Automatic Payment; Am I the last guy?

Well, the scenario you are worrying about, i.e. the bank taking your money without your authorization, is fraud no matter how it happens. The only difference between checks and electronic debits is how the institution gets the numbers that allow said transaction. I'd rather have it travel instantly in an encrypted transmission over a computer network than hang around for several days in the highly insecure US mail. Especially since that check is going to get scanned and those numbers entered into the same computer network once it arrives anyway.

I'm not worried about. I've never said I was. I simply pointed out the very significant difference between authorizing someone access to your account, and given them a payment.

It is not fraud at all for a person to take money out of an account they have legal access to and the legal right to make withdraws from. And that is what you've done when you give a person (and an incorporated bank is a legal person) access to your account through an automatic withdraw. You have made them a co-owner of the account. This is also why you cannot take them back off. You have to request them to remove themselves from your account.

You do not have this fascinating problem with stolen checks or automatic payments. In both these cases, the account is still exclusively yours.

friedgreencorrado wrote:

SVreX wrote:

friedgreencorrado wrote: I had a bad landlord once that wouldn't cash a check until three weeks after you'd written it. When I was broke, that was almost a guarantee that it was bouncy time.

With all due respect, the fact that you don't keep your checkbook balanced is not your landlord's fault.

You make a *very* valid point if someone is making a living wage, I just ask folks to remember that there are a lot of people who do not. Not so much in my case (my situation was due to high child support payments), but many of my neighbors then were in that boat through no fault of their own. BTW: I'm not angry you said it..again, it's a valid point.

I see no difference how much one makes.

Writing a check is an authorization to remove funds from my account. If the funds aren't there, it's my fault. If I don't balance my checkbook, I don't know how much is there to authorize.

I have had periods where I made a lot of money, and periods where I scraped by on almost nothing for a very long time. Made no difference as to whether or not I bounced checks.

I have had checks that did not clear for months. Still didn't bounce checks.

I know what my balance is, not what the bank says it is (which is not my balance, but my uncleared balance).

Once I've written the check, it is no longer in my balance, whether or not it has cleared.

If I have $100 in my account, and write 2 checks for $85, I am being careless, or dishonest. It is MY job to know the balance. There is no magic bank gnome that will show up to fill my account full of gold and shiny treasures.

It has nothing to do with a "living wage".

foxtrapper wrote: You have made them a co-owner of the account. This is also why you cannot take them back off. You have to request them to remove themselves from your account.

This is baloney. To make a debit, recurring or not, they still need some form of authorization from you, or it's fraud. Maybe that's an agreement to take out a set amount each month, maybe that's an agreement to take out a monthly balance or a minimum payment that is detailed on a statement that you receive before the debit. They don't just get carte blanche access to your money for whatever they want to use it for, that is ludicrous. YOU still have to initiate/authorize the transaction. If what you are saying is that YOU don't want to have to keep track of debits that YOU don't individually authorize, I understand that, but to assert that an automatic debit doesn't follow the same rules as any other transaction is wrong. Most of these arguments against automatic payments really boil down to "I don't trust myself to actually read my statements as they come in, and make sure I have enough money in my account when the debits occur".

Josh, you are right about the creditor being a co-owner is baloney.

However, every automatic authorization I've ever read is pretty broad. They do not generally require specific transaction by transaction individual authorizations. They are blanket authorizations that DO enable people to withdraw from your account at their will.

Obviously doing so in a manner that was not intended is fraud. But the automatic authorizations are usually quite broad in nature.

It's not co-ownership, but it is a pretty wide authorization.

There is a difference between automatic payments, and automatic draws. Automatic payments are when you authorize the bank to make certain payments out of your account for a specific amount for specific intervals. Automatic draws are giving another entity the right to initiate a draw.

For example, PayPal draw authorizations are quite broad. If you make a purchase and do not have funds in your PayPal account to cover them, they can remove the funds from your bank account at THEIR will. You do not initiate this draw. This is supposed to be for the amount of the overdraft. However, let's say there is a disagreement with a buyer on your EBay account. PayPal can withdraw the funds from your bank account to cover the amount of the discrepancy without your specific authorization (you have already given them a blanket authorization). If you are eventually found to be innocent, they will refund the money. But it might take a LONG time.

The bottom line is: READ THE FINE PRINT. There is no uniform format for draft authorizations, and you NEED to know what you are authorizing them to do.

Josh wrote: This is baloney. To make a debit, recurring or not, they still need some form of authorization from you, or it's fraud.

I never said otherwise. If you'd actually read what I'm writing, you'd see I said that several times now.

What you're not following, is the substantial legal difference betwen automatic withdraws, and automatic payments. It's been spelled out, you're just not reading it, or not understanding it when you do read it.

One more time:

Automatic payments have you in control.

Automatic withdraws have you giving control away.

SVreX wrote:

friedgreencorrado wrote:

SVreX wrote:

friedgreencorrado wrote: I had a bad landlord once that wouldn't cash a check until three weeks after you'd written it. When I was broke, that was almost a guarantee that it was bouncy time.

With all due respect, the fact that you don't keep your checkbook balanced is not your landlord's fault.

You make a *very* valid point if someone is making a living wage, I just ask folks to remember that there are a lot of people who do not. Not so much in my case (my situation was due to high child support payments), but many of my neighbors then were in that boat through no fault of their own. BTW: I'm not angry you said it..again, it's a valid point.

I see no difference how much one makes. Writing a check is an authorization to remove funds from my account. If the funds aren't there, it's my fault. If I don't balance my checkbook, I don't know how much is there to authorize. I have had periods where I made a lot of money, and periods where I scraped by on almost nothing for a very long time. Made no difference as to whether or not I bounced checks. I have had checks that did not clear for months. Still didn't bounce checks. I know what my balance is, not what the bank says it is (which is not my balance, but my uncleared balance). Once I've written the check, it is no longer in my balance, whether or not it has cleared. If I have $100 in my account, and write 2 checks for $85, I am being careless, or dishonest. It is MY job to know the balance. There is no magic bank gnome that will show up to fill my account full of gold and shiny treasures. It has nothing to do with a "living wage".

Never played the game of tracking balance and don't understand why anyone would unless very desperate. I write a check I consider the money gone, doesn't matter how long it takes for the check to clear. You wrote the check based on the money there and when you handed the check over the money should be considered gone. never bounced a check with this philosophy.

A couple years ago a motorcycle insurance policy lapsed for a month due to their changing their autopay setup. In MD, this resulted in a massive fine - like $800.

I changed insurers for the cars and bikes to ones which will auto-pay by credit card. I have every utility, magazine, club renewal - everything - on that card. It in turn auto-pays from my checking account and has for years. I've never had any issue. I never have a late payment, and I spend about zero time on it.