Bank of America Credit Card Customer Service Rip Off!!!!

In September (2008) My husband and I were forced to take out another credit card to pay for our 1 month old sons funeral. He passed away from a horrible and painful disorder called CDH, he never even got to come home. Well because of him being in the Nicu my husband used FMLA to be with him as much as he could. We did not get paid for half of August and half of September. We then had to use the card to pay some bills, since we had no income for a whole month. We THOUGHT the card was no interest for a year, Thats what we applied for when they sent us the offer, but they gave us a different one instead I guess. Well we were close to the limit and the lovely finance charge came, and that put us over the limit and a fee was assessed. I called the company and got a real nice lady and she explained to me how to not let it happen again, I just had to make a payment of $100 within a week. I made $125, that way we would be ok. Well I logged onto my account and saw yet another over limit fee, for no reason, I was nowhere near over limit. So I called and got some Asshole (supposed Manager) and he told me that when your card goes over you have 20 days to fix it, I called on the 21 day. You see if you dont fix it in 20 days they charge you again. Well when I called the first time they did not tell me this. Had I not made that extra $25 on my payment we would be in a downward spiral of over limit fees. The 2nd "customer service" (I use that term lightly) agent could care less and said that they already gave me back one of the fees so they will not do it again, even when it is their fault for not telling me all of this info. If they would have given us the card they offered, the one we signed up for this never would have happened. I have a few credit cards and thought HSBC was horrible, think again, at least they work with you a little bit (besides that credit protection they keep "forgetting" to take off, but don't forget to charge us for) We have great credit but I am willing to hurt it a little by canceling my account with them. Horrible, Horrible customer service, if you can even call it that.

Comment On This

Online exposes happen for a reason. When they're, or you're, in the spotlight they're, or you're, subject to the brightest lights. You may not like my exposes, which is your right. You may think it's NOT your or anyone else�s business, which is your right. If I find that it is MY business, I can read about it and write about it. That's my right and my freedom.

