There have been cases where a third party deposits money into an account to create a false relationship with someone to cause legal problems.

Also, when a deposit is done, no balance information can be given to the depositor without proper identification that shows that there is an account relationship.

These cases are generally avoided with a simple sign that states the policy of the Credit Union. I think most would agree that todays tellers do not understand banking laws, cannot figure compound interest and have barely acceptable social skills.

My Mom has a checking account and I'm on it as well . The other day she lost her Debit Card . I went to the bank to tell them to kill that card and reissue her another . To start with , the bank can't do anything . You have to call the card services people AND they would not take any action without talking to her . " But I'm on the account " . Nope . Doesn't matter that I could write a check and clean out her account , but by God I won't cancel her Debit Card in an emergency .

quote:

Originally posted by SigSAC:

Also, when a deposit is done, no balance information can be given to the depositor without proper identification that shows that there is an account relationship.

Ding ding ding! We have a winner.

This happened to me and this is the explanation I got. And it actually make perfect sense. Furthermore, If your teller isn't doing this they are not properly protecting your account, and almost certainly violating policy and maybe even banking regulations.

quote:

Originally posted by cparktd:

quote:

Originally posted by SigSAC:

Also, when a deposit is done, no balance information can be given to the depositor without proper identification that shows that there is an account relationship.

Ding ding ding! We have a winner.

Nope. DEFINITELY NOT the reason at my credit union. The deposit receipt just shows the amount of the deposit. No new information here, the customer already knows the amount of the deposit, since s/he is making the deposit.

If you want balance information, that is a separate request, and that is not given unless either a) the teller knows you, or b) you show ID.

Maybe the teller is flirting with you and checking to see if you live in good neighborhood.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
Maybe the teller is flirting with you and checking to see if you live in good neighborhood.

Right. Good looking young teller flirting with 81 year old Geezer. It happens to me every day.

quote:

Originally posted by DSgrouse:
V-tail,
The biggest focus for banks right in transaction reporting is AML, in that, the primary concern is human trafficking. Human trafficking is third behind drugs and illegal arms sales in the world. It is an estimated 150 billion a year. What it leads in is sophistication of how it is transacted. Banks and law enforcement are finding that by monitoring bank transactions for required reporting they can compile the data and trace trafficking. Human trafficking uses small deposits, withdrawls that add up to large sums. They are using fake buisness accounts, or simply piggybacking on active buisness via employees. IE employee is a runner for x trafficker,
traficker sells girl for 90 bucks (average in the world),
He has runner two buy 90 dollar item from store.
Runner 2 returns it later that day/week for cash.
runner 1 does the return. (this is a over simplification, but here is another.)

Bad dude sells 30k of ladies/kids in a month. He needs to launder the money.

Not to get too far off topic:

Sex trafficking is overstated by a factor of 100. As in, out of 200 arrests of sex workers, less than two are actually trafficked
by being unwilling/underage, the rest are doing it voluntarily. Almost all actual human trafficking in the US is farm workers, which is completely ignored by the government.

Well it has come to my bank. At least I got an email detailing the policy with NO explanation of the reason. ONLY account holders will be allowed to make cash deposits and ID will be required to make the deposit. In the meantime stuff like this goes on with no trouble:

16 indicted in North Shore bogus check cashing ring called 'BME Mafia'

LINK:http://www.nola.com/northshore/index.ssf/2018/04/north_shore_da_announces_indic.html

By NOLA.com
The Times-Picayune

Story by Robert Rhoden and Bob Warren

Sixteen people have been indicted in connection with a counterfeit check-cashing operation headed by a Slidell rapper and dubbed the "BME Mafia," St. Tammany Parish authorities announced Friday (April 27) during a news conference in Covington.

Dozens of additional suspects are being sought in the case, which was the result of a one-year investigation spearheaded by Slidell police.

The alleged ringleader, Willie Mack Cauley, 40, of Slidell, is charged with one count of racketeering and 89 counts of bank fraud, North Shore District Attorney Warren Montgomery said. He is being held in jail in lieu of $1 million bond.

