Bank of America DOES NOT accept U.S. DOLLARS as payment on mortgages

reply to post by loam

That tripod/camera is used to take photographs for new debit cards. I know, because I had my photo taken at a Bank of America branch before.

Originally posted by loam
I think this is a hoax. Why is there a tripod and camera behind the guy? Seems like an odd thing for a bank to let someone do.

The tripod is for taking the pics that go on the debit cards. Almost every BOA has one in a corner or near a blank wall for that.

reply to post by loam


Bank of America puts your picture on your debit card. They have camaras setup just like that in most branches, as you can see in the picture, the strip of white wall between the door and the chair is the backround area for the picture. I have bank of america, and i have to say, they need photography practice, cuz my picture is all stretched sideways and i look fat as hell.



EDIT: I just saw the post above this right after i posted it. Just consider this double confirmation =P

Originally posted by loam
I think this is a hoax. Why is there a tripod and camera behind the guy? Seems like an odd thing for a bank to let someone do.

If this is not a hoax, then I think there is likely more to this story than is being disclosed.

edit on 4-2-2012 by loam because: (no reason given)

I call hoax, as well. I used to work as a teller at a bank and we had quite a number of merchants bringing in gigantic amounts of cash serveral times a day. It's usually policy for restaurants to not want to keep huge amounts of money on site so they'd bring the excess cash in for deposit. The only repercussion for large amounts of cash coming in was that the customer would need to fiill out an IRS form if their daily total was over $10,000 to explain where they got it. If a bank won't accept a $2000 mortgage payment in cash then they certainly wouldn't take a $5000 cash deposit from a merchant several times a day, in which case that branch would have no justification for being there for very long.

....and no, banks don't allow strangers to just show up and set up cameras. It makes them suspicious that they're planning to rob the bank or stalking a customer. The guy who rigged this stunt has no idea how banks even operate.

These people have been battling BoA for a long time, they post videos about their struggles with them. They have been driven to the levels of anger and ball busting because of the actions/in-actions of BoA. This seems like a lot of effort over the course of at least half a year to be all just a hoax.

Uploaded Sept. 16, 2011...


"BoA flat out lied to us on dozens of occasions..."

I know exactly what that's like, and when you're dealing with a giant like BoA, their mistakes become your problem, and it's up to you to do all the work to resolve the mistake. Usually that requires outbursts of anger to get their attention.

reply to post by JibbyJedi

I didn't choose to BUY my former home, my parents were killed and I inherited the home I was raised in. So some of us didn't CHOOSE to get into a mortgage, but I still did it successfully for about 7 years before the fraud was too much to deal with.

That sucks. Sucks even worse that they didn't have proper life insurance to handle stuff like this after they go. Now, when you "inherited" the home, I am pretty sure you had to do a bunch of paperwork (in fact, I know you did). That is when you should have understood what you were facing.

I never bought myself anything

That is a bold faced lie.

....always paid my bills and did my duty as a landlord for my tenants.

Ah, so you rented the place out hoping to float along. Guess you still didn't really understand what you were getting into.....

When THEY decide not to pay rent

Oh yeah, here we go. When THEY don't pay, again, nothing more than you trying to shift the blame of your ignorance and lack of personal responsibility onto someone else. Like I mentioned to you earlier, thanks for proving my point.

then how does one make "on time" mortgage payments? When a tenant is short on rent, they don't give you $20 or $50, they give you NOTHING that month.

So I guess you were not able to handle a tenant missing a payment, maybe even 3-4 in a row? Like I said, you didn't know what you were doing. I own several rental properties and have had this happen many times. Simple and easy understanding of what to do and how to do it easily means this can be covered. But quick, think fast and come up with an impossible situation that you were facing that no one in the world could handle and those evil corporate goons just took you for all you were worth. Remember, the mantra of the ignorant and the dependent is "it's not my fault".

Get yourself a mortgage holder whose customer service reps are in China and India, and can't speak English.

