the customer for ever penny possible" customer unfriendly policies the OP was still dinged with overdraft fees. I'm just sayin there are much better options available why RISK doing business with the likes of WAMU (CHASE).
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-07-10:
I was just going to say that WAMU is owned by Chase, but crab beat me to it. At one time, WAMU did not follow this "scheme".

My credit union operates just as crab describes. If I transfer from one account to another, it goes in immediately--not several hours later. As soon as I hit transfer, it's in the appropriate account. No hocus pocus, nothing. It does seem that some banks will do whatever they can to get that extra money from the customers.
Posted by yoke on 2009-07-10:
Crabman, I agree that this time the OP had the funds in the account to cover the charges, but many on this board claim that CU's will do things for the consumer that banks do not do. That is false and the consumers that are having problems with the big banks will have the same problem with a CU.



Posted by Anonymous on 2009-07-10:
CU's,at least mine are willing to work with their customers,and don't charge these outrageous fees like some banks do.They appreciate their customers,banks not so much.
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-07-10:
yoke, I wouldn't make up things about my CU. Everything I have said is true. I don't overdraft, but they do have features I appreciate, and like TW said, they are good to their customers. I can't recall ever seeing a complaint about a credit union--just banks.
Posted by yoke on 2009-07-10:
Knowitall, I have a CU and love it, but NOT all CU's are as forgiving as yours or mine. My brother has a CU and it is just like a bank, then again he has a history of NSF's. The first few they are accomodating with, but after that they are not. The way some talk on these boards CU's do not charge fee's and will hold your hand when you have NSF's and not blame the consumer. Like I have said the ones who are having problems at the big banks will also have problems at a CU. CU's expect you to have the funds in your account to cover transactions also.
BTW, my CU does do "reorder" and I still have yet to get a NSF.
Posted by tnchuck100 on 2009-07-10:
yoke, "...many on this board claim that CU's will do things for the consumer that banks do not do." -- They DO!

Let's examine your statement:
"...CU's will do things FOR the consumer..."
OTOH
"...BANKS will do things TO the customer..."
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-07-10:
yoke, I know there is always the exception to the rule. No one will put up with NSF's. I had one NSF when I opened my CU account before I had transferred my money from WAMU. They had ordered checks for me and it gave me a negative amount in my account so I was charged $26. I called and explained and they took it off. I loved that!
Posted by knightoftheword on 2009-07-10:
I just posted a review regarding my bank that is NOT a CU that actually did things FOR me. It's under "I messed up but they fixed for me". I just wanted you all to know that there are banks out there who do understand customer service. (That doesn't mean banks should be expected to fix something you mess up because you didn't understand how to balance an account.)
Posted by skelly39 on 2009-07-10:
Bottom line-you spent before you deposited. Debits are processed for the business day after midnight on the following calendar day. I don't know when people are going to figure this out. It takes one day of having an account to know when things are processed. I don't know if credit unions have different rules, but I'm guessing the OP and a lot of other people who complain wouldn't bother to get to know those either.
Posted by tnchuck100 on 2009-07-10:
knightoftheword, in your case it shows that a bank CAN take care of its customer. But, as evidenced by the many complaints found here, they generally don't.

skelly39, as for your "bottom line" approach, you totally missed the inequity that took place getting there. However, you are part of a fairly good sized group here that does not understand the real problem.

It is not an overdraft issue as much as it is the bank compounding the problem to maximum detriment of the customer.
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-07-10:
Exactly Chuck.
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-07-10:
skelly--As mentioned, my CU processes a transfer from another account as soon as you do it on-line. That's what the op was talking about.
Posted by skelly39 on 2009-07-10:
tnchuck-I understand the problem. If you read the inquiry, the OP says "usually" it posts immediately but that it was still pending the following day. The debits were made before the transfer-end of story. If you do something on the 9th, they will process it on the 10th at midnight for the 9th. If you transfer money on the 10th, it's going to post for the 10th. Sorry, but I don't think I missed the point.
knowitall2-Great. I'm glad your credit union does that. The OP was talking about WAMU and cheating.
Look, I'm no fan of banks, I have my fair share of overdrafts, and I know the penalties. That's why I have no sympathy for anyone who doesn't bother to understand how the process works. Whether it is fair or not is not the issue; it is what it is and anyone with a bank account should know this.
Posted by madconsumer on 2009-07-10:
at my bank, transfers between same bank, accounts, post immediately. from other banks, can take upto 7/10 days.

i like this:

two words: check register.
Posted by tnchuck100 on 2009-07-10:
Those two words "check register" cannot trump "creative accounting". The big banks will see to that.
Posted by Slimjim on 2009-07-10:
I disagree with you on that chuck. Hey, one of our firms had been victimized by Wachovia and some of that magic accounting a few years ago. They put through a wire transfer then returned items against it. No way should they have transfered the money that wasn't all there if they were looking out for our best interests. When the day was done, it still was our fault for making the error. We switched banks and told them fock off, but still, it was on us in the end. Nothing is more bullet proof than having the money in your account before drafting against it.
Posted by madconsumer on 2009-07-10:
"Top Advice From The My3cents Community:"

at a girl suusanB!!
Posted by madconsumer on 2009-07-10:
"creative accounting"

correct, by account holders. since there are millions of credit union and bank account holders in the united states, if this so called "creative accounting" was taking place, there would be more news about it. as such, only time we hear about "creative accounting", is on a complaint site.

remember for every 100 credit union and bank complaints, there are 100,000 (or more) other account holders who have zero complaint.
Posted by yoke on 2009-07-10:
madconsumer, you are correct. We never hear about the people that are happy and who do not overdraw their account. The ones that come on here to complain are the ones who have made a mistake and do not want to take responsibility for it, they would rather blame the bank or someone else.
Close commentsAdd reply

Hard To Believe
Posted by GG1234 on 06/07/2009
They keep giving access of my checking account to my mother. She knows my balance and everything. I wouldn't have a problem with this if I was a child. But at 28, this is ridiculous and illegal. She is not co-signed, in fact she is a manipulative psycho, and probably tricked whomever she was talking to. The point is that she doesn't have the authority to do what they let her do and I don't support people who criminals.

I can't say I feel safe doing business with WAMU or Chase.
     
