Checking or savings account -- Managing an account -- Complaint #6472398

Complaint Overview

Complaint ID: 6472398

Company: Columbia Banking System, INC.

Product: Checking or savings account

Sub-Product: Checking account

Issue: Managing an account

Sub-Issue: Cashing a check

State: Oregon

ZIP Code: XXXXX

Date Received: 2023-01-22T12:00:00-05:00

Date Sent to Company: 2023-01-22T12:00:00-05:00

Company Response: Closed with explanation

Timely Response: Yes

Consumer Disputed: N/A

Submitted Via: Web

Consumer Narrative

To Whom It May Concern : I attempted to resolve this complaint in person and also previously submitted a complaint with the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. However, I do not feel my complaint was adequately addressed by their response and my complaint had been closed without giving me an opportunity to reply to their response ( hence why I needed to open this new complaint ). My first complaint identification number is : XXXX. I am writing this reply to their response to supplement my previous complaint and clarify a few issues that were raised in their response. The staff member I interacted with was not following federal law. If the tellers actions were compliant with XXXX Bank procedure or policy, I would like an opportunity to review them because they are contrary to federal law. While it is correct that I accompanied my father to the bank, I was not the individual that was cashing the check. My father is a XXXX XXXX that does not speak XXXX well, so I came with him to the bank to act as his translator. Per federal statute 31 CFR 1010.312, " a financial institution shall verify and record the name and address of the individual presenting a transaction, as well as record the identity, account number, and social security or taxpayer identification number, if any, of any person or entity on whose behalf such transaction is to be effected Verification of identity in any other case shall be made by examination of a DOCUMENT, other than a bank signature card, that is normally acceptable within the banking community as a means of identification when cashing checks for nondepositors ( e.g., a DRIVERS LICENSE or credit card ). '' ( XXXX XXXX ). Nowhere in the statute does it require an individual to identify their profession from XXXX years ago. I provided my father 's driver 's license, social security card, and his XXXX XXXX debit card, thus satisfying any identification requirements per the relevant federal statute. I also verbally provided my fathers date of birth, physical address, phone number, and birthdate ( although I do not know why I needed to provide these details verbally since they were listed on my fathers drivers license ). Nowhere in the law does it require an individual to provide their profession, especially considering that a job title is not an identification document. The teller asking me what my father 's occupation was to cash the check was entirely inappropriate and irrelevant to the transaction. However, I may have been willing to overlook the teller 's mistake if not for the fact that the teller would not even take my father 's current profession as an acceptable answer to her question. My father is retired. He has been retired for over XXXX years and would identify himself as retired on any government document. If " retired '' is an acceptable answer for the U.S. government, why is it not for XXXX Bank? Furthermore, even if my answer was unsatisfactory to the teller, I contacted the account owner that issued the check so that he could give telephonic approval ( after correctly identifying himself with the teller ) to release the funds. Speaking with the account owner, in addition to my father 's identification documents, was still not good enough for the teller. Instead, she insisted that she needed to know my father 's job profession from before he retired. How does a person 's job profession from XXXX years ago identify them as the individual they say they are in any way? It doesn't, which is why the federal statute does not require providing your job profession as a form of identification when cashing a check that is {$XXXX} or more. XXXX Bank should also note that even after my father and I could cash the check, the teller mistakenly short-changed the transaction by {$XXXX}. When I returned ( without my father ), the teller did not ask me for any kind identification before releasing the funds. How is it XXXX Bank 's policy and procedure to go from asking irrelevant questions not required by statute to failing to ask for any kind of identification at all? Because the teller was not following any legitimate federal law or XXXX Bank policy or procedure. I know this because the brochure the teller provided to me describing XXXX Banks identification requirements also did not say anywhere that an individual would need to disclose their profession to cash a check. The teller took XXXX look at my father and me, the XXXX of our skin, heard us speaking XXXX, and decided to discriminate against us by making it as hard as she possibly could for us to get the funds that rightfully belonged to my father. XXXX Bank did not adequately investigate my complaint. If they had, they would have realized the XXXX and inappropriate actions their employee took against my father and me.

Frequently Asked Questions

Disclaimer

This analysis is AI-generated based on publicly available CFPB complaint data. It does not constitute financial or legal advice.

Related Pages

• Columbia Banking System, INC. Company Profile
• Checking or savings account Complaints
• Managing an account Complaints
• Oregon Complaints
• Company Rankings
• Company Directory
• Search Complaints