No thanks. Not born yesterday. Faced with that situation, inheriting a house with such a company, with ZERO credit I could have EASILY managed to get it mortgaged by another, more reputable company. All that with a simple high school education.

Then when they blatantly make errors on your monthly statements charging you way more than what is due, lose your pmt, make typo errors, etc., try to resolve your issue WITHOUT it costing you a hit to your credit score.

I don't think they did that. I think reality is you didn't know what was going on. If they were "blatantly" doing what you are saying, then I would assume even the most simple person in the world would have had an immediate court case filed, house payments going in escrow (yes, even if you can't afford to make them) and you would have this situation under control with little difficulty. I mean, breach of contract is EASY to prove if it is a BLATANT as you say. That is our course unless you didn't really understand anything about what type of mortgage you were dealing with, what the stipulations were, etc. Then of course your ignorance makes anything you don't understand a "blatant" attempt to screw you over. Remember, it can't be your fault. You were forced into an impossible situation and they took advantage of you. Right? lol

People talk a lot of smack who have never been in the shoes of some of us land owners.

Yes they do, it is even worse when folks like you who don't really have a handle on the situation trying to make the banks look evil (and don't get me wrong, they are evil). But when people like you attack them, it makes anyone with a legitimate grip look like one of the ignorant masses who just whine about the ?man? screwing them over all the time and how nothing is their fault.

reply to post by JibbyJedi
let's see what the law has to say about that
[Quote]
U.C.C. - ARTICLE 3 - NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS , PART 6. DISCHARGE AND PAYMENT

§ 3-603. TENDER OF PAYMENT.

(a) If tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument,the effect of tender is governed by principles of law applicable to tender of payment under a simple contract.

(b) If tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument and the tender is refused,there is discharge,to the extent of the amount of the tender,of the obligation of an indorser or accommodation party having a right of recourse with respect to the obligation to which the tender relates.

(c) If tender of payment of an amount due on an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument,the obligation of the obligor to pay interest after the due date on the amount tendered is discharged. If presentment is required with respect to an instrument and the obligor is able and ready to pay on the due date at every place of payment stated in the instrument,the obligor is deemed to have made tender of payment on the due date to the person entitled to enforce the instrument. now, since federal reserve notes are legal tender for all debts, public and private, the fella with the mortgage only needs a paper trail showing how much cash was refused, and voila! That much debt goes byebye.

reply to post by MainLineThis

Now, when you "inherited" the home, I am pretty sure you had to do a bunch of paperwork (in fact, I know you did). That is when you should have understood what you were facing.

I was almost 2 years into battling Identity theft at the time I inherited the house. The best rate I could get was 8.9% because the credit bureaus wouldn't do an actual investigation into my contesting the fraudulent accounts on my credit report. After 4 years of fighting ID theft, my cousin brought me down to Major Crimes Division in town and a cop friend of his called the credit bureaus and requested the fraud be removed.
That's a whole other dinner & a movie tale of bad luck I went through.

That is a bold faced lie.

Excuse me? I couldn't afford anything but the basics... I pirated what I couldn't afford.... allegedly.

Ah, so you rented the place out hoping to float along. Guess you still didn't really understand what you were getting into.....

Was a 3 family house with 8 garage attachment. The rents more than covered the mortgage, worse case my paychecks could if rents fell through. And no I didn't understand what I was thrown into, but I made it work and didn't spend what I didn't have.

Oh yeah, here we go. When THEY don't pay, again, nothing more than you trying to shift the blame of your ignorance and lack of personal responsibility onto someone else. Like I mentioned to you earlier, thanks for proving my point.

Blame is where it is, as in "the cause". I went through a long battle with my former job because I was whistle blowing about neglect and abuse of the folks I worked with, so my paycheck were getting crippled around the same time rents were coming up short. When it rains it pours.

So I guess you were not able to handle a tenant missing a payment, maybe even 3-4 in a row?

