Notice changes in banking scene?greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
Y2K final clincher for action about my money came yesterday when I went to do some personal banking in a quiet country town where we had a little high water in NZ last week. (About six inches over the main road for anyone interested.) Outside the bank was a security person on patrol with uniform and cell phone. (Guns are not carried by police or security people except when there is a incident involving a very disturbed person and they are very rare.) Inside was a completely redesigned bank interior with new fittings more like a preparation for a seige. I know the bank manager personally so asked what was going on. He was very uncomfortably with his new decor and answered without his reassuring smile, 'its a changed banking world'. His tellers also looked uncomfortable. I asked him was he expecting a run on the bank? No answer. I asked him what was the largest sum of money he would give me in cash $5k. Needless to say I shifted my savings yesterday afternoon into a more liquid form. An on demand account from which I will remove my funds over the next week or so..I know most of you live in a different world but..
Anyone else noted changes in bankers dealings with customers or struck a 'cash in the hand' limit?
-- Bob Barbour (email@example.com), July 21, 1998
I went into my bank and cashed a check for $3,000 and I wanted it in small bills, nothing over 20's. The teller wanted to know what I was going to do with the money!!!! (I wanted to say it's none of your damn business lady). Anyway, being the polite person that I can be on occasion, I told her that I felt sorry for the homeless and I was going to start handing out the money to panhandlers. I've cashed bigger money than that before and was never asked what I was going to do with it.
-- Barb-Douglas (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 21, 1998.
Overheard teller and bank manager talking about changes being made at my bank as they spoke.
-- Arthur Rambo (email@example.com), July 21, 1998.
Funny you should ask. I received a note in my bank statement from the FDIC basically telling me that my accounts in the four different banks owned by my bank were only insured to 100,000. So if I had four different accounts in each of these banks, my total insurance is 100,000, not 400,000.
-- Amy Leone (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 22, 1998.
That is incorrect. You would be insured up to $100,000 in each of those four banks ($400,000) total. However, the FDIC insurance fund currently has a balance of approximately $28 billion. Since there are more than $3.65 trillion in FDIC-insured deposits in US banks, simple math will tell you that any significant bank runs which close banks will cause huge problems.
-- Nabi Davidson (email@example.com), July 22, 1998.
A clarification on your deposit insurance... You would only be insured to $100,000 if those four banks were BRANCHES of the main bank. But if they are separate banks owned by another bank, your insurance is still $100,000 per bank.
In some cases, branches of a bank are named differently than the main bank for business purposes. But if that is the case, they are required to disclose to the customers that they are branches of the main bank. Customers have to be made aware of the insurance limitation in that instance.
-- Nabi Davidson (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 22, 1998.
for your information regarding the teller's question... according to banking laws and regulations, tellers are required to report ALL suspicious transactions of any amount on a special form to the IRS. failure to do so results in a very large fine and jail time. the limit of $10k on a cash transaction has NOTHING to do with a "suspicious" transaction. upon hearing your request for all "small bills" the teller probably concluded that the transaction was suspicous and she went into her government informant role as required. your comments on the use of funds will appear on the government report. your transaction is probably on its way to IRS for review. IRS uses a new huge computer system called FenCen to then lookup all your accounts and transactions denominated in dollars anywhere in the world to see if similar tranactions have occured. if so, they move on to the alphabet police for action and further investigation.
the computers are still working now, no matter what may happen in 2k. one might do well to know the laws and caution that they stay well within them or y2k may be their least concern.
from a concerned fellow y2k alarmist.
-- anon (email@example.com), July 22, 1998.
So that's the reason that some have advised tapping the ATM for smaller amounts over a period of time? Avoid the teller?
-- Rocky Knolls (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 23, 1998.
avoiding a teller certainly will avoid a "suspicious transaction report". however, FinCen (supercomputer of supercomputers) monitors most (soon to be all) transactions in dollars WORLD WIDE and analyzes them for suspicious conditons according to a pre-set group of factors. if, for example, you were to attempt to pull out several installments of cash over a month or so totalling over $10k in an attempt to surcumvent the cash transaction report, FinCen may (translate that to WILL by the end of 1999) identify the transactions, put them together, read the information as warranting investigation and presto - alphabet soup. failure to file a CTR may result in a huge fine and 10 years of jail time, no matter how legally you earned your money and paid the taxes due. further, even suspicous activity is enough to confiscate your account and any accounts connected with the tranactions, with no due process of law and no habis corpus. your money is gone and good luck getting it back. the alphabet people require only suspicion of a crime, and you must prove otherwise, as well as meet a plethora of other requirements, and even then you may never see it. many who have had their $$ siezed, never see it again, and yet are never charged with any crime!
and we all supported these laws, or at least, never resisted the suspension of the constitution and bill of rights.
so beware out there. sometime y2k blinds us to reality. while preparing is the name of the game, failure to keep in mind that it is more likely than not that all our agencies we love so dearly will make it through this crisis in one form or another, and believing that it does not matter, could result in spending newyear's 1999-2000 in the pokey, or at the least, severely hampered in funds.
write enough laws, and there's always some that every person has violated. siezure and money laundering laws are not written to stop drug trafficing, they are written to keep track of taxpayers and their dollars, and make them very suceptible to any actions the alphabet gang want to take.
good luck all.
-- anon (email@example.com), July 23, 1998.
Hi All: What about recent bank mergers?? The bank I do business with just recently was bought out by another larger bank and they were experiencing problems in the transference of the business. Another bank in the area closed down. I only have about $2 to $3 in my savings account. Cyber
-- Carole Payne (CyberCybil@webtv.net), July 24, 1998.
Interesting stuff here. BTW, who or what is the 'alphabet' folks.
-- Doug Peterson (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 28, 1998.
Doug-- the "alphabet folks" are the various federal enforcement agencies, such as FBI, BATF, DEA, IRS, ETC, ETC, that collectively perform the functions that the KGB did for the USSR. One of their prime functions is to know as much about you as possible, in order to to dissuade you from acting in a manner which is contrary to the interests of "the powers that be". There are now at least 58 federal agencies that are authorized to use deady force in the performance of their duties... more coming (you wouldn't think the IRS would need shotguns, would you?). Big Brother is here, and getting bigger.
-- Justa Person (email@example.com), July 29, 1998.
For some further information on FinCEN:
FinCEN: Big Brother After All? Dec 1991 http://ftp.eff.org/pub/Crypto/Misc/cpsr_fincen_paper.txt
New Regulations to Fight Money Laundering..." Jul 1997 http://www.house.gov/banking/72997bac.htm
-- Max Dixon (Max.Dixon@gte.net), July 29, 1998.