Read 8 RepliesAdd reply

User Replies:Close comments

Posted by Anonymous on 2009-06-07:
sounds like mommy needs to cut the apron strings.
Posted by BokiBean on 2009-06-07:
Perhaps they can install a password on your account to guarantee that they are not giving out information to a non-account holder. I'd call the bank and tell them what is happening.
Posted by Soaring Consumer on 2009-06-07:
Was this at one point a joint-account, or an account originally set up under guardianship (before you were 18)?
Posted by yoke on 2009-06-07:
What did the bank say when you asked them why they were giving your mother access to your account?
Posted by Suusan B. on 2009-06-07:
Anyway you look at it, somehow Mom is gaining access to your checking account. This can only be done one of three ways - - a paper check, the PIN number for your debit card and/or the on-line password. If I were you I would close your existing account and open a new one and make sure your account information is secure. I don't believe that any bank will give out account information without proper identification and find it hard to believe that your Mom tricked them into giving her access without some form of verification.
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-06-07:
This is a pretty serious breach of privacy laws, all banks have procedures in place to prevent just this kind of thing. Was she ever on your account? Did you make them aware of the unauthorized information?
Posted by grandma005 on 2009-06-07:
If she knows your telephone passcode and your account # it is easy to access your account on the phone. You must change your telephone passcode. She can get this information without ever talking to a Bank teller.
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-06-07:
Sounds like she's using info about you to pass verification tests, likely over the phone. Contact the bank, password protect your account, and request that the account be noted that you've been the victim of identity theft by a family member, and that anyone requesting access to your account MUST know the password. Also reset any PINs asap.
Close commentsAdd reply

Washington Mutual Staff Gave Wrong Advice Several Times Causing Big Problems
Posted by Inthespirit on 04/10/2009
MIAMI, FLORIDA -- Washington Mutual sells MONEY ORDERS. That is not the problem, the problem is that they do not back them up, it's a company from Colorado which backs up the money orders.

You better believe that - I found it out when I used one I had from a few years ago, to use as emergency money. I paid partly in cash and with a Washington Mutual money order to buy a vehicle.

Bank of America accepted the money order until Washington Mutual refused to honor it. Now I was facing a big financial loss. The seller had nighmares done to his credit and his accounts, we were both in financial hell. Quickly, I went to
WaMu and was surprised to be told to call the State of Florida, that WaMu had sent the money there as the money order had not been cashed. I am a weekly customer, with automatic deposit of salary check, why wasn't I contacted rather than the state? That time I was refused talking to the manager but the staff member informed me to call the state office which keeps unclaimed funds and when I did - TreasureHunt reported not having the funds.

After weeks of no info, I returned to the branch where I had originally bought the money orders. This time the manager was available. A few of her questions surprised me - such as asking me if I had ever had an account with them, the answer being yes, as long as they have been on the east coast. For about 2 hours, between other duties, she made phone calls using only her first name to numbers she gathered on her computer. Then she told me to get a lawyer, WAMU could not redeem the eschewed money orders. I asked her to please identify herself as a bank officer as it had more influence than my making more dead-end phone calls, which she finally did when we were approaching 3 hours of refusals.

It helped, of course it helped, she got someone to ask her to fax copies of the money orders. Now she gave me a final phone number to call myself and as a nice gesture called it herself. It was the number for a pain clinic.

We were both exhausted by this time and I agreed to return 2 days later to give time for the fax to be answered. I did more research and found that the mystery company is owned by American Express. I called the branch manager to thank her for her work and to give her the specific phone number which is current for now.

In time the funds will be returned, it takes between six-eight weeks, and I am still waiting.

I am hopeful this will be the end of it all. However, I am prompted by those who I tell of this experience to write about it, to inform others how money orders purchased at a bank are not necessarily a product of the bank, how money orders have expiration dates, seven years if purchased at a bank and ten years if bought from the US Post Office.

I wish I had know this and not listened to Washington Mutual staff assurances - "our money orders are safe forever as long as you don't date them." It's not true... no way!

     
Read 3 RepliesAdd reply

User Replies:Close comments

Posted by madconsumer on 2009-04-11:
"I found it out when I used one I had from a few years ago, to use as emergency money."

money orders expire. just like the checks from companies that state on them, "void after 180 days".
Posted by spiderman2 on 2009-04-11:
The money order must have been fairly old for it to have been turned over to the state. I don't think money orders are a good vehicle for saving money.
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-04-11:
All of this has nothing to do with the bank, it is all dictated by the Uniform Commercial Code, and the state laws. Your money isn't lost, you can claim it from the state of Florida. No check of any type is good indefinitely.

By the way, the funds are excheated, not eschewed. Look it up in your Funk & Wagnalls.
Close commentsAdd reply

WAMU and fraud activity
Posted by R_Dean on 04/05/2009
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA -- After a long session on the phone today I did find out some interesting facts about my accounts with WAMU. I took my family to dinner Saturday night and then re-newed a subscription to a well known professional community service. The WAMU computer saw these activities as suspicious and suspended my account. I received a call from an automated service to verify the charges were made by me, which I did with reserve. I had to use another credit card to complete the transaction and did not want to have it repeated in the event that the WAMU service put the original transaction through. After nearly 2 hours on the phone, being told there was no answer for my question, and even told the fraud department was closed on Sunday, I found out the following from [snip]:

1) The WAMU computer will "review" account activity and suspend accounts, no explanation given why a dinner with my family would be considered fraud.

2) Upon suspending the account, the customer needs to call WAMU to have a review with a banker before the account can be used again.

3) I signed up and agreed to this action in the terms and conditions and I should have read this. In no way is there text which covers what is considered fraudulent use on my card.

If I am on-site dining with my family, or making a purchase on a secured site with an abundance of information included, what do I need to do, or how do I need to insure the use of my card will not trigger such suspensions. And why does it take multiple people and indifferent customer service people to simply say this is what it is, I can always change banks at my desire. Thank you WAMU for respecting customer loyalty and your customers concern about how it may be possible to exist well together.

With one foot out the door Sunday morning and the intent of using my card to make purchases, I now know I must carry other cards with me to insure I do not get stuck, my confidence in WAMU is damaged, my confidence in the customer service process at WAMU is destroyed.
     