I inherited a dead beat from the get go, owed over $4000 to my father, I got rid of him when he owed $6,600 total. The gracious courts gave me the victory and gave him 20 YEARS to pay me back. To a dead beat, that's a free pass, and many, many, many people in my old town knew that game and played it like professional thieves. The laws favor the unlawful tenants, screw the landlords and their obligations.

No thanks. Not born yesterday. Faced with that situation, inheriting a house with such a company, with ZERO credit I could have EASILY managed to get it mortgaged by another, more reputable company. All that with a simple high school education.

I played that game too. My mortgage got passed around like a high school cheer leader. I was getting constant updated mortgage holder information and new customer service numbers, went through Countrywide, Option One, Wells Fargo, all the 1 hit wonders. Regardless, I was burning through daytime cell minutes on hold waiting for Ahknad to tick tock tack me to death, then disconnect me so I'd have to start all over. Must be nice to have never had any errors on your contracts or statements. Wish I was you.

I don't think they did that. I think reality is you didn't know what was going on. If they were "blatantly" doing what you are saying, then I would assume even the most simple person in the world would have had an immediate court case filed, house payments going in escrow (yes, even if you can't afford to make them) and you would have this situation under control with little difficulty. I mean, breach of contract is EASY to prove if it is a BLATANT as you say.

Yeah well I was there, got boxes of paperwork to prove it. Must be nice to have all the legal answers by 28 years old like I was at the time. I didn't have all things in order ready to take on such tasks, especially with ID theft tarnishes all my options for borrowing at a reasonable rate. I had more than 1 thing working against me at the time.

But when people like you attack them, it makes anyone with a legitimate grip look like one of the ignorant masses who just whine about the ?man? screwing them over all the time and how nothing is their fault.

I have more "legitimate gripes" than you will ever accrue in 10 lifetimes of being a victim of the broken system. Simple errors are not so easily corrected ALL the time, and can cost time, money, and be devastating to one's credit, even when the fault is not your own. Wake up and stop being devil's advocate for the real evil.

reply to post by snowspirit


Calling b.s. on this.

I have a mortgage with Bank of America (not by choice - my mortgage was bought by them.) I don't have any other checking/savings account with them. I still bank with the bank I used before my mortgage was transferred to B of A.

When I pay my mortgage, I often take cash from my bank and drive it a mile away to a B of A branch. The money is in cash and I never had a problem with them taking my money.

The one caveat is, B of A will not accept a partial mortgage payment (cash or check) even if you're a penny short.

There's level headed discussion over at reddit.

www.reddit.com...

"He's trying to make a mortgage on a foreclosed home. You are exactly right, he has to send the payment to the "Property Claims Department" and he owes a sum of over $10,000. Here is the video where the cops explain it to him.
They have a whole channel about their fight with BoA. They are trying to play the victims because their house is in foreclosure. Since they are over 10K behind, they haven't made the payments in almost a year. I don't see how they are the victims here, seems to me they are breaching their mortgage contract* by not living up to their end of their mortgage agreement."

reply to post by schuyler


One question, when your son-in-law quit claimed on the deed, did he have his named removed from the original mortgage? If not he would have lost control of the house, but could very well libel for the mortgage. If that is the case, so much for trying sticking it to your daughter.

There was a discussion about this on another real estate investor forum called bigger pockets where a couple got divorced, and the guy wanted the house. He wanted his ex-wife to quit claim the deed to him. The investors basically agreed that it would be a bad move for her to do so. If she quit claimed the deed, she would loose all control of the house. If it went into foreclosure, that she would still be responsible for the mortgage also. She quit claim, she would have to make sure her name was removed from the mortgage probablly by him getting another mortgage in his name only that would cover the amount of the original mortgage, so she wouldn't have any financial responsibility. I believed they discussed another way to have her name removed, but I can't remember.