Everyday consumers of goods and services now have the Internet to describe their experiences with businesses and those businesses� employees. Government executives, administrators and all government employees, businesses, both non-profit and profit, legal and not legal, and every single one of their owners and employees, and all religious participants are ever increasingly more vulnerable to exposure, and accountability. Consumers have become bolder that their payment means total accountability for what consumers paid for. Consumers are less likely to keep to their place, do as they�re told and keep their opinions to themselves. Today�s governments, businesses or religions that dismiss or ignore consumers do so at their own risk. The Internet is free at public libraries, free at many businesses and free to anyone that wants to crawl on to it from a nearby wireless connection. Consumers of these goods and services more often than not relate bad experiences over good experiences. Exercising their freedom of speech rights where legal and illegal in other countries, they not only spell out and link the offending business� name and location, but also the offending employees and/or owner�s names and locations. They spell out in great detail, and link with supporting documentation, their complaints. I am glad to see �Gone are the days where settings from Auschwitz to Abu Ghraib contaminated in isolation both superiors and subordinates.� I am glad �the Internet is real-time exposure forcing attention, and repercussions.� I am glad �The result has been an increase in holding others accountable, just saying no and exposes.� Governments, schools, teachers, businesses, attorneys, judges, Realtors, home loan lenders, doctors, mechanics, hospitals, religions, etc. should be �relentlessly interviewed, closely monitored, increasingly resisted, and constantly scrutinized.� �Online exposes and nastiness� happen for a reason. Reasons like bad customer service or injustice. �As the realization sinks in that the Internet is also a real time conduit of ones� reputation,� customer service will be deliberately forced to get only better. I have come to the recent conclusion that the Internet has made the Better Business Bureau a dinosaur. The BBB does not publish what the complaint is, and without that, the complaint is useless. Complaints made to the BBB about businesses not providing goods and services as advertised or legally required, bar associations about lawyers lying and taking client�s money but not doing what they were paid to do, Realtor associations about Realtors clearly violating written ethics rules, ethics committees, commissions, etc. should not be private. Instead, all should be public. That�s another reason why there is an increase on the Internet of complaints and exposes. Too often, ranks have closed in around an offending member and protected them rather than hold them accountable. Or worse, the accused makes threats against the complaintant and witnesses, or bribes are offered by the accused and accepted by the investigator(s), prosecutors and/or judges, and editors. The Internet is the medium to not only expose the offending member, but also these cover ups by those paid to investigate, judge and punish offenders. Public records are public to protect the public. That�s why our publicly elected officials voting records are public. That�s why publicly elected officials can only have public meetings �putting their opinions and conclusions easily available to everyone.� That�s why all complaints, investigations and outcomes should be public. As MadMax wrote, �Remember, we have a legal system, not a justice system.� HOWEVER, "Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it." John Adams, (2nd President of the United States of America), 1776 (Thoughts on Government) FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO ANONYMOUS FREE SPEECH The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly that the right to anonymous free speech is protected by the First Amendment. A much-cited 1995 Supreme Court ruling in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission reads: Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical, minority views . . . Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. . . . It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation . . . at the hand of an intolerant society. The tradition of anonymous speech is older than the United States. Founders Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote the Federalist Papers under the pseudonym "Publius," and "the Federal Farmer" spoke up in rebuttal. The US Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized rights to speak anonymously derived from the First Amendment. The right to anonymous speech is also protected well beyond the printed page. Thus, in 2002, the Supreme Court struck down a law requiring proselytizers to register their true names with the Mayor's office before going door-to-door. These long-standing rights to anonymity and the protections it affords are critically important for the Internet. As the Supreme Court has recognized, the Internet offers a new and powerful democratic forum in which anyone can become a "pamphleteer" or "a town crier with a voice that resonates farther than it could from any soapbox." On December 21, 2007, Superior Court Judge Terence Flynn granted EFF's motion to quash the Township's September 26th subpoena seeking the identity of the truthsquad and denied a motion by the township to authorize future subpoenas, finding that the subpoena amounted to "an unjust infringement on the blogger's First Amendment rights" and that the blogger "has a right not to be drawn into the litigation." Judge Flynn denied the motion for a protective order, finding that it was unnecessary at this time. More from Judge Flynn's ruling from the bench: "And I [...] recognize that there are First Amendment issues with regard to disputes with the past administration. And that anyone [...] has a right to make their feelings clear. And they have a right not to be intimidated by the issuance of discovery requests in order to shut them down. For that reason, in many ways, the authority cited by the intervenor is correct and accurate. And first of all the [...] blogger, if in fact it�s an individual person, and I�m assuming absent any evidence that it is another individual person, has a right not to be drawn into the litigation and forced to reveal identity or to impede on his or her First Amendment rights simply on a suspicion, however founded or unfounded, and I don�t believe that this suspicion is sufficiently founded at this point to determine that it is Mr. Moskovitz. That person should not be drawn into the litigation and forced to abide by the rules with regard to exchange of information that the parties have, as opposed to a third party. So the Court is satisfied that there is no authority under law for this particular subpoena to obtain this private information. To allow the subpoena would be undue and unjust infringement on the blogger�s First Amendment rights. There�s no factual basis at this point, other than a mere suspicion for the justification. And ultimately that even if the information were obtained, it would be so remote to the actual elements of this litigation that it would not be admissible under any circumstances." � First Cash v. John Doe � Manalapan v. Moskovitz New Jersey Township tries to unmask anonymous online critic.

Comment On This

It used to be that banks developed a relationship with their customers. After all, who wants to do business with a person or entity they cannot trust. One bad experience can chase away bad & good customers alike. Good trustworthy customer service can attract customers, while bad customer service can erase a customer's trust and then they flee to find another banking entity that they feel is going to be better.