Read 5 RepliesAdd reply

User Replies:Close comments

Posted by Anonymous on 2009-04-05:
Interesting. On one hand, it can be reassuring to know that a credit card company is looking out for your security by flagging suspicious activity. On the other, unless you were paying $500 for a dinner and you've never spent more than $20, I don't know how dinner could be a suspicious transaction. Suspending your account seems a bit excessive,and making you have a "review" with a banker before they make your account active again is ridiculous. I'd have both my feet out the door at this point.
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-04-05:
I've had this happen. Wamu put a temporary hold on the account, it wasn't suspended. They have every right to verify with a customer whether or not a charge is legitimate. As for the check, it's not extremely unusual for a restaurant customer to have their card photographed with a cell phone, or have the name, number, expiration date and security code copied while the card is out of their possession. Chances are, they saw the restaurant charge followed by an internet charge, and wanted to know if it was legit. That call can be the first sign of a lost or stolen wallet, or of identity theft, so why complain?
Posted by BokiBean on 2009-04-05:
I wouldn't trust them to use them at ALL anymore. That's one card I would cut up.
Posted by old fart on 2009-04-05:
page two just isn't there... strange...
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-04-05:
Thanks OF, I thought it was just me
Close commentsAdd reply

Curtailment Forced Bankruptcy and Foreclosure
Posted by Moonscope on 03/22/2009
Bank One N. A. moved-in March, 2001 {15 Year, 6.5 fixed, never seconded} Loan Transferred to Homeside Lending November, 2001 all posted payment’s achieved timely conformation from April, 2001 to March, 2002, twelve month old timely paid loan was demanding twelve $102.99 Escrow Shortage monthly’s from April, 2002 to March, 2003. Assistance Filing “Proof of Claim” against Washington Mutual’s Bankruptcy is needed before 3/31/2009 deadline.

November 19, 2004 Washington Mutual requested patience’ promising loan history production’ relating “The Comptroller of the Currency” and “Better Business Bureau” involvement relative to second’ ignored R. E.S. P.A. “Qualified Written Request” telephonically on December 15, 2004 loan management conversed, that Bankruptcy STAY’ was released and loan history was transferred to Washington Mutual archive department in Chicago. Archive department instantly e-mailed unclenched’ loan histories, ending loan manager’s “48 month” covert “Principal Curtailment” concealment, and erroneous Escrow reduction missing fund’s concealment, the Better Business Bureau then removed Washington Mutual’s chief arbitrator chair, expelling for three year’s, “speaking retrospect-fully’ acquiring Credit Report in 2002’ would-have averted Foreclosure Theft’ nothing else!” Case Number 02-xxxxx-H3-13 including Core Adversary Trial’s Appealed award.

December 2007’ Washington Mutual returned $7,515.98 loan payment funds to Bankruptcy Trustee without Arbitration, Explanation or Accountability, as a precursor to July, 2008 Foreclosure’, Mooting Judgment Ruling’ by equating yet’ another Fiduciary fault/guilt Theft admittance, self assessing, while grossly underestimating actual damage, ignoring commitment clauses Contractual damage, accrued damage’s, Interest and accrued Interest.

Specifically’ “Deed” commitment damage’s clause, By the Rights granted’ by Benjamin Franklin and The Founding Fathers, in their leading’ Statute’ of the very First Amendment {SCIENTER = meaning or Science of the Contract - Anti-trusting’ exacting Lending Institution’s’ while including certain Contractor’s “stating” Contractor must contractually abide the universal forwarded stipulations of contract offered, cemented with binding Mutual’ Signature’ requirement} Loan Originator and Loan Manager Both’ protectively harbored $778.34 “Principal Curtailment” {evading’ shouldered $10,286.25 Contractual Commitment’s damage Clause’} Also’ protectively harbored the unaccredited $637.22 Escrow reduction {later claimed’ as November, 2001 erroneous Escrow reduction intended for December, 2001 payment} concealing Both’ by protectively harboring loan History for Four Year’s “Principal Curtailment’s” self defining and $637.22 Escrow Reduction’s definitively “Escrow Curtailment” intentionally coveted from loan statement’s by “pencil shading” Void without digits, December, 2001 payment accountability Box’, then stealthy omitting’ from requested, received 2002 Escrow Summaries and Final’ loan history the first “28” November, 2001 after’ loan transfer Day’s, Also’ returning $336.00 Escrow to progress “Escrow in shortage” for preplanned future $175.26 Escrow reduction, claiming the $637.22 I. R.S 1098 without 2001 fund’s received’ Re-taxing, Credit Repository deception, forcing Bankruptcy, releasing Stay, and Foreclosure Theft.

Washington Mutual Executive Response Center formal December 16, 2005 report’ admitted discovery “Bank One 2001 credited, then suspended, then “Curtailed” $778.34 monthly payment, crediting loans overall Principal only” then transferred loan to Homeside Lending that reduced “Escrow” $637.22 (“claiming” November 28, 2001) explaining’ erroneous misapplication attempt at reversal of “Principal Curtailment.” Loan Management admitted Escrow reduction while denying it vanished unaccredited; singularly defending monthly’s progression concoction.
Actualities; real-time statement starkly contradicts December 16, 2005 Final’ loan history’s recorded date, because Homeside Lending received loan November, 2001 and November 5, 2001 exacts $1,289.85 Escrow transferred, then Escrow reduced by $637.22 to $652.63, accrediting Principal $253.34, accrediting Interest $383.88, accrediting Escrow $175.26, recoiling back-to overall Escrow balance $175.26 action’. November 28, 2001 loan update highlighted Escrow’s $652.63 balance only’, the erroneous Escrow reduction then vanished before December, 2001, because December, 2001 Principal, Escrow and Interest received “pencil shading” without digit accreditation, mirrored on all loan updates, both’ 2002 requested Escrow Summaries, including Final’ loan history that intentionally covertly omitted first 28’, November, 2001 Day’s, add $336.00 Escrow returned, figure Curtailment and Curtailment’s loan Re-terming’ adjustment, equates the $1,148.48 April, 2002 to May, 2003 $102.99 Escrow Shortage, perfecting the irreconcilable pretzel logic that created the phantomlike December, 2001 unsubstantiated, unaccredited void that blocked outside refinance, with twelve $102.99 Escrow shortage’s, reflecting Homeside Lending used “Mindbox” Data Repository’ and Loan Manager used it’s editing, point and click “Soap” Program’, augmenting date’s to protect stolen Escrow, with historic recreation faltering. Blocking outside refinance by erroneous Credit Repository reporting, Also’ loan manager thwarted’ Washington Mutual’s letter promising loan history production, by releasing Bankruptcy “Stay” selfishly knowing loan history concealment protected Principal Curtailment and missing Escrow Reduction whose production would-have eliminated forced Bankruptcy’, adverted Bankruptcy’, forced Bankruptcy’ reversal, Foreclosure was desired solution, release of Bankruptcy Stay action’ was required, because Bankruptcy protected manager from case-load accountability review, additionally’ Washington Mutual’s inherent case-load accountability review, Fear’ protectively circumvents Justice’ by reimbursing’ half of all “Court appointed Attorney” fee’s’ across Texas, Lobbying courtroom participant’s, insuring prosecution protection!

