[X]

2
Helpful
Votes

RBC Bank Cary North Carolina Complaint - Customer No Service - Money on Deposit

Review by RMAC10 on 2009-05-07
CARY, NORTH CAROLINA -- Monica Laliberte WRAL TV 5 consumer advocate tries to match abandoned property to owners, called my husband RE $40,000 in abandoned property in the state of NC in our name. This turned out to be our retirement account w/ RBC in Cary, NC held in a money market checking account. We had left it there untouched for over 3 years w/o a transaction on it, RBC says they simply turned it over as abandoned property sent an unmarked 1st class mailing letter for notification, zeroed out balance on an October 08 statement, which we seldom pay attention to - because we do not use the account, and know exactly how much money is saved there. Now it's up to us to do all the paperwork to resolve from the state I researched the NC abandoned property rules, and RBC seems to be in compliance, you would think with $40,000 on the line, a current address, current phone number, and a local Cary, NC connection, the bank would have at least given me the courtesy of a phone call, or a certified letter, or a signature requirement to close my account. Today they joined the ranks of customer no service. [snip] did not acknowledge that that is not an acceptable way to treat a long time customer and depositor, and said it was up to us to fix the problem with the state, The account was closed on October 6, and we have lost 7 months interest on this account.

I think RBC abandoned property should be tightened, some process notification attempts to locate the depositors (more than just an innocuous first class letter - that probably looked like the other 7-8 bank offers we get each week. I'm glad in the time of economic financial downturn, RBC can afford to just throw away good customers. RBC has really bad customer service.
Comments:3 Replies - Latest reply on 2009-05-15
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-05-07:
The bank is not your accountant.

It is unreasonable to expect the bank to expend alot of time and money to contact you about an account that you are responsible for.

Having not read any statements or letters, I would doubt you read the account terms and conditions either.
Posted by Anonymous on 2009-05-07:
The rules on abandoned property are set by the state, not the bank. They did exactly the right thing in sending you a notice that you were about to be escheated, and by your own admission, you ignored it. All you had to be is pick up the phone and acknowledge that you got notice, and the account should be considered active. This might not preclude an inactivity fee, but it is considered customer contact, and relieves the bank of the responsibility to escheat the funds to the state.
Posted by RMAC10 on 2009-05-15:
Hey Robf and KenPopcorn - see here's the deal - We put the money in the bank so we would not have to worry about it ever until we needed it. (Otherwise we would have put it in our mattress). While I agree the bank was supposed to turn abandoned property over to the state, the bank does have an obligation by the same law to make a due diligence search for the owner before turning it over. I did not ignore my statements, and what part of I DID NOT GET A DAMNED LETTER do you not get. If I would have gotten a letter, or a simple phone call, don't you think we would have immediately protected our savings. This money was not abandoned (no one died, no one moved). RBC just chose the wrong people to mess with. Hence - this bad review of their company.

Your Name:
(displayed with your comment)
Your E-mail:
(required)

Your Experience/Advice:
Check spelling


By clicking submit you agree that you have read and accept the Terms of Service & Privacy Policy.


Note: All comments are reviewed by a moderator before being published. Please be sure to read our guidelines before commenting.