Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
computer systems can't tell your race. If someone tried to cash a big check like that and didn't have the funds to cover it I would have been in big trouble had I done it. That would have to be ok'd by at least a manager or director.
I am unaware of any “ system” that would flag a check as fraudulent. The physical check might be declined because it appears fraudulent. Declining is not the same as calling the Police.
We DK who wrote the check, the bank the check was drawn on, the amount or how much cash back, if any, he wanted. Small branches often do not have a large amount of cash on hand. They don’t call the Police when that happens.
Settlement checks are rarely made out to the beneficiary, unless issued by a court. He used an employment attorney who likely worked on a contingency and gets paid first out of a settlement.
It is not uncommon for a bank to decline to give cash back on an uncleared check. When the happens the bank does not call the Police.
So you have no factual evidence that would have happened. Can you rule out simple incompetence, not race as the cause? No.
Unless there are other facts not presented, I see no race based discrimination here.
And at the end of it all the check was cashed, so what more is he entitiled to?
Nope. I am going to look at this based upon HISTORY and the HISTORY of how blacks have been perceived in this society. Just like actuaries determine risk based upon history......just like lending institutions determine risk based upon credit history.....I am using history to determine risk of an incident being racial.
When your teenage boy gets his drivers licence and you have to pay the elevated cost....is it based upon something he has actually done? What is it based upon? Where are the FACTS that says he will be a more risky driver? Where are the facts that say a person with bad credit will not pay back THIS particular loan on time?
It can NEVER be proven that race had anything to do with this, short of being able to read minds. However, given history and given modern perceptions of black men as criminal.....which we read about ALL THE DAM TIME on C-D, it stands to reason that this was motivated partly by race. We can read daily on C-D people pointing out black crime and how blacks are more criminal than whites. Yet, when an incident like this happens and someone suggest that they seen the black person as a criminal.....you then cry foul and that there is no evidence of it. The evidence is that in America people see blacks as criminals.
I am unaware of any “ system” that would flag a check as fraudulent. The physical check might be declined because it appears fraudulent. Declining is not the same as calling the Police.
We DK who wrote the check, the bank the check was drawn on, the amount or how much cash back, if any, he wanted. Small branches often do not have a large amount of cash on hand. They don’t call the Police when that happens.
Settlement checks are rarely made out to the beneficiary, unless issued by a court. He used an employment attorney who likely worked on a contingency and gets paid first out of a settlement.
It is not uncommon for a bank to decline to give cash back on an uncleared check. When the happens the bank does not call the Police.
Looks like we do not have enough information.
If you only Knew the history of Livonia, Michigan.
1. deposit a large check without a decent explanation
2. Check amount (very likely) well in excess of bank balance
2. get cash from that check at the same time
are all indicators of fraud, though #3 is the main one.
We're basically hearing his side of the story, yes? His and his attorney's, who got on a phone call - though it does sound like she emailed over more documentation. There's mention that the Bank's computer system kicked the check out, seemingly since they would only expect payroll checks from Enterprise.
I have numerous times deposited checks > $100K on behalf of clients in their account. I always take paperwork, and they want my ID information. And most times, a manager comes over to weigh in. And they always tell me the funds won't be available for up to 7 days. THAT is the normal fraud detection sequence.
If I walk into my bank that I've been at 20 years, to the branch I use where they know me, with a check in excess of $10K, they're not flat handing me $10K in cash - even though I have more than that on deposit. And even if I just deposit that big check, they're still going to tell me it might be up to 7 days before it clears. Again, that's the fraud prevention system.
It's entirely possible - though unstated - that Chase cleared the check so quickly because it was drawn on a Chase account. And it's also possible/likely when he went to Chase, he had all the documentation his attorney sent over.
Like he said....if it had been a white man.....there is the difference. Black people do not get the benefit of the doubt to the degree whites do.
Today, in my opinion, racism comes out when people feel they have justification as a cover, because no one wants to appear racist to themselves or to others. This has been demonstrated in social experiments where a black person and white person are set up to commit the same seemingly "wrong" act. The black person gets treated a lot differently than the white person for the same act. The white person is given the benefit of the doubt (of not doing anything wrong)....the black person is assumed guilty. Again, the "wrongful" act provides "cover" from the claim of a racist motive. The racism is only exposed when a white person commits a similar...but gets a different reaction. How often do you get the chance to see a white person present the same scenario? Almost NEVER....so you can't see the inherent racism of it.
computer systems can't tell your race. If someone tried to cash a big check like that and didn't have the funds to cover it I would have been in big trouble had I done it. That would have to be ok'd by at least a manager or director.
I can think of reasons why his ability to get immediate cash back might have been declined. I don’t track why the bank called the Police
1. deposit a large check without a decent explanation
2. Check amount (very likely) well in excess of bank balance
2. get cash from that check at the same time
are all indicators of fraud, though #3 is the main one.
We're basically hearing his side of the story, yes? His and his attorney's, who got on a phone call - though it does sound like she emailed over more documentation. There's mention that the Bank's computer system kicked the check out, seemingly since they would only expect payroll checks from Enterprise.
I have numerous times deposited checks > $100K on behalf of clients in their account. I always take paperwork, and they want my ID information. And most times, a manager comes over to weigh in. And they always tell me the funds won't be available for up to 7 days. THAT is the normal fraud detection sequence.
If I walk into my bank that I've been at 20 years, to the branch I use where they know me, with a check in excess of $10K, they're not flat handing me $10K in cash - even though I have more than that on deposit. And even if I just deposit that big check, they're still going to tell me it might be up to 7 days before it clears. Again, that's the fraud prevention system.
It's entirely possible - though unstated - that Chase cleared the check so quickly because it was drawn on a Chase account. And it's also possible/likely when he went to Chase, he had all the documentation his attorney sent over.
Indicators of fraud is not the same as being actual fraud. Indicators of racism is not the same thing as actual racism. To the bank it looked like fraud, based upon historical indicators. To the customer it looked like racism based upon historical indicators of racism. What we KNOW....is that the check was legit...and not fraud. That has been proven. What we don't know is if it was racially motivated. That can NEVER be proven. However, the edge goes to the customer because he was legit.
If you are going to have fraud prevention indicators.....you BEST make sure they are full proof. It seems as if they went to the extreme by calling the police...instead of going to the extreme to seek verification of the check. Those were the two extremes the bank had as options and the one they choose is why this is being seen as racism.
I can think of reasons why his ability to get immediate cash back might have been declined. I don’t track why the bank called the Police
I've called SDPD before when customer made a stink and refused to leave. Tellers don't make enough to put up with threats. Some of the rudest people at the bank I used to work at were the wealthy ones. I've had some really drunk ones too. No thanks, let the PD deal with em.
One guy said we emptied his safety deposit box even though there was record of him doing it. Loony tune.
I can think of reasons why his ability to get immediate cash back might have been declined. I don’t track why the bank called the Police
Because you don't know the whole story, which as Frank points out, there is much more to.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