Curtailment defined {“liken-to lopping off Horse’s tail” Curtailment = covert’ prepayment deception, Breach of commitment, of accountability, of relationship, emphasizing intentional Breach of Chartered License, here repeated to mask’} Curtailment abandoned December, 2001 and November 5, 2001 Escrow reduction intended Curtailment replacement, evaporated {liken to “Escrow Curtailment” defined = Anti-trusted} diligent loan history harboring became required’ to protect Homeside Lending Data Repository’ “Mindbox” problematic “point & click” power editor “Soap” extremely assessable Program’s’ limitless historic editing ability’s finality from caseload review. Loan Manager testified’ Homeside Lending used {INNUS} Credit Repository, pondering in-house. Prior to release of Bankruptcy Stay’ all loan histories reported December, 2001 unaccredited, requested Escrow Summaries and November 16, 2004 Final’ loan history report, covertly omitted’ the “first 28, November 2001 day’s” following loan transfer, compelling deception intent, in actuality both {Curtailment-theft’s} relates double standard when prosecuting Violent armed bank robbery thief’s’, theft’ and these isolated matter’s expanded universally, damaging unreported multitude’s.

Payment timeline;
March, 2001 Bank One N. A. 6.5 fixed 15 year NOTE contracted timely payments are no later than the Fifth’ of the month, each payment received generates posting’ account update statement, including single fixed detachable coupon’ for next monthly payment up-to November, 2001; all agree timely
Bank One received December, 2001 $812.48 coupon’ payment and properly accredited Principal $246.59, Interest $389.63 and Escrow $176.26, then all became suspended, then overall Principal “Term” commitment reduced $812.48 - $34.14 P. M.I. = $778.34 truncating from “NOTE” overall Principal financed “Principal Curtailment” transferring loan with December, 2001 unsupported
November, 2001 Homeside Lending received transferred loan with $1,289.85 in Escrow funds
November, 2001 proof of payment investigation team {loan payment entry Stay’} requested front and back photo-copied canceled check routing # proof that Bank One received December, 2001 payment, posted them U. S Mail
November 5, 2001 not November 28, 2001 Escrow reduced $637.22 to $652.63, real-time statement documents accrediting Principal $253.34, accrediting Interest $383.88, accrediting Escrow $175.26 recoiling back-to Escrow balance $175.26 action’ {Escrow reduction addressed Principal and Interest replacement = $175.26 un-curtailed, awaiting Escrow shortage fund accumulations for repeating covert Escrow reduction} action’
November 29, 2001 statement’ only highlight’s Escrow’s $652.63 balance, prior to $637.22 vaporizing
December, 2001 the $637.22 Escrow reduction has already vanished, amounting four year Curtailed
December 10, 2001 $1,168.26 County Tax payment, amounted Escrow to minus $515.63 shortage
December 15, 2001 received $336.00 Escrow Surplus, increasing Escrow arrears to minus $851.86
December, 2001 Escrow reduction’s $637.22 claimed I. R.S. 1098 taxable in 2001, Re-taxing!
January, 2002 paid $813.49, February, 2002 paid $813.49, March, 2002 paid $813.49; all agree timely
January, 2002 requested, “Escrow Summery” report detail’s, December, 2001 without digit entry or itemization, payment box only “Pencil shaded” blank {all other monthly’s itemize Principal, itemize Interest, itemize Escrow} Also’ all loan monthly payment update’s exacted December, 2001 without Principal, Interest or Escrow accreditation “Escrow summery” accounted unrepaired accountability
April, 2002, payment with Escrow Shortage requirement $813.49 + $102.99 = $916.48; check did I. S.F.
April 15, 2002, “Escrow Summery” report again requested, received, still’ December, 2001 has no digit entry or itemization, payment box “Pencil shaded” blank {all other monthly’s itemize Principal, itemize Escrow, itemize Interest} Also’ loan monthly payment updated balance’s reflect December, 2001 lack’s any/all Principal, Escrow or Interest accreditation, Escrow accountability remains unrepaired, lender demanded remaining Ten’ x $102.99 = $1,029.90 Escrow shortage arrear “paid in full” prior to additional Escrow Summery loan history reports communicated, payments suspended after May, 2002
May, 2002 $2,000.00 payment, Loan Manager Testified all payments, charges and fee’s updated current, prior to July, 2002, only’ the Ten’ demanded $102.99 Escrow shortages remained unaccounted.
July, 2002 to September, 2002 prioritized Credit-card balance reduction, anticipating outside refinance
October, 2002 all refinance attempts failed, reasoning was then unknown, Credit-cards showed $60,000.00 available credit with low remaining balance due
November, 2002 Countrywide exposed home loan payment history problem, Credit Repository Report, restriction hobbled their refinance efforts, undersigning dismissed out of hand
November, 2002 any / all outside refinance offers and term commitments attempted without availability, even high risk, high Interest, refused loan, including without the expanded Principal first desired
December, 2002 Involuntary Bankruptcy protection forced
December, 2002 Attorney charged ¼ hour proof of claim, explained additional funds available for loan history research and volumes of loan history documents copied and conversed, numerous office visits and hours expended without loan history resolve
Early, 2003 Bankruptcy requires finance training class, reviewed check paid loan history problem with Attorney / Scholars/ Teachers proof of claim review suggested
Middle, 2003 Bankruptcy Conformation Hearing, demanded on the Court recorded record, credit for cashed check payment accountability waving canceled check’s to Judge, Trustee, Homeside Lending. Judge forced Signature then “Stayed” Bankruptcy Conformation for 60 Day’s, reprimanding and ordering Attorney to file “Proof of Claim” for loan history resolve.
October, 2003 Judge’s 60 Stay time allotment expired, Attorney stated Homeside Lending offered return of Principal Curtailment and Escrow reduction funds, offer denied, without Credit Report itemizing returned funds, some damages and loan history production’s proof of event accountability, fearing unrealized additional damage’s, he conversed quitting, payments halted for court review date.
February, 2004 received Bankruptcy Attorney’s notice of quitting all Houston, Texas case-load, “he” recommended Bar Association Attorney
March, 2004 New Attorney formatted loan history from real-time summaries and composed “R. E.S. P.A. “qualified written request,”
April, 2004 New Bankruptcy Attorney’s R. E.S. P.A. “qualified written request” was being ignored letterhead Dated February 12, 2004, request carries time-line restriction’s with damages {“loan servicer must acknowledge within 20 Days, and resolve within 60 Days”} Attorney backdated letterhead way before our first acquaintance pre-expiring, home loan payments halted for Court review.
September, 2004 release of Bankruptcy Stay hearing, called Attorney at office, she refused courtroom attendance, in courtroom My Bankruptcy Trustee “Attorney” was busy hearing and releasing Bankruptcy Stay’s and Foreclosure’s ruling from Judge chair, allowing Judge’ Courthouse absentee day, Trustee “Stayed” Bankruptcy until October, 2004 awaiting Bankruptcy Attorney representation, Again canceled check stubs waved demanding accreditation with loan history production
September 17, 2004 used Attorney’s unanswered / ignored February 12, 2004 R. E.S. P.A. “qualified written request” to craft, format, personal R. E.S. P.A. “Qualified Written Request” posted Certified Mail, Washington Mutual, Bank One and Homeside Lending, Also’ posted First Class B. B.B. Comptroller of the Currency, Office of Thrift Supervision, RESPA and more, e-mailed all-about. “Comptroller of the Currency” forwarded assisting, “Better Business Bureau” forwarded assisting and repeatedly ignored, despite Washington Mutual seating one of their Five Chief’ arbitrator chairs, B. B.B. later reported three Year, Washington Mutual suspension resulted.
October, 2004 Trustee recommended Attorney file amended Proof of Claim or file Core Adversary, “privately conversed with Attorney and Trustee, Both’ stated Core Adversary filing intended” Trustee related, Judge Ruled, Bankruptcy “Stay” suspended until December 15, 2004
October, 2004 Year later 2005; Judge ruled Bankruptcy Attorneys ignored R. E.S. P.A. “qualified written request” inadmissible evidence in Core Adversary Courtroom proceedings, actual postings questioned.
November, 2004 Attorney claimed forwarding with Lender communication for loan history production, possibility of Core Adversary trial avoidance, her filing still pending if loan history production unresolved
November 19, 2004 Washington Mutual letter requested patience’ promising loan history production while relating The Comptroller of the Currency and Better Business Bureau involvement
December 15, 2004 called Washington Mutual for status up-date, Management reported Bankruptcy “Stay” released, and loan history transferred to Washington Mutual Chicago Archive department, called Archive department and four year coveted, protected loan history received by e-mail that Day
December 16, 2004 called archive department disputing loan history received, explaining discovery of Principal Curtailment and Escrow reduced with wowing response
December 19 or 20, 2004 Bankruptcy Attorney office meeting, Core Adversary filling was pending
December 15, 2004 Core Adversary filing’s letterhead date