Cauley, who runs a company called BlakMaze Entertainment, moved to St. Tammany in August 2016 after the Baton Rouge floods, according to authorities.

Between January and August 2017, the ring sought to defraud several banks, individuals, businesses and government agencies, including the St. Tammany Parish Sheriff's Office, East Baton Rouge Parish Sheriff's Office, Ross Dress for Less and Rack Room Shoes, authorities said. During a three-month stretch, 89 checks totaling more than $140,000 were presented to various financial institutions, authorities said.

Authorities said they know of a least a dozen businesses affected by the alleged scheme.

The suspects called their scheme the "Nike game," referring to the sports company's swoosh logo that resembles a check, authorities said.

Cauley is accused of recruiting people to carry out a complex scheme. The ring included a group called "smurfs," who stole people's financial information and provided it to those who created the bogus checks, "recruiters" who would find people to cash the checks at banks and stores, and "mules" who would do the check cashing in exchange for $50 or $100 per check, authorities said.

"This is a very complex scheme," Montgomery said. "A scheme to defraud. A scheme, in essence, to steal from individuals.''

Slidell Detective Nick Burtanog, who headed the investigation with help from the St. Tammany Parish Sheriff's Office, district attorney's office, Louisiana State Police and U.S. Secret Service, said the ring had more than 100 people working in various roles.

At least 16 counterfeit checks totaling more than $30,000 were presented to the St. Tammany Sheriff's Office. Another 15 bogus checks totaling more than $15,000 went to other victims in St. Tammany and Washington parishes, the DA's office said. All loses were reimbursed by each bank, authorities said.

Responding to a question from a reporter, Burtanog explained how the counterfeiters were able to victimize the Sheriff's Office.

He said when inmates are released they are given a check for any money that might be left in their commissary accounts. Using the routing and account information on those checks, counterfeiters would make new, bogus checks that were then cashed at the various businesses and financial institutions.

Capt. Scott Lee, a St. Tammany Parish Sheriff's Office spokesman, said after the news conference that the Sheriff's Office has now gone to a debit card system to refund money left in prisoner commissary accounts.

"They're extremely difficult to counterfeit,'' Lee said.

Burtanog noted that the Sheriff's Office has a "positive pay system in place to protect the taxpayer dollars'' so the agency did not suffer a loss.

"Although the Sheriff's Office did not suffer any financial loss on behalf of the taxpayers, my staff has put additional controls in place to prevent future fraud attempts," St. Tammany Parish Sheriff Randy Smith said in a statement. "We would encourage all residents to keep a close watch on their personal and business accounts."

In addition to Cauley, the St. Tammany grand jury indicted the following suspects on April 20:

Teineka White, 43, of Sumter, S.C., racketeering and 24 counts of bank fraud. She is accused of accessing account information as a retail vendor for Bank of America and sending it to Cauley.
Kierra Dunbar, 20, of Slidell, racketeering and 21 counts of bank fraud. She allegedly took photos of legitimate customer checks at Ross Dress for Less and Rack Room Shoes, where she worked at the time, and provided the information to Cauley for counterfeiting purposes.
Victor Harris, 34, of Jacksonville, Fla., racketeering and 11 counts of bank fraud. He is accused of giving a legitimate check, drawn on the account of Diamond Sharp Contracting Group, to Cauley, who then made counterfeit copies.
Frederick Selders, 36, of Baton Rouge, racketeering and seven counts of bank fraud. He is accused of recruiting "mules" to cash the counterfeit checks and share in the profits.
Kelvin Carter, 25, of Gonzales, racketeering and nine counts of bank fraud. He is accused of being a recruiter.
Marcus Nalls, 27, of Baton Rouge, accused recruiter, racketeering and five counts of bank fraud.
Tasha Variste, 31, of Baton Rouge, accused recruiter, racketeering and four counts of bank fraud.
Jonquayle McCoy, 24, of Baton Rouge, accused recruiter, racketeering and three counts of bank fraud.
Larry Womack, 23, of Slidell, accused recruiter, racketeering and nine counts of bank fraud.
Jonathan White, 40, of Biloxi, Miss., accused recruiter, racketeering and eight counts of bank fraud.
Robert Hatch, 26, of Baton Rouge, accused recruiter, racketeering and one count of bank fraud.
Steven Stanley, 27, of Baton Rouge, accused recruiter, racketeering and five counts of bank fraud.
Loreal Dunbar, 33, of Baker, accused recruiter, racketeering and six counts of bank fraud.
Derrick Variste, 33, of Baton Rouge, accused recruiter, racketeering and 17 counts of bank fraud.
Dareyan Byrd, 39, of Dothan, Ala., accused recruiter; racketeering and two counts of bank fraud.
Montgomery said this type of case is typically handled by federal investigators, not state or parish agencies. "I'm not aware of this kind of case ever being brought in St. Tammany Parish,'' he said.