Good Lord, what an amazing set of replies. Asking the local community branch of bank of America to accept cash for a mortgage payment is like trying to make a payment for your Chevron/Texaco credit card at your local 7/11 with a gas pump out front. When you sign a mortgage paper you receive a letter saying, "Please send your payments here" with an address. So you arbitrarily pick a branch, thus changing the addrerss you were told to send payments to, and you cry foul?

This is a crass publicity stunt with no factual basis in grievance. These guys ought to ashamed.

There seems to be some confusion about why Bank of America won't accept cash as payment in this situation. First, and foremost, this couple is in foreclosure. The couple apparently owes over $10,000 in back payments. The arrogant man in the video waltzes into the bank with about $1300 in cash -- Far less than the amount owed.

If the bank accepts the payment -- in this case, a partial payment --- the foreclosure proceedings stop. If the borrower makes a full payment of the $10,000 owed, the foreclosure proceedings stop.

Most banks, in these cases, will elect to NOT accept the partial payment so as to keep the foreclosure proceedings moving forward. Why, you might ask? Because if the bank does accept the payment --- partial or in full -- the borrower typically falls behind again on the payments shortly thereafter. Then, the bank has to re-start the whole foreclosure proceedings again from scratch.

This can be expensive for banks to have to keep restarting the foreclosure process over and over again. Banks know from history that just because the borrower makes a single payment to halt the foreclosure process that all they are really doing --- in most cases --- is trying to slow down and delay the day of reckoning when the house is finally repossessed by the bank for resale.

The bank, in this case, is taking the logical and intelligent course of action here by refusing the partial payment. If the borrower objects, then find another mortgage lender or bank, and pay off Bank of America in full. Don't blame the bank for your inability to repay the mortgage, and for defaulting on your personal loan obligations.

I also guarantee you that someone at the bank in the foreclosure department knows this couple's financial situation and capacity to repay -- or not repay -- the loan note. I am certain that someone at the bank has reviewed this couple's personal credit report, tax returns, and related financial details, and likely came to the conclusion that this couple doesn't have the capacity to repay.

Now granted a lot of things are done by credit these days but what were they thinking trying to go on their first try with trying to acquire a transaction in cash but bringing a camera and shoving it in everyone's faces before anything went wrong?

I'd wait for something to go wrong and THEN I would record it. Mega fail for using a camera that was obvious so anyone could see it and bother people with it. It is somewhat their fault for being disruptive. That guy could've handled the whole situation a lot better by being more civil.

I hate how he called everyone his "fans" at the end of the video. We're not his fans. We just disapprove of the way bank of America treated him in regards to his actions and misconduct.

I'm glad to hear they dont accept US dollars.

From this day forth, when I make payments, I shall send sea shells, beads, and raw minerals.

This is great news!

Some aspects of this incident tell a story of them being in the foreclosure process.... they say differently.

Posted on their Facebook just over half hour ago...

Last Friday, after almost 2 year of this living hell, we were supposed to be able to walk into ANY BofA branch and make a payment. Just as we've done many times in the past, what we didn't know on that day is that, apparently BofA dose NOT take cash (U.S. Dollars) as payment on ANY mortgage, at any location, regardless of any given homeowners situation. Had never tried paying in cash before. Will post more after our day in court at 777 Sonoma Ave. Santa Rosa, Ca. Anyone wanting an interview or comment should be there on Monday Feb 6th, our appointment is at 2pm, so sometime after that. Thanks, Rob & Ana

Posted 9 hours ago...

Just a heads up to Bank of America. Our attorney, Catherine King is behind us 100%... thank you very much!

Catherine King:
I'm on it. Thanks.
9 hours ago

www.facebook.com...

Why would any reputable attorney support their actions?