Clarifications; Bank One loan originator “Principal Curtailment” was a breach of DEED contractual Term commitment preemptive clause’s signed authorization requirement’s, restriction of covert prepayment’s compromising “NOTE” {here fifteen year} final pay-off, that specifies’ instead of damage arbitration, all loan originator received funds and earnest funds returned, supporting DEED 180 month term commitment paperwork’, $12,291.54 but for Insurance, Tax and Inspection Costs related = $10,286.25 amendable with discovery. THIS Specification was the missing top half of preemptive “DEED” Clause’s “Paragraph” that protected “NOTE” omitted by Judge on Judgment rendered, the forward substance of Core Adversary Justice sought, Judgment quoted “NOTE” from the “and therefore” down, only’, Plagiarized by edit, delete, plus’ 10% Interest Bankruptcy Trustee charged, plus’ forced Bankruptcy’ damages, doubled with foreclosure.

Washington Mutual argues substantiation of Credit Repository, inaccuracies, required. Loan manager testified Homeside Lending used {INNUS} Credit Repository. The three major Credit Repositories report’s’ itemize only twelve most recent month’s’ detailing generalization “no derogatory.” Home loan was hobbled with lender accountability derogatory of December, 2001 phantomlike void of accreditation {pencil shading} matching posted loan history’s and Escrow summaries, accessing itemization of December, 2001 requires release by Homeside Lending {INNUS} Washington Mutual, but Escrow reduction’s only challenge is real-time statement date predates loan history’s recorded date, to alone’ allow Washington Mutual connotation that November, 2001 Escrow reduction’ anticipated December, 2001 payment need, only forwarding their nonsensical slimmer of convince-ability’s baffling relevance,
Washington Mutual states’ dispute the “No Derogatory” for solution, Assumption’s November 5, 2001 Escrow reduction first credited November, 2001 {assuming and/or December, 2001} then payment discovered, defaulting payment to December, 2001, but December, 2001 was also’ proved paid by check photocopy, then before December, 2001 the $637.22 vanished, Tax payment created Escrow in shortage, at some point the $637.22 was reported I. R.S. 1098 Taxed, $336.00 Escrow returned. Detailed Escrow summery report was demanded, requested, received early January, 2002 and again requested, received April 15, 2002, intentionally all reported December, 2001 “pencil shaded = void”, without accreditation including monthly loan account histories and Final loan summery began Homeside Lending loan history November, 29, 2001 intentionally coveting first 28, November 2001 Day’s following loan transfer, explaining creation of $103.00 Escrow Shortage demand, Credit Repository Report’s void, blocked outside refinance forcing involuntary’ Bankruptcy protection.

