#BankingWhileBlack: Bank employee calls police on black man trying to cash a check

TOP said:
Ten fraud arrests with the branch since July...Employees ' on high alert....this one overreacted in calling the police, but when they were unable to verify the check for such a large amount....
why not go to the bank who issued the check, if you don't have an account anywhere...?
Lots of missing info on the "event"...I bank there...metal detectors now...you can't just walk in any more... Things have changed for many reasons...just understand the process and avoid problems....
Click to expand...

Only the issuing bank would cash the check...
 
countryboy said:
Of course you do, libs always want to sue for every little thing. Yes, the guy was treated badly, so that means he should automatically sue? Also remember, this is Cleveland, there's a good chance whoever called the cops is black, and chances are the cops are black as well. Since the news stories don't mention the race of the bank employees, or the cops, that chance goes up exponentially. Libs always have to assume race is involved, probably because they can't imagine that everyone isn't as racist as they are. I bet there's more to this story.
Click to expand...

their color doesn't matter idiot

they are working for a bank who trained them


its called institutionalized racism asshole
 
Rune said:
Only the issuing bank would cash the check...
Click to expand...
Okk....so it was a Huntington check, and they were trying to‘ verify....
and could not?
again, this bank was on alert...the teller did overreact in calling the police...where was bank security. she should have touched base with a manager....Some details missing here?
(Our branch you have to be let in and out...I bet theirs is on order;)
 
A few questions.

1. Why didn't he cash the check at the bank where he has an account?
2. If he didn't have an account with a different bank why didn't he just open one there?
3. Did the guy get belligerent and cause a scene?

I have had banks refuse to cash government checks because I didn't have an account there.
 
Grumpy said:
A few questions.

1. Why didn't he cash the check at the bank where he has an account?
2. If he didn't have an account with a different bank why didn't he just open one there?
3. Did the guy get belligerent and cause a scene?

I have had banks refuse to cash government checks because I didn't have an account there.
Click to expand...
1. Why does he have to? He went to the bank the check was issued from
2. Why does he have to?
3. He left, went to his car, didn’t realize they’d called the police
 
Phantasmal said:
1. Why does he have to? He went to the bank the check was issued from
2. Why does he have to?
3. He left, went to his car, didn’t realize they’d called the police
Click to expand...

1. Because most banks charge a fee for cashing non customers checks.
2. To save the fee?
3. You didn't answer the question did he cause a scene?

I'm not saying the bank was right and didn't over react. But I am sure tellers deal with angry people both black and white every day and don't call 911. There must be more to the story. But like most liberals you hear one side and go off half cocked!
 
Grumpy said:
A few questions.

1. Why didn't he cash the check at the bank where he has an account?
2. If he didn't have an account with a different bank why didn't he just open one there?
3. Did the guy get belligerent and cause a scene?

I have had banks refuse to cash government checks because I didn't have an account there.
Click to expand...

1) He didn't have one.
2) He's 30 years old and, according to katzgar when the same question was asked, this was the first job he ever had. If he hadn't opened one by now, it's likely he didn't see a need to do so.
3) That information, either way, was conveniently left out.
 
Phantasmal said:
1. Why does he have to? He went to the bank the check was issued from
2. Why does he have to?
3. He left, went to his car, didn’t realize they’d called the police
Click to expand...

1) That doesn't obligate them to cash it when it can't be verified.
2) Perhaps to be able to cash checks without problems. He doesn't have to but it appears to me it would make good sense.
3) That's what is being claimed. The thing is the source is him.
 
Grumpy said:
1. Because most banks charge a fee for cashing non customers checks.
2. To save the fee?
3. You didn't answer the question did he cause a scene?

I'm not saying the bank was right and didn't over react. But I am sure tellers deal with angry people both black and white every day and don't call 911. There must be more to the story. But like most liberals you hear one side and go off half cocked!
Click to expand...

1) None are required to cash the check even on their bank and don't do so when a large amount can't be verified
2) To avoid future problems
3) That part was conveniently left out.
 
Grumpy said:
1. Because most banks charge a fee for cashing non customers checks.
2. To save the fee?
3. You didn't answer the question did he cause a scene?

I'm not saying the bank was right and didn't over react. But I am sure tellers deal with angry people both black and white every day and don't call 911. There must be more to the story. But like most liberals you hear one side and go off half cocked!
Click to expand...
Most banks charge fees for having a checking account unless you maintain an account.

Yhe story is the bank dealt with previous cases of fraud, so they automatically assumed this guy was guilty. There is nothing more to this story than a presumption of guilt.
 
Phantasmal said:
Most banks charge fees for having a checking account unless you maintain an account.

Yhe story is the bank dealt with previous cases of fraud, so they automatically assumed this guy was guilty. There is nothing more to this story than a presumption of guilt.
Click to expand...

It wasn't automatic at all. It was based on things in this situation similar to other situations where fraud had existed. Presumptions aren't automatic but are valid and are based on a probability. If likes something quacking like a duck, looking like a duck, and walking like a duck being called a duck.
 
Phantasmal said:
Most banks charge fees for having a checking account unless you maintain an account.

Yhe story is the bank dealt with previous cases of fraud, so they automatically assumed this guy was guilty. There is nothing more to this story than a presumption of guilt.
Click to expand...

Funny mine doesn't guess you don't know how to shop around.

No the story is did the guy cause a scene thus the 911 call? Most banks don't call the authorities unless they feel it's warranted. You are assuming the guy is telling exactly what happened, and I say let's hear the banks side of the story.
 
Phantasmal said:
Most banks charge fees for having a checking account unless you maintain an account.

Yhe story is the bank dealt with previous cases of fraud, so they automatically assumed this guy was guilty. There is nothing more to this story than a presumption of guilt.
Click to expand...
There's no no fee if you keep $300 in a savings account...Everyone should have one with that, right?...‘He could earn a couple of hundred bucks if he gets direct deposit...then he doesn't have ‘ to worry about going in to cash or deposit. Very convenient....‘.they'll help you budget, as well...most banks have great programs....
 
Grumpy said:
Funny mine doesn't guess you don't know how to shop around.

No the story is did the guy cause a scene thus the 911 call? Most banks don't call the authorities unless they feel it's warranted. You are assuming the guy is telling exactly what happened, and I say let's hear the banks side of the story.
Click to expand...

No one gives a fuck what You say.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top