Best Buy My...
I recently went to a local chain store that deals with electronics, appliances and computers. I had visited the very same store about a week prior and purchased a computer during that visit. The purpose of this visit was to purchase another computer so that my wife and I would not be competing for computer time. Since I have come into a bit of money recently, I had over $6,000 in the checking account. Having selected my computer and some additional hardware and software, I went to check out.
At the check out there were several discrepancies between what the advertisement at the display area stated, what the sales associate had stated, and the price that rang up on the register. After sorting that out (a total of 20 minutes wasted), the cashier proceeded with the check out. The check out process went all the way to me writing a check. Now the check was only for $720 and some change. Knowing that I had over six grand in the account, I didn’t think anything about writing such a check. Additionally, since this chain store dealt with large ticket items like refrigerators, computers and stereo equipment, I didn’t think I would have a problem submitting a check. My perceptions were especially true since I had written a check for a similar amount just about a week before.
Now it is important to note that I had a valid driver’s license, my valid passport and a deposit slip demonstrating that I had deposited $2400 into my account about 10 hours prior on that very same day. Much to my surprise my check was rejected on the advice of a company called CERTEGY, which is headquartered in Florida.
Embarrassed in the extreme, I called for a manager. The manager refused to honor the check on the basis of company policy. I pointed out to her that this policy was not posted, that I had presented two forms of valid identification, that I had a stamped deposit slip demonstrating enough cash to cover the amount of the check, and that the store was accepting checks written by other people without rejection. The manager gave me a slip of paper with the phone number to contact CERTEGY directly, indicating that they sometimes can override the decision made by the computer.
Well, I called CERTEGY. The voice mail system walked me through five minutes of rigmarole to end with a message that stated that there was no negative history on the account, meaning that there was no history of rubber checks, reports of checks being stolen, or the like. Still, the voice mail system informed me that my check would not be honored. I pressed a dozen or so buttons more so that I could talk to a real person.
When I finally had a real person on the line, the customer service representative (CSR) repeated—almost verbatim—the message that the voice mail system had given me. I explained that this was an inappropriate answer to my issues and wanted to know why my check would not be honored. The CSR told me that their service routinely took precautions based upon a set of tracking criteria to assure that the checks were not stolen and that I was not a victim of identity theft. So, being insistent on the fact that this was an inappropriate decision on their part, I requested a review of the decision.
The CSR reviewed the data in CERTEGY’s database, asked a lot of questions—all of which I answered to his satisfaction—and the attempted to override the computer-generated decision. The computer would not allow the override. So, I asked to speak with a supervisor.
The supervisor came on the line and gave me the very same spiel about my account and the decision CERTEGY had made on the basis of their tracking criteria. Again, it was almost verbatim to the voice mail message and the message offered by the CSR. I explained to the supervisor all that has occurred, the fact that I presented valid ID, and had over $6000 in the account. The supervisor explained to me that accepting a check was the same as the store granting me credit for a short period until the check cleared. Thus, the store—on the advice of CERTEGY—had to take precautions against rubber checks, identity theft, and other crimes. Again, I told him that I presented two forms of valid identification, had a deposit slip demonstrating sufficient funds, and that the check cashing policy applied to my situation violated the Uniform Code of Commerce (UCC), as well as the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
The supervisor actually had the audacity to say, “You believe that because you have the money in the account that a business should accept your check. Well, that is not how it works. Some people cannot be trusted.” He also stated that there was nothing to indicate that my check would not be honored by my bank and that it was merely an issue of my having written several large checks recently. I explained to him that I recently came into some money and was finally able to purchase some major items that I had previously forgone. Nothing seemed to impress this little man and his every word seemed to indicate that I was a person that could not be trusted to submit a check. Again, I felt very insulted and defamed.
Being very upset at this process, I asked to speak to his manager. The answer I received was that the manager was not available at that time, and then I was shuffled off to a voice mailbox for the manager. I left a message, but I have not received an answer as of yet.
The very next day I went to my bank, retrieved sufficient cash to purchase the computer and peripherals, then proceeded back to the same store. As I entered the store I requested to see the manager. I reviewed the events from the night before, arguing that I had been wronged in the process. I made it clear that the policy and process was defaming, inappropriate, and illegal. I fanned out over $800 in cash and asked the manager if I was going to be treated as a valued customer. I also informed him that I was considering filing suit against his company and CERTEGY.
The manager offered to “take care” of me. Well, somehow the manager of this store thinks my reputation and character is only worth a $25 discount on the price of my computer. Here I was buying almost $800 worth of merchandise and he offered 25 bucks.
Now the Uniform Code of Commerce, the guiding body of law for interstate commerce in the US, and the model for the Uniform Codes of Commerce adopted by each state, makes it clear that a check is a bank draft that is payable upon demand. There are also very strict laws regarding the passing of bad checks, fraud and failure to make good on a check that was not honored due to NSF (non-sufficient funds). The store that I went to was completely covered from any and all damages I might have inflicted upon them had my check bounced. They had my identification numbers, my address, my phone number and my check. Additionally, in the great state of Indiana, a bounced check is subject to a service fee of up to $50.00 or 10% of the check, whichever is greater. The only restrictions require that the store post its check cashing policies, post a notice of the exact fee, and take standard precautions to ascertain the check writer’s identity.