Brief timeline; Closed March, 2001 “Principal Curtailment” theft, loan transfer, “Escrow misapplication, check payment investigation, Escrow misapplication vanishes becoming Escrow Curtailment” theft, December, 2001 unaccredited, Escrow Curtailment Re-Taxed, Escrow Surplus return, requested Escrow Summery received, twelve $103.00 Escrow shortage’s demanded starting April, 2002, April, 2002 first untimely payment {check ISF}, Again requested Escrow summery received, May, 2002 $2,000.00 payment, Prioritized Credit Card balance pay-offs, refinance blocked, Bankrupt, loan history denied, Judge orders Proof of Claim loan history resolve, Staying Bankruptcy Conformation 60 Day’s, Attorney Quits all Houston case-load, New Attorneys R. E.S. P.A. ignored, My R. E.S. P.A. ignored, Comptroller of Currency assistance, Bankruptcy Stay released, Better Business Bureau expels Washington Mutual, paid Trustee to end Bankruptcy, Sued Washington Mutual/ Homeside Lending, Trial ended 100 Days later Judgment received, awarded $1,000.00 for ignored R. E.S. P.A. only’, Attorney received compensation Award, DEED specification Curtailment damages ignored equates Judge allowed Theft, erroneous Escrow reduction’ {is Escrow abuse, without damage award} Escrow reduction vaporized equates, Again Judge allowed Theft, {Congressional “RULE” 2005} timely appeal ruled by Bankruptcy Judge late factually overruling 2005 Congressional mandate, forcing Excusable Neglect court arguing, Second Appeal shouldered {docketed} awaiting Enron Judge, Main Enron Trial’ conclusion, Houston Courthouse Supervising Judge expected to expose Houston Courthouse Judges impropriety’ of ignoring congressional “RULE” 2005 overshadowed Excusable Neglect case merit’s, then Appealed Fifth Circuit to over-rule Enron notoriety Judge’s decision! “Wall Street” protectionism, Appeal’s denied up-to desired U.S. Supreme Court when Appellate Attorney let time expire’ before sending case to printer, never once compiling Core Adversary Merits to Brief, Washington Mutual uses Bankruptcy Trustee to return $7,515.98 without Arbitration, Explanation or Accountability then Forecloses.

Specific detailing advanced from above; Bank One N. A. “Principal Curtailment” breach of “DEED” term commitment’ signed prepayment authorization Clause “NOTE” protection, Contractually specifies, instead of damage arbitration, all loan originator received funds and earnest funds returned, supporting “DEED” Lender Signed “NOTE” paperwork’, exempting Insurance, Tax and Inspection Costs relative $12,291.54 minus $1,289.85 transferred, best accountability updateable, if arbitrated Attorney advice required! Minus $1,168.26 County Tax, minus $239.00 PMI, minus $308.00 Hazard Insurance, Judgment omitted these specifics, {quoting from middle Paragraph} starting from the “and therefore” altering composers contractual protection intent = $10,286.25 plus’ 10% Interest, plus Escrow reduction that vanished damage’s, plus’ forced Bankruptcy damage’s, plus foreclosure damages, plus homestead return

Damage was extraordinary and $1,000.00 each Day’s justifiable, even circumstantially shortsighted, once examining premeditatedly misapplication advancements, considering theft admittance was precursor of courtroom fallacious court argumentum, understanding asset division shoulders certain limitations, additional fund sources hold promise that may of may not factor into Washington Mutual asset treasury revaluation, comparatively paling damage’s accounted, first’ help is needed “nonetheless” quest’s, exposing derivative, assumption’s, researchable, learn-ability, prior to April, 2009.

Damages Sought in Three Day, Core Adversary Trial, and demanded today!
In accordance with original “forced Bankruptcy damage’s” sought, as a simplification’ Day-rate damages equate, relating arbitrate-able self-judgment $1,000.00 each Day’ was recorded at Core Adversary Trial
Actual damage’s forwarded without accounting all accrued damage’s or restitution
Damage’s 2,744 Day’s and 2,744 Day’s Interest require, amendments accordingly, Day-rate’s simplify
From September, 2001 or from November 5, 2001 to March 31, 2009 all assessed = 2,744 Day’s
Mindful Trustee charged 10% Interest resulting, so 10% results
Foreclosure was Homestead Theft doubling overall damage’s if not restored

Bank One Principal Curtailment, Deed damage’s of $10,277.25 X 10% Interest X 2,744 Day-rate.
Homeside Lending Escrow reduction $637.22 minus $336.00 Escrow returned = $301.22 X 10% Interest X 2,744 Day-rate, plus forced Bankruptcy damage’s X 10% X 2,744 Day-rate
Combined = Curtailment damage’s $10,578.47 X 10% Interest X 2,744 Day-rate and 2,744 Day’s X 10% Interest on Curtailment Damage plus forced Bankruptcy damage’s X 10% Interest for 2,744 Days

Then minus Washington Mutual’s December, 2007 return of $7,515.98 damage reduction that shortsightedly omitted $3,582.75 damage’s from included Theft’s, then Interest accrued and day-rate damage amount’s. Again’ Core Bankruptcy fund return is admitting faults burden of guilt, Both’ Mooting and Muting Judgment while Self accessing restitution that grossly underestimating damage rendered, ignoring all accrued Damage’s and accrued Interest

Simplified eliminating arbitration and Attorney fee’s = 2,744 Day’s X $1,000.00 = $2,744,000.00 with homestead’s return or with Foreclosure damage doubled, But’ $5,488,000.00 accounts fighting Usury by using = $3,000,000.00 Claim or ironclad $3,500,000.00 defendable Claim.
     