I've recently found pervasively throughout Bank of America that phone reps. unintentionally, or intentionally, perpetuate confusion & misinformation & thus have seriously tainted my perception of trust in this Bank. Transferring customers calls all over to various "Bank of America representatives" who may be anywhere in the country or even in a call center elsewhere in the world does nothing to foster trust and accountability in this Bank. Many seem to be disinterested in providing any true assistance, others seem dead set to make customers miserable. It is truly unique to find someone by phone who sincerely seems to want to assist customers like me now. We (are?/were?) Premier Banking clients with BOA & our monthly statements still say so, but only by closer study of my online account information was I able to detect that Bank of America had begun charging a monthly maintenance fee on one of my accounts with them which started first of this year 2010. I called my local client manager's phone number on her business card (she's been assigned to me for years & I even got her set up for my own Mother's banking business). She's also our key Premier Banking contact & has always been very helpful in getting errors corrected when anything is wrong on any & all of our numerous accounts with Bank of America. The woman who answered my call was not her & was somewhere else in the world yet I don't know where. This woman said there is no more Premier Banking and that all customers affected were sent letters last year. Apparently neither my mother, nor I received any such letters yet everything else we do have in writing tends to contradict this unverifiable report of BOA's Premier Banking Group elimination. She said my client manager is still with the bank & the phone no. I called is still my former client manager's bank phone no., BUT she IS working elsewhere in the bank. We know our client manager personally & find it too hard to believe that she would not have written us personally to inform us of her role change and/or that Premier Banking was no more.

Now I realize when I look through all the disclaimers & disclosures on BOA's website that they retain & reserve the right to make changes, but isn't any customer of the bank entitled to be given written notice of major changes that affect them? If we have no personal client manager to hold accountable for assistance & are only left to resort to any faceless "rep" on the phone who may or may not be giving their true name or even telling us true information over the telephone, then my trust in BOA is severely compromised.

As a Bank of America stockholder and long-standing customer, I find this secretive & sudden depersonalization of its customers and employees to be a mistake. Changing the rules (as it appears they are) may be without impunity from current federal & state regulations; however, it may not be from many of its customers who are disillusioned & growing stronger in their lack of trust in this huge national institution.

Comment On This

I see I am not alone in my "dislike" of BOA. I (we) got an offer in the mail for 0% int for a year on a card that is serviced by BOA. We hadn't used this card for awhile (had paid it off) so I decided to transfer another card over. I have always made payments right on the CC site and never had a problem, however, all of a sudden my payments are rejecting for some unknown reason, so they proceeded to charge me fees for returned checks, fees for late payment, etc. I t doesn't end. When I contacted them they said there was a hold on my acct. NOT!!! I work at the bank, I would know if there was a hold on my acct. No one helps me to see WHY this is happening, I can't see my own information! I feel very helpless and now see why BOA is still in business, they steal from customers. They should be called Bank of Ripoffs! I learned a valuable lesson, I will NEVER deal with BOA again!!

Comment On This

First of all I want to say I'm sorry for your loss! I also agree that Bank of America is a complete ripoff! I received a notice in the mail of increase of percentage rate unless I contacted them. I called and was told if I didn't use the card that the percent would stay the same. I agreed and didn't use it. I donate to WWF (wild animals) monthly of only 10$ and forgot to switch it to another card. Once I got my statement I called WWF & had it taken off. I had called B of A & told them but they wouldn't do anything until it was posted. So upon calling the second time I got this complete jerk on the other end of the phone. Not only did he NOT change the percent like they had agreed too...but he decreased BOTH of my credit cards available money to only 200$ over the debt!!!! Causing it too look as if I had maxed out both cards!!! This decrease on one alone was over 10,000 of available credit. Now we all know what that does to your credit report. What really pisses me off is.. I never asked for that credit in the first place! One day you just get a letter in the mail stating they increased your amount of avail credit. Now it's hurting ME because they can't run a business! I've had that particular card for 10yrs+ (NBNA though before B of A took over) I was so mad it made me sick all night! I've NEVER been late on a payment & pay atleast 50-100$ over monthly payment. He asked my profession which is an RN..which means my job is very secure and for the most part untouched by this economy. I don't make a certain amount per paycheck & have overtime available. I immediately paid one down to less than half the next day & plan now to cancel the cards. I've got many years left to my life & will never use them again! AND I will be sure to inform others fo reasons to not use them! One family member of mine owns three businesses and took his money elsewhere a few years ago for all their non stop fees for this or that. I should of done so then! I also like how they make sure they take the bill out with the highest amount first & that puts a bunch of little ones behind just incase they bounce and then they can get multiple fees! You can transfer between accounts immediately...but if you transfer money to B of A cc it takes days to post...but of course it's taken out of your account immediately. So they are not paying you interest on that money & by taking days to post to cc we pay them interest!! It's all about them taking all they can!