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
Well it has come to my bank. At least I got an email detailing the policy with NO explanation of the reason. ONLY account holders will be allowed to make cash deposits and ID will be required to make the deposit.

My guess: that is a safeguard against money laundering.

Note, you stated that policy is for cash deposits. I can sort of see that. Cash is not as easily traceable as checks.

In my case, referring back to the original post, where I opened this thread, my deposits into this account are always checks, always from hardware stores, Ace Hardware, True Value Hardware, and a couple of little hole-in-the-wall local hardware stores that are not affiliated with any of the nationals. These are the same type checks, from the same customers, going into the same account at the same credit union, for nearly twenty years. I'm the same person. The only variable, the only thing that changes, is the cashiers.

Some of the cashiers just take the deposit and give me a receipt. Others will ask for ID. No rhyme nor rhythm, no pattern re whether the cashiers know me, whether they're new at the branch or are old-timers, it just seems to be totally random. Each time that I am asked for ID I reiterate my position: If somebody wants to take money out of the account, by all means, identify that person three ways from Sunday! On the other hand, if somebody shows up with checks payable to the business and is making a straight deposit -- no cash back, no problem solving, no discussion, no request for balance information, just a straight deposit, then just take the damned checks and deposit them to the account. I don't care if the person making the deposit is wearing a pink bunny suit and farting to the tune of "Happy Birthday," just process the deposit. I am adamant about that, and when pushed, I will tell the cashier to get the branch manager, right now. I get the roll-eyes, and the checks get deposited without me producing ID.

My position on this: We are talking about a business account. I have the option of sending the deposit over with a messenger, with somebody who works for me, but whose name does not appear on any account documents. Mine is a small operation, there is no such thing as "employee ID," so if it is somebody other than me making the deposit, the person's ID is meaningless and irrelevant. What is the branch going to do? Refuse the deposit? Nope, that ain't gonna fly.

Taking it a step further: the branch has a Night Deposit slot. Everything that is dropped in that slot is processed with no question. No ID of course, because there is no face-to-face contact. This is just plain inconsistent.

quote:

My position on this: We are talking about a business account. I have the option of sending the deposit over with a messenger, with somebody who works for me, but whose name does not appear on any account documents. Mine is a small operation, there is no such thing as "employee ID," so if it is somebody other than me making the deposit, the person's ID is meaningless and irrelevant. What is the branch going to do? Refuse the deposit? Nope, that ain't gonna fly.

quote:

My position on this: We are talking about a business account. I have the option of sending the deposit over with a messenger, with somebody who works for me, but whose name does not appear on any account documents. Mine is a small operation, there is no such thing as "employee ID," so if it is somebody other than me making the deposit, the person's ID is meaningless and irrelevant. What is the branch going to do? Refuse the deposit? Nope, that ain't gonna fly.