Read 5 RepliesAdd reply

User Replies:Close comments

Posted by dan gordon on 2009-03-22:
my god what a bunch of gibberish. Whats the point? why send something so detailed. You think a bunch of bankruptcy lawyers monitor this site? Get a grip
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-03-22:
Will agree with Dan on your Washington Mutual Complaint. Do you happen to have the short version of this mess? I'm pretty sure I got the gist of it, you're looking for about $1,200.00+ back from them?
Posted by old fart on 2009-03-22:
My god almighty! TWO pages of this...
Posted by Chris721 on 2009-03-22:
Thank God I wasn't the only one. I'm no genius but I felt my IQ dropping rapidly while reading this mess.
Posted by moonscope on 2009-03-23:
Best defense for Loan Manager was to compile damages to conceal Theft of Escrow, I call-it to baffle with bull dung. If all loan offices managed perfect monthly customer payments no job security exists or need for office staff’s shouldered, whatsoever’ including Chase Bank and all Banking, Curtailments are Breaches of Contracts and here’ reduced Term Commitment with accompanied Escrow reduction Theft, after all payments were requested and perfectly timely paid.
The reason that a large amount {about 20% to 25%} of Foreclosures ever resulted ever’ is the altered meaning of one important word, Benjamin Franklin and Congress prioritized with Foreclosure protection, by placing on the most forward statute of The First Amendment of The Constitution “Of The United States Of America” that Government later abandoned, called in the First Amendment’ Anti-Trust {here and elsewhere all Curtailments equate stealthy Theft of Trust] First Amendment protected against my Loan Originator’s “Principal Curtailment” {or stealthy payment amputation} then Loan Transferred, then Erroneous Escrow reduction attempted Curtailment reversal lacked accountable placement in that fiscal year, so it vaporized or was pursed, equating “Escrow Curtailment” {or stealthy payment amputation}and calling Escrow reduction Theft’ Anti-Trust or not calling it Anti-Trust, the First Amendment demands Lenders Escrow accountability and requires the Courts honest attention.
Congress allowed Curtailments, because Congress regulates Escrow funds accumulation amount thresholds, whereas all Curtailments are unauthorized prepayments and loan managements short-cutting by intention assumption. Later Congress changed Anti-Trust’s meaning by creating Anti-Trust Department that controls altered commodity pricing. Dan Gorden the gibberish was real forced Bankruptcy and Foreclosure events and superbowl please scroll to damages at bottom of post, finding $1,000.00 per day for 2,744 days unless arbitrated.
Close commentsAdd reply

Washington Mutual Website
Posted by Old fart on 03/12/2009
SAGINAW, MICHIGAN -- I wanted to check the balance on my wife's Washington mutual credit card and when I went to the website, it refused my ID and password... when I finally Called CHASE on the phone using this number, 1-866-892-9268, the representative confirmed all the on line info and reinstated the on-line access..

It apparently is a fact that the info on the WAMU card including the Phone number and on-line site is no longer valid.

You must use the CHASE phone number...!!

That is, 1-866-892-9268
     
Read 8 RepliesAdd reply

User Replies:Close comments

Posted by Suusan B. on 2009-03-12:
I'm a Wamu customer and for the past couple of months they have been announcing on their website that effective 3/9/09 all former Wamu credit card accounts will be serviced via the Chase website.
Posted by old fart on 2009-03-12:
I hadn't seen that Suusan...maybe I was looking in the wrong place..The WAMU website still has the log in info posted..
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-03-12:
An open CC old fart? I thought you were free of such burdens?
Posted by old fart on 2009-03-12:
Yeah C2O... I went nuts and charged 88 dollars on the internet for our 42nd anniversary.... I bought her a Lenox Tweety for her collection...
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-03-12:
42 years and you gave her the bird.... nice!
Posted by MRM on 2009-03-12:
I said a bird, bird, bird. A bird is a word.
I said a bird, bird, bird. A bird is a word.

I heard this song while watching an episode of the Family Guy. So hilarious!
Posted by jktshff1 on 2009-03-12:
Everybody's talking about the bird....
I remember when that was just out!! OF does too.
Posted by MRM on 2009-03-12:
Thanks to Family Guy for putting that song in my head.
Close commentsAdd reply

WaMu Screwed Me They Will Screw You Too
Posted by Allforfriends06 on 03/12/2009
I recently sent this to WaMu, it says it all!

Attention: WAMU SUPERVISOR

I recently mailed a deposit of $500.00 to my WaMu Account # XXXXXXXX. It posted to my account on 3/10/09. I called the 1-800 number to see if it was available because it said Pending hold. The guy I spoke with said that the whole check was available. I went to the Chase branch to make a withdrawal and it was NOT available.

I then called the 800 number back. Spoke with a lady and she said, no he was wrong it won’t be available until Thursday. You have $100 available now. Ok….

This morning (3/11/09) I found out that my husband will be shipping from Fort Benning Ga, to Afghanistan for a year. I need to get to Fort Benning before he leaves. The only way to do that is to call WaMu and ask if they could release the funds one day early.

So! I call yet again and I am told that I must go into the branch in which I made the deposit. Ok, it was mailed. The lady then said there is nothing we can do to help you. I asked to speak with someone else. I have only 2 days to get to Fort Benning.

I was then put through to a Floor Manager, who was about the rudest person I have EVER spoken with. Again, expecting some kind of compassion I explained the story yet again. She now tells me that, no the check won’t be available until 3/17/09. The previous 3 people I spoke with were wrong. There is nothing she can (will) do. Call back tomorrow. How can I possibly get to Fort Benning in 1 day driving? I asked to speak with her supervisor. She said there isn’t one above her.

She ended up transferring me to the Risk department where I got to explain EVERYTHING again. This lady basically said you have already discussed this with us and we can do nothing. And oh, yeah, the floor manager was wrong, this won't clear until the 18th. She then disconnected the call.

Thank you so much Wamu for having some compassion. Thank you for taking the time to help me. Thank you for helping me have the chance to see my husband before he is sent to war, from which he may not come back from. Thank you Wamu for nothing.


     
Read 23 RepliesAdd reply

User Replies:Close comments

Posted by Anonymous on 2009-03-12:
This would be more than enough to make me close out my accounts with them.

Look for a local credit union. That's the kind of place where you can tell someone the problem, and they'll try and help you.
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-03-12:
What a class act. While hubby is getting ready to dodge bullets the wife is being stabbed in the back by the bank. Time to ditch this bank and head off to a place where you and your husband have faces, not just account numbers.
Posted by tnchuck100 on 2009-03-12:
We are faced with many enemies today. Afghanistan, Iraq, banks, ..... And the list is growing daily.
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-03-12:
With one small difference, chuck. Al Qaeda can kill you. The banks will make your life so miserable that you'll wish you were dead.
Posted by tnchuck100 on 2009-03-12:
True, Doc.
Posted by allforfriends06 on 2009-03-12:
I will be closing this account as soon as the check and my payroll clear. Now every time I call I have to verify the address I lived at 20 years ago and do I know so and so.
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-03-12:
allforfriends06 - More importantly, were you able to secure funds to see your hubby before he deploys? If not, call your local VFW and find their service officer. I'll bet they'll float you some cash until your check clears. (I know you'll repay them ASAP...so they can help someone else.)
Posted by allforfriends06 on 2009-03-12:
Ghost of Doc J- I ended up going to the local pawn shop as well as getting a title loan. I had planned on driving through the night but instead had to get a red eye flight for tonight and I will be there come hell or high water tomorrow.

