Direct depost coming my way in January...2 credit unions decline to open accounts

[logjam]

Greetings all,

I got the "letter" at work telling me MANDATORY direct deposit will begin on Jan 1, 2012.

I went to two different credit unions today, presented them with $8000 in paychecks with the 12usc411 non-endorsement on them, and was told they don't accept any restrictive endorsements on them. So, I left without joy... Well, that sucks!

A while back, someone posted on a GLP forum topic (I believe David contributed to that thread for a time) about sending the bank I already have an account with a notarized letter stating that "All withdrawals or deposits on account XXXXXXXXXX-XXXX are for credit on account or exchanged for lawful money in the form of Non-negotiable Federal Reserve Notes of face value" Then send it registered mail to the bank.

Will this work, or does the actual signature card need this verbiage as well?

Thanks!

[EZrhythm]

"It" doesn't work, each makes it work.

I would form it as a NOTICE,record a certified copy in the public and then send a certified copy. The court makes the record and the record makes the court. You are the court.

To make the declaration more impenetrable certify your statement under oath with a notary or witness placing a seal.

When you open an account look for the I-9 form that may be included in the wording of the account agreement. The I-9 section/form is for allowing the bank permission to share you account activities with the IRS. Wells Fargo tried tried to pull a fast one and get the account endorsements on the electronic pad but I insisted on signing a hard copy. They still tried to get me to sign electronically saying that they could print me a hard copy after I signed.

[logjam]

"It" doesn't work, each makes it work.

I would form it as a NOTICE,record a certified copy in the public and then send a certified copy. The court makes the record and the record makes the court. You are the court.

To make the declaration more impenetrable certify your statement under oath with a notary or witness placing a seal.

When you open an account look for the I-9 form that may be included in the wording of the account agreement. The I-9 section/form is for allowing the bank permission to share you account activities with the IRS. Wells Fargo tried tried to pull a fast one and get the account endorsements on the electronic pad but I insisted on signing a hard copy. They still tried to get me to sign electronically saying that they could print me a hard copy after I signed.

Thanks EZ. Yea they are sneaky that way. Is the I-9 a form that has to be filled out, or is it voluntary? Also, is it not the I-9 that makes one declare that they are US Citizens?

Banks are really fighting back it seems. They don't want to give up that precious ability to fractionally lend...

[Jethro]

I suspect "MANDATORY" does not really mean mandatory at all. If "direct deposit" wasn't a condition of being hired, it's likely an unenforceable condition to stay hired. If they fired you because of this matter, you'd likely have a rather nice lawsuit against them.

George Gordon once told of a similar story (if I can find the link to the audio, I'll post it) where a company "mandated" everyone move to direct deposit. One guy refused to do so. The company threatened over and over to terminate him by X date if he didn't go along. X date passed, and not only was he not fired, he still got his paycheck (or it may have been cash) -- he was the only one.

If it were me, I'd likely make a conditional offer something like: "I'd be happy to use direct deposit. However, YOU (company) must set up the DD account for me; and such account must be in in lawful money per 12 USC 411, or YOU assume full liability for the account. Deal?" Now they got a problem.

[shikamaru]

I suspect "MANDATORY" does not really mean mandatory at all. If "direct deposit" wasn't a condition of being hired, it's likely an unenforceable condition to stay hired. If they fired you because of this matter, you'd likely have a rather nice lawsuit against them.

George Gordon once told of a similar story (if I can find the link to the audio, I'll post it) where a company "mandated" everyone move to direct deposit. One guy refused to do so. The company threatened over and over to terminate him by X date if he didn't go along. X date passed, and not only was he not fired, he still got his paycheck (or it may have been cash) -- he was the only one.

If it were me, I'd likely make a conditional offer something like: "I'd be happy to use direct deposit. However, YOU (company) must set up the DD account for me; and such account must be in in lawful money per 12 USC 411, or YOU assume full liability for the account. Deal?" Now they got a problem.

I remember that broadcast. That was awesome.
I can't recall which one it was either.
Was it you can beat city hall?

[logjam]

Well looky what I just found...

Payment must be made in cash, by check, or direct deposit if the employee chooses, and, in limited circumstances, by payroll debit cards. The law prohibits employers from making deductions, other than for taxes or other items required by law such as garnishments, without first securing the employee's written authorization to do so. Even with written permission, employees cannot be required to forfeit their wages for shortages, errors, damages, etc. Employers can be assessed a $1,000 penalty per violation or face criminal charges for intentionally and willfully violating this law.

I am thinking about drafting an affidavit stating first, that direct deposit was offered as an option when I was hired, NOT as a condition of employment. Do ex-post facto laws apply in situations such as this?

Then quote the law as seen above. (My employer is county govt. Don't they have to abide by state laws, which have superior jurisdiction?) The last time (quite a while ago) they tried to get me to switch to DD, they sicked one of the directors on me. I held my ground, but definitely didn't make friends doing it. What recourse would I have if they pursue harassing me on this?

