What would you call a $12,000 overdraft fee?
The North Dakota Supreme Court called it “reasonable.”
You might call it: “outrageous, atrocious, barbaric, contemptible, corrupt, criminal, disgraceful, egregious, flagitious, flagrant, heinous, horrendous, horrible, ignoble, inhuman, malevolent, monstrous, odious, opprobrious, scandalous, scurrilous, shameless, shocking, sinful, unbearable, ungodly, unspeakable, villainous, wanton or wicked.”
But did I mention that the bad-check writer had amassed 842 bad checks over the course of four years? Of course not. If I told you everything right up front, would you keep reading? It’s called a hook, people.
Cavett’s arguments were based upon the fact that consumers have seen rising overdraft fees recently as banks seek for new ways to make a profit. Banks have been sued regarding the overdraft fees and the legislature has sought to regulate the practice of administrating overdraft fees.
Nevertheless, the court soundly rejected her arguments, which were based on the idea that the fees should be considered interest payments and that the charges were therefore much too high. So what’s the lesson in all this? Don’t overdraw you account, and if you do, you’ll have to pay the overdraft fees? I apologize, that’s not an interesting nor exciting lesson. I’ll try to do better next time.
Related Resources:
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