All of Wamu's customer service is located in Cebu,Philippines. I didn't realize this when I started up my account. Kind of ironic since I lost my job with Earthlink when they transferred their customer service to Cebu (People Support)in 2004.
Posted by tnchuck100 on 2009-03-12:
Be sure to pay back that title loan as the agreement states. Those places can make WaMu seem like your fairy godmother.
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-03-12:
Have a safe journey. You're one 'aychet cha-yil' (Hebrew: "Woman of Valor") for making some tough financial choices to make the trip possible. G-d speed to both of you!
Posted by allforfriends06 on 2009-03-12:
tnchuck100- I checked everything out and will be paying that off on Monday. I explained the situation and the lady said that typically you need to keep the account for at least 1 month. I told here I would pay the balance on Monday and the $50 fee. She said that was no problem with the current situation I was facing. That's worth it to get me there on time.
It was nice actually speaking with someone that seemed to care.
Posted by allforfriends06 on 2009-03-12:
Thanks Ghost of Doc J!! :) This board makes me realize not everyone is as uncaring as Wamu Customer Service employees.
Posted by tnchuck100 on 2009-03-12:
BTW, good luck and tell your husband thanks.
Posted by allforfriends06 on 2009-03-12:
tnchuck100 - will do :)He will be back in 400 days.. not that I am going to be counting down or anything. Maybe I should have stayed in and followed him over :)
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-03-12:
and please tell him we all thank him for his duty
Posted by madconsumer on 2009-03-12:
and this is the banks issue why?

banks are not there to be friends or companions, but to be a bank.
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-03-12:
"This board makes me realize not everyone is as uncaring as Wamu Customer Service employees."

is met by..."and this is the banks issue why? banks are not there to be friends or companions, but to be a bank."

Well almost all of us, allforfriends06...almost all of us.
Posted by allforfriends06 on 2009-03-12:
Funny! I read madconsumer's post and immediately this came to mind...just for you madconsumer!

And she said
Ain't nothing gonna break my stride
Nobody's gonna slow me down
Oh no, I've got to keep on moving
Ain't nothing gonna break my stride
I'm running and I won't touch ground
Oh no, I've got to keep on moving

*and you got it KenPopcorn!
Posted by MRM on 2009-03-12:
That song is called "Been Around the World," by Mase and P Diddy.
Posted by allforfriends06 on 2009-03-12:
MRM- I was thinking of the one that came out in '83 by Men at Work (Ain't nothing gonna hold me down). I didn't even know P Diddy had one!

Off to find it! Only 2 hours and 27 mins before I head to the airport.
Posted by MRM on 2009-03-12:
Its a remake version by P Diddy. You know how he do, he always samples other artists' music.
Posted by allforfriends06 on 2009-03-12:
MRM- I will have to check that out! I love the one Men at Work recorded. :) (I'm so 80's)
Posted by Starlord on 2009-03-13:
LOL. Your title for your complaint reminds me of the company using a phony opera. I can see the opera singers singing "they screwed others, they'll screw you too." ROFLMAO
Close commentsAdd reply

Rip Off
Posted by Nonstop on 03/11/2009
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA -- I made a purchase on my debit card which was approved as I had money in my account, had savings as a back up. I later went to a restaurant and that was paid with a debit card and approved. Five days later, I was charged $68.00 for two non-sufficient fees, one for the merchandise I had purchased prior to the restaurant and the second I was $3.00 short, although I had monies in my savings and forgot this purchase. Allowing the $3 shortage and being charged $34, how can I be charged $34 for the earlier purchase that was approved prior to other purchases?

This is a rip off and I am contacting Chase, FDIC and BBB and closing my account.
     
Read 3 RepliesAdd reply

User Replies:Close comments

Posted by Anonymous on 2009-03-11:
I agree. If there are not sufficient available funds the debits should be declined. Why don't they do this? Because the banks are more interested in collecting fees than preventing overdrafts.
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-03-11:
When you make a purchase by debit, do you have to select the account you want to pay from (chequing/savings)? If so, having money in your savings account won't help avoid an overdraft. Regardless, I agree with Doc J, banks should be declining your purchases if the funds aren't there, not allowing you to go into overdraft.
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-03-11:
The problem is that not every debit transaction hits the bank for immediate approval, and of the ones that do, the bank may be in a stand-in mode (i.e. not using a live balance) because an update is happening. In the good old days, no one rushed out to stop you from writing a check that would overdraw your account. You should assume the same holds true for a check card.

This is not to say that some transaction can't or won't be declined, I'm just saying you cannot depend on it as an alternative to maintaining your account.
Close commentsAdd reply

Worst Customer Service Ever!
Posted by Gypsymap on 03/07/2009
I made a $500- payment in Jan/09. I was told by a call center agent from Washington Mutual BANK not the Washington Mutual Visa department that I did not have a payment until March/09. So when the card turned off I called in to sorted out the issue and I asked for the late charge of $39.95 to be waived and it was agreed that they're made the mistake. I went on line made another payment like they asked. Then I receive a notice that my limit was lowered.

I have called multiple times and gotten no help, what I did get though was sorry ma'am but you made a late payment. There's nothing we can do would you like to get back on hold and tell somebody else they will tell you the same thing thank-you for calling.

So note to self if you make a large payment to Washington Mutual VISA and they make a mistake on your account they have no customer service. And we the customers that are paying and trying to make larger than minimum payments WASHINGTON MUTUAL DOESN'T CARE!

Let me make another point when I called in to find out why the card was originally turned off I offered to make a payment from my Washington Mutual BANK to my Washington Mutual VISA they wanted $14.95 plus the phone call was being out sourced to India and the Philippines what have they come too? And what price are we going to pay?
     
Read 2 RepliesAdd reply

User Replies:Close comments

Posted by Ponie on 2009-03-07:
LOL, Zachary. Now let's add horrible, terrible, horrendous, etc. :)
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-03-07:
You can't prepay revolving credit. No matter how much over the minimum that you pay, the minimum payment will still be due the next month. It's just the way that revolving credit works.
You should never give them your bank account info, they will use it again any time they want. Instead, you could have set up a recurring monthly payment from your own bank's site. This would have taken care of your payment issue, and also kept your account secure.
Close commentsAdd reply

Top of Page | Next Page >