This is starting to be fun... now that I think I have the upper hand.

BTW, I too remember that George Gordon podcast... need to go searching for it.

Thanks all.

Here it is: http://library.georgegordon.com/node/1540

[David Merrill]

"It" doesn't work, each makes it work.

I would form it as a NOTICE,record a certified copy in the public and then send a certified copy. The court makes the record and the record makes the court. You are the court.

To make the declaration more impenetrable certify your statement under oath with a notary or witness placing a seal.

When you open an account look for the I-9 form that may be included in the wording of the account agreement. The I-9 section/form is for allowing the bank permission to share you account activities with the IRS. Wells Fargo tried tried to pull a fast one and get the account endorsements on the electronic pad but I insisted on signing a hard copy. They still tried to get me to sign electronically saying that they could print me a hard copy after I signed.

Thank you EZ;


I was thinking of forming an identical suggestion. In general publish your demand for lawful money pursuant to... at the county clerk and recorder. Whenever applicable grab a certified copy for a couple bucks and send it to a banking institution. Use either Registered Mail and an evidence repository ($39 Miscellaneous Case file in the federal court) or maybe a professional process server. It is doubtful that they would close down your account since it is the only method of paying you and you have not broken any laws.

About your marked checks. You can simply strike through the demand. Use a single strikethrough and be careful to get before and after copies. Now you have both evidence of your demand and evidence that the institution is coercing you to endorse private credit from the Fed. I can imagine the only purpose is for a full refund of your withholdings, right? So you have the evidence of your demand. Do that every paycheck and show your blanket demand and its proof of service on your electronic bank when you file your 1040.



Regards,

David Merrill.



P.S. The option of payroll debit cards sounds good.

[logjam]

P.S. The option of payroll debit cards sounds good.

David, how would one redeem lawful money from a payroll debit card?

I've seen your threads re: Paypal, but would a payroll dc be issued by my employer, or is it something I must acquire and give them permission to deposit funds into? I realize you don't know, I was just thinking out loud.

Thanks.

[David Merrill]

I am presuming the conditions are like a suitor who works for WalMart. So that is the model I am working from.

It is about record-forming with the account authorization. WalMart has its own debit card. The employee gets the same debit card as any WalMart debit card and the paycheck amounts get put on the debit card. I am presuming that the debit card from your employer is with a name bank.

You would publish a general demand at the county clerk and recorder. Serve it on the bank.

The debit card is not a credit card, refer to the PayPal and other related threads.

This is an interesting endeavor in record-forming though. Maybe we should sit down?

[logjam]

Update as of 10/27...

Decided to try my luck with another bank. This time, I did not tell them of my intentions... just listened politely as the Bank officer told me all about the features, overdraft protection, etc.
It was for a non-interest bearing checking account. I handed her the state-issued DL, and a $50FRN to open the account with.
After her tap tap tapping on her keyboard for quite a while, she finally handed me the "signature card" which is actually an 8.5x11 piece of paper. She indicated where I was to sign. I thoroughly read it through, then did some changes.
First, I crossed through U.S. Citizen, and wrote "man" in its place. Then in the section called "Other Terms/Information", I wrote "On all transactions, demand is made for lawful money per 12USC411", and signed with Without Prejudice above my name.

Great I thought! They didn't even question it.

About 15 minutes later and 12 miles down the road I get a call from the branch manager telling me that he checked with "Legal" and this is not allowed. I asked him if he was aware that Title 12 is US law, but he didn't want to hear it. He said to come in and change it, or they will have to cancel the account.

Can they do this once they've accepted a cash deposit?

What other recourse do we have? It seems banks are catching on to this, and want no part of it. If this is written into the US code and pertains to Federal Reserve Banks and branches, how can they ignore this law?

Anyone?

Thanks.

[motla68]

Update as of 10/27...

Decided to try my luck with another bank. This time, I did not tell them of my intentions... just listened politely as the Bank officer told me all about the features, overdraft protection, etc.
It was for a non-interest bearing checking account. I handed her the state-issued DL, and a $50FRN to open the account with.
After her tap tap tapping on her keyboard for quite a while, she finally handed me the "signature card" which is actually an 8.5x11 piece of paper. She indicated where I was to sign. I thoroughly read it through, then did some changes.
First, I crossed through U.S. Citizen, and wrote "man" in its place. Then in the section called "Other Terms/Information", I wrote "On all transactions, demand is made for lawful money per 12USC411", and signed with Without Prejudice above my name.

Great I thought! They didn't even question it.

About 15 minutes later and 12 miles down the road I get a call from the branch manager telling me that he checked with "Legal" and this is not allowed. I asked him if he was aware that Title 12 is US law, but he didn't want to hear it. He said to come in and change it, or they will have to cancel the account.

Can they do this once they've accepted a cash deposit?

What other recourse do we have? It seems banks are catching on to this, and want no part of it. If this is written into the US code and pertains to Federal Reserve Banks and branches, how can they ignore this law?