We have gotten to a point where the big corporations are writing the laws and we citizens have to live with whatever these entities come up with in the process. Well, I am mad as hell and I am not going to take it anymore. I am actually thinking about filing a defamation of character suit against the store and CERTEGY. These entities do not have the right to treat people so poorly. The real question is what amount should I seek. If I seek a reasonable amount, perhaps the amount of my purchase plus treble damages as a punitive approach, both the store and CERTEGY will not feel the pinch. Even if I were to be successful in the law suit, it would be a meaningless victory. If I ask for enough money to make each of these entities feel the pinch (say $100,000), then I could be accused of being frivolous and over the top.
Even writing this rant could cost me in the long-run as each of these entities could argue that I am injuring them by re-telling my story. Such action is often the manner in which a large corporation sheds itself of small lawsuits… after all, they have more money and justice is seldom seen in our civil courts of law (c.f. my writings on values).
What I would really like to do is get a grassroots boycott campaign against companies that use such services and employ policies, such as the one explained above, If we could get even one day’s worth of publicity and impact even 10% of their sales, it would be a moral victory. In the end, I may just file suit… and ask for a million dollars from each offending entity.
Anybody know a good lawyer?
FOLLOW UP:I was eventually able to speak with a senior vice-president of Certegy who appologized for the manner in which my check was rejected. He admitted that there is a flaw in the apporach used to screen that allowed perfectly legitimate customers to be screened out, even though there is no negative reports or activities. We discussed the problem in itself and ways to allow floor staff at the call centers to override erroneous decisions and "overlap" screen outs.
When I explained that I had already written a complaint brief and had the necesarry forms for which to file a federal suit explaining the violations of FCRA, UCC and defamation of my character, he offered some alternatives that met my basic call for justice.
After discussing the matters, I have decided to hold off on filing suit. I await follow through on his (and Certegy) part.
My point--and I do have a point--is that we are responsible for making the systems we use (or those that use us) work. If we don't stand up for our values and principles, then the systems fail.
In the facilities management, engineering, business process consulting, and emrgency preparedness professions we deal with SPOFs--Single Points Of Failure--which can bring down a system and grind productivity to a halt. We must insist that we do not become SPOFs.
October 25, 2005
At the check out there were several discrepancies between what the advertisement at the display area stated, what the sales associate had stated, and the price that rang up on the register. After sorting that out (a total of 20 minutes wasted), the cashier proceeded with the check out. The check out process went all the way to me writing a check. Now the check was only for $720 and some change. Knowing that I had over six grand in the account, I didn’t think anything about writing such a check. Additionally, since this chain store dealt with large ticket items like refrigerators, computers and stereo equipment, I didn’t think I would have a problem submitting a check. My perceptions were especially true since I had written a check for a similar amount just about a week before.
Now it is important to note that I had a valid driver’s license, my valid passport and a deposit slip demonstrating that I had deposited $2400 into my account about 10 hours prior on that very same day. Much to my surprise my check was rejected on the advice of a company called CERTEGY, which is headquartered in Florida.
Embarrassed in the extreme, I called for a manager. The manager refused to honor the check on the basis of company policy. I pointed out to her that this policy was not posted, that I had presented two forms of valid identification, that I had a stamped deposit slip demonstrating enough cash to cover the amount of the check, and that the store was accepting checks written by other people without rejection. The manager gave me a slip of paper with the phone number to contact CERTEGY directly, indicating that they sometimes can override the decision made by the computer.
Well, I called CERTEGY. The voice mail system walked me through five minutes of rigmarole to end with a message that stated that there was no negative history on the account, meaning that there was no history of rubber checks, reports of checks being stolen, or the like. Still, the voice mail system informed me that my check would not be honored. I pressed a dozen or so buttons more so that I could talk to a real person.
When I finally had a real person on the line, the customer service representative (CSR) repeated—almost verbatim—the message that the voice mail system had given me. I explained that this was an inappropriate answer to my issues and wanted to know why my check would not be honored. The CSR told me that their service routinely took precautions based upon a set of tracking criteria to assure that the checks were not stolen and that I was not a victim of identity theft. So, being insistent on the fact that this was an inappropriate decision on their part, I requested a review of the decision.
The CSR reviewed the data in CERTEGY’s database, asked a lot of questions—all of which I answered to his satisfaction—and the attempted to override the computer-generated decision. The computer would not allow the override. So, I asked to speak with a supervisor.