I have a business account as well with a different bank. I would ask for a meeting with the branch manager and ask that the policy be waived or I would move my account. My wife moved our account years ago when she went to make deposits during the lunch hour and they did not have sufficient tellers to quickly process the transaction. I have had several issues over the years and all have been resolved with the various branch managers. At one point they were charging me thirty dollars for returned checks in addition to debiting the amount. I was successful in getting those charges reversed.

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
I would ask for a meeting with the branch manager and ask that the policy be waived

Policy? What policy? We don' have no steenkin' policy!

And therein likes the problem. It seems that cashiers are randomly pulling this out of their asses.

When I ask "Why?" I am told, "so we know who you are."

My response: "What difference does it make? Please just deposit the checks into the account."

I have asked them to SHOW me the "policy." Nope, there is nothing in writing.

"Well, we don't know how to address you."

My response, "It is not necessary to address me at all. I did not come here to have a conversation, nor to pass the time of day, nor to discuss the weather, especially while there are other people waiting to transact their business. Please just deposit the checks into the account so that I can move on and you can take care of the next person in line. If you feel that you MUST address me, 'sir' will be fine."

I have actually said that. I receive the stink-eye, the check(s) get deposited, and life goes on.

Ridiculous. Not even a hearty handclasp from the branch manager???

Wells Fargo has just announced the same policy - cash deposits only allowed by account owners or authorized signers. Anyone else can still deposit checks.

I know the original post was about being asked to present ID for depositing checks. I think we are going to see a trend towards validating who makes the deposits. If nothing else, this may push more people to using electronic deposits by validating the user who is logged in to the system.

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:
I stopped in to deposit some checks from my customers today. Not real big checks, they were in the hundreds of dollars, not thousands.

Cashier wanted to see ID. Not the first time this has happened. We had a little discussion. As in, "This is a business account. What if I send one of my employees, or a messenger, whose name is not on the account, to make the deposit. ID would prove nothing. Would you refuse the deposit?"

She gave me a blank look. I asked her to call the branch manager over, and I suggested that if I wanted to take money OUT of the account, or if I were asking for cash back on the deposit, verification of ID might be appropriate. However, this was a straight deposit. Money in. No money out. No cash back. No discussion. No problem solving. Just take the checks and post them to the account. If a midget in a pink bunny suit wants to put money in my account, just take it, no questions asked. Capisce?

The amounts of the checks all from my customers (Ace Hardware stores) were, as I mentioned, modest. Not even in the ballpark to trigger money laundering concerns. No reason for the cashier to ask for ID. None at all.

It is interesting isn't it?

For the past 2 years, with all the impending nonsense I have dealt with personally, I have actually "cashed" lots of checks, instead of depositing them. As in, they were payroll checks that went through the IRS, and all applicalbe payroll taxes were taken out, and any other legal mumbo jumbo. EVERYTHING was on the up and up...

But, after a few years of cashing them, and keeping the cash in my safe, i was left in the dark with what to do with it.

Now that all the bullshit was over, I had to put it back in the bank.

So I went in to deposit it.


First, I went in to deposit 2k. THey gave me the 3rd degree and I asked as you did "so what if i wasnt' the account holder and tried to deposit this? (stammer) "What if i went to the ATM and deposited it? "stammer"

(They stated that 4 months ago they started asking for ID if it was over $400.00.

I asked what they limit for checks was.... (since I am an account holder there I can get money orders or cashiers checks. They said 10K. I asked her if i should get a cashiers check for the deposit amount, and then deposit it.

I might as well have been speaking Greek.

Seeing as I can trace all the funds to my side jobs (and having paid taxes on them) I might just mess with them more next time...

Kevin

I wouldn't. It seems like all they have to do to get back at you is report your cash deposits to the IRS and then you have to deal with the government. You may be able to account for all the funds but now you have to spend the time and effort proving it to the man. You lose.

Also, you should probably just make one big deposit if you want it all in the bank. Otherwise you can be accused of structuring and the IRS will just take your money until you prove it's not. Again, you lose.