Anyone?

Thanks.

Hey logjam, just my 2 cents based upon experience, they do not like restrictive endorsements because certain ones limit their ability on the fractional reserve banking side to negotiate transactions at different rates.
If you can get a hold of a regular bank check from an account if you have an old one laying around, use a high powered magnifying glass on the signature line, it will say something like " Authorized Signature " . amazing how small it can be and still be legal. The other thing is that you do not need to be so elaborate in the lawful money statement, just simply put " 12 usc 411 - lawful money " and do it real small right below your signature, not just on the signature card but for all checks deposited, that way they cannot try to weasel out of a transaction and yet gets stream lined past most tellers, have had lots of success doing it this way. The only time i had a problem is before i started doing that was writing it real big to make it very obvious and in that case all i did was go to a different branch of the same bank and it was accepted.

good luck in your journey.

[logjam]

Thanks Motla.

I actually mused how it would be nice to have a stamp that is so microscopic, they wouldn't see it once it was stamped on their paperwork. Turn their trickery back on themselves!

It just really pisses me off how their "legal" dept. always deny changes to their precious signature card.

What stuck me was that the only sigNATURE on it was mine. No bank officer signature, none.

So then, can this still be considered to be a contract? What do you think would have happened if I asked the bank officer to sign it as well? hmmmm....

It looks like the banks and corporations are in collusion with one another, quietly corralling people into a direct deposit system, thereby removing the ability of one to non-endorse. They are a crafty bunch!

I have yet to use my trump card against my employer (pointing out the state law to them) and am reluctant to do so, but that may be my only recourse.

grrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!

[shikamaru]

What stuck me was that the only sigNATURE on it was mine. No bank officer signature, none.

So then, can this still be considered to be a contract? What do you think would have happened if I asked the bank officer to sign it as well? hmmmm....

It's called an adhesion contract or contract of adhesion.

A standard form contract (sometimes referred to as an adhesion or boilerplate contract) is a contract between two parties where the terms and conditions of the contract are set by one of the parties, and the other party is placed in a "take it or leave it" position with little or no ability to negotiate terms more favorable to it.

Examples of standard form contracts are insurance policies (where the insurer decides what it will and will not insure, and the language of the contract) and contracts with government agencies (where certain clauses must be included by law or regulation).

While these types of contracts, in and of themselves, are not illegal per se, there exists a very real possibility for unconscionability.

Courtesy of Roman Civil Law. Isn't that special?
Perfectly legal or not illegal. That's why corporations present them to customers.

You may want to read Ancient Law by Henry James Sumner Maine.

According to Maine, society has been a progression from "status to contract".

What I want to draw attention to here is your right to contract.
We want to wield this power without injuring ourselves or agreeing to terms and conditions which are prejudicial against our rights or position.

[motla68]

Thanks Motla.

I actually mused how it would be nice to have a stamp that is so microscopic, they wouldn't see it once it was stamped on their paperwork. Turn their trickery back on themselves!

It just really pisses me off how their "legal" dept. always deny changes to their precious signature card.

What stuck me was that the only sigNATURE on it was mine. No bank officer signature, none.

So then, can this still be considered to be a contract? What do you think would have happened if I asked the bank officer to sign it as well? hmmmm....

It looks like the banks and corporations are in collusion with one another, quietly corralling people into a direct deposit system, thereby removing the ability of one to non-endorse. They are a crafty bunch!

I have yet to use my trump card against my employer (pointing out the state law to them) and am reluctant to do so, but that may be my only recourse.

grrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!

If you use some thinking here on approach it is a negotiable contract thing, not a us is against them thing, got to get that patriot indoctrination out of your head so you can go in with a clear mind. One bank that had refused I had requested to speak with the bank manager, politely asked according to their banking policy what qualifies as a restrictive endorsement from what the teller told me, he explained and the way he did is about how some of you all out there are so wordy when doing these things so this is how the simplification came about. You do not have to be a historical genius of banking transactions to get the job done, each situation has it's own unique experience it does not accomplish anything for bringing prejudice to all banks for what one or two does.

Please do not consider this as me singling you out or me being some kind of hard ass, but you wrote " without prejudice " on the signature card, the first sign of adversity then the thought was of prejudice... frustration, the bank officer could have been new or any other reasons, please do correct me if i am wrong here, but this is what I mean by approaching things with a clear mind, attract more positive energy by correcting the mistake and gain more probability of things going in your favor in the end. Save yourself from countless hours of historical research on the 101 ways of banking contracts unless that really interests you.

[dmk]

Direct Deposits and Signature Card Response

Wow very good discussion.
logjam: did you get a response on what to do on your signature card?
I am not with a big 4 bank but next tier and they are not listening either.
What to do? checks with statement still okay and are they being excepted? My fear though is with wire transfers: business to business or personal accounts; keep to small amounts?
Are smaller regional banks better? or keep looking until I find one that will accept?
Thanks everyone.
D