The supervisor came on the line and gave me the very same spiel about my account and the decision CERTEGY had made on the basis of their tracking criteria. Again, it was almost verbatim to the voice mail message and the message offered by the CSR. I explained to the supervisor all that has occurred, the fact that I presented valid ID, and had over $6000 in the account. The supervisor explained to me that accepting a check was the same as the store granting me credit for a short period until the check cleared. Thus, the store—on the advice of CERTEGY—had to take precautions against rubber checks, identity theft, and other crimes. Again, I told him that I presented two forms of valid identification, had a deposit slip demonstrating sufficient funds, and that the check cashing policy applied to my situation violated the Uniform Code of Commerce (UCC), as well as the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
The supervisor actually had the audacity to say, “You believe that because you have the money in the account that a business should accept your check. Well, that is not how it works. Some people cannot be trusted.” He also stated that there was nothing to indicate that my check would not be honored by my bank and that it was merely an issue of my having written several large checks recently. I explained to him that I recently came into some money and was finally able to purchase some major items that I had previously forgone. Nothing seemed to impress this little man and his every word seemed to indicate that I was a person that could not be trusted to submit a check. Again, I felt very insulted and defamed.
Being very upset at this process, I asked to speak to his manager. The answer I received was that the manager was not available at that time, and then I was shuffled off to a voice mailbox for the manager. I left a message, but I have not received an answer as of yet.
The very next day I went to my bank, retrieved sufficient cash to purchase the computer and peripherals, then proceeded back to the same store. As I entered the store I requested to see the manager. I reviewed the events from the night before, arguing that I had been wronged in the process. I made it clear that the policy and process was defaming, inappropriate, and illegal. I fanned out over $800 in cash and asked the manager if I was going to be treated as a valued customer. I also informed him that I was considering filing suit against his company and CERTEGY.
The manager offered to “take care” of me. Well, somehow the manager of this store thinks my reputation and character is only worth a $25 discount on the price of my computer. Here I was buying almost $800 worth of merchandise and he offered 25 bucks.
Now the Uniform Code of Commerce, the guiding body of law for interstate commerce in the US, and the model for the Uniform Codes of Commerce adopted by each state, makes it clear that a check is a bank draft that is payable upon demand. There are also very strict laws regarding the passing of bad checks, fraud and failure to make good on a check that was not honored due to NSF (non-sufficient funds). The store that I went to was completely covered from any and all damages I might have inflicted upon them had my check bounced. They had my identification numbers, my address, my phone number and my check. Additionally, in the great state of Indiana, a bounced check is subject to a service fee of up to $50.00 or 10% of the check, whichever is greater. The only restrictions require that the store post its check cashing policies, post a notice of the exact fee, and take standard precautions to ascertain the check writer’s identity.
We have gotten to a point where the big corporations are writing the laws and we citizens have to live with whatever these entities come up with in the process. Well, I am mad as hell and I am not going to take it anymore. I am actually thinking about filing a defamation of character suit against the store and CERTEGY. These entities do not have the right to treat people so poorly. The real question is what amount should I seek. If I seek a reasonable amount, perhaps the amount of my purchase plus treble damages as a punitive approach, both the store and CERTEGY will not feel the pinch. Even if I were to be successful in the law suit, it would be a meaningless victory. If I ask for enough money to make each of these entities feel the pinch (say $100,000), then I could be accused of being frivolous and over the top.
Even writing this rant could cost me in the long-run as each of these entities could argue that I am injuring them by re-telling my story. Such action is often the manner in which a large corporation sheds itself of small lawsuits… after all, they have more money and justice is seldom seen in our civil courts of law (c.f. my writings on values).
What I would really like to do is get a grassroots boycott campaign against companies that use such services and employ policies, such as the one explained above, If we could get even one day’s worth of publicity and impact even 10% of their sales, it would be a moral victory. In the end, I may just file suit… and ask for a million dollars from each offending entity.
Anybody know a good lawyer?
FOLLOW UP:I was eventually able to speak with a senior vice-president of Certegy who appologized for the manner in which my check was rejected. He admitted that there is a flaw in the apporach used to screen that allowed perfectly legitimate customers to be screened out, even though there is no negative reports or activities. We discussed the problem in itself and ways to allow floor staff at the call centers to override erroneous decisions and "overlap" screen outs.
When I explained that I had already written a complaint brief and had the necesarry forms for which to file a federal suit explaining the violations of FCRA, UCC and defamation of my character, he offered some alternatives that met my basic call for justice.
After discussing the matters, I have decided to hold off on filing suit. I await follow through on his (and Certegy) part.
My point--and I do have a point--is that we are responsible for making the systems we use (or those that use us) work. If we don't stand up for our values and principles, then the systems fail.
In the facilities management, engineering, business process consulting, and emrgency preparedness professions we deal with SPOFs--Single Points Of Failure--which can bring down a system and grind productivity to a halt. We must insist that we do not become SPOFs.
October 25, 2005
posted by Jim Downey at 4:45 PM
1 Comments:
I had the EXACT same problem at Bob's Stores for $200 stinkin dollars worth of stuff. I am infuriated and with you on that law suit. Who was the SVP at Certegy you spoke with?
Post a Comment
<< Home