I think they are in a forclosure process and the check, they wouldn't cash for over 10,000 well they probably owe double that in back payments.
It is another person making things up...to try and make themself look better and get the people behind them...without telling the whole story...they would have taken the money, but the guy was making a scene and swearing ...from what the manager was saying, so by the poster stopping and starting the video, you have to believe the manager of the bank...in this case. He was level headed and the people behind the guy making the video, well they looked at him like he was a donkey!!!!
I think they just wanna keep the house they can't pay for...hey I want a private island with white sand beaches and a mansion full of servants...but...I am realistic and so..I have to live with the fact, that ...that life isn't for me...not yet.
Life sucks sometimes...wear a helmet.

Originally posted by seamus
reply to post by JibbyJedi

 

let's see what the law has to say about that
[Quote]
U.C.C. - ARTICLE 3 - NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS , PART 6. DISCHARGE AND PAYMENT

§ 3-603. TENDER OF PAYMENT.

(a) If tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument,the effect of tender is governed by principles of law applicable to tender of payment under a simple contract.

(b) If tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument and the tender is refused,there is discharge,to the extent of the amount of the tender,of the obligation of an indorser or accommodation party having a right of recourse with respect to the obligation to which the tender relates.

(c) If tender of payment of an amount due on an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument,the obligation of the obligor to pay interest after the due date on the amount tendered is discharged. If presentment is required with respect to an instrument and the obligor is able and ready to pay on the due date at every place of payment stated in the instrument,the obligor is deemed to have made tender of payment on the due date to the person entitled to enforce the instrument.

now, since federal reserve notes are legal tender for all debts, public and private, the fella with the mortgage only needs a paper trail showing how much cash was refused, and voila! That much debt goes byebye.


promissory notes may be governed by UCC article 3, but not all mortgages will be. the mortgage security itself is, in any case, not governed by art.3 ucc but common-law principles. Again, subject to whatever the terms of the mortgage were (i.e. how to tender payment) the bank may well be within its rights to object to payment in cash. There is more to it than simply the mortgage disappearing overnight because the bank refused to accept payment in cash, because - at the end of day (all interlocutory steps aside) there is still a debt to be satisfied and as I said in a prior post, courts will not allow a party to be unjustly enriched in most cases (in this case, by getting a windfall). In the case of a mortgage security over the house, that security is valid until the debt is repaid ... a party may seek to restrain the bank's attempts to foreclose if there has been unconscionable conduct on the behalf of the bank or the bank has refused to accept payment (for instance), but a court would probably not forgive a debt solely on that basis.

in any case, this chap here gets it down pretty well. legallad.quickanddirtytips.com...

Alright, thanks to the people from reddit, I know the situation.

if the guy is making his regular mortgage payment he can pay with cash, check, or whatever he wants. However if he failed to make his mortgage payments and he is being foreclosed on they won't accept payment at the branch level.

At this point he's probably been working with a home modification specialist for BofA or the bank owns the house now. Either way payment needs to be sent to a different department because at the branch level the systems are programmed to not take payments on foreclosed loans.


and then this


He's trying to make a mortgage on a foreclosed home. You are exactly right, he has to send the payment to the "Property Claims Department" and he owes a sum of over $10,000. Here is the video where the cops explain it to him.

They have a whole channel about their fight with BoA. They are trying to play the victims because their house is in foreclosure. Since they are over 10K behind, they haven't made the payments in almost a year. I don't see how they are the victims here, seems to me they are breaching their mortgage contract* by not living up to their end of their mortgage agreement.

So essentially, the bank branch can not take payment....and please note I do not support the bankers very much, but in this situation the bank staff is correct.

Originally posted by loam
I think this is a hoax. Why is there a tripod and camera behind the guy? Seems like an odd thing for a bank to let someone do.

If this is not a hoax, then I think there is likely more to this story than is being disclosed.

edit on 4-2-2012 by loam because: (no reason given)

The new BoA credit cards put your picture in the upper left corner of the card for quick easy ID to prevent unathorized use if someone steals your card. They have those tri-pod cameras in the bank branches to take your photo to put on your credit/debit card.