Banks Charging Multiple Non-Sufficient Funds Fees?

Shub & Johns launches investigation into banks possibly engaging in deceptive business practices or potentially violating consumer contracts. Some banks are allegedly charging consumers multiple insufficient funds fees after multiple attempts to process the same failed transactions.

Non-sufficient funds, or NSFs, fees are fees charged by the bank on consumer accounts when a transaction is attempted without the necessary funds in the account to complete the transaction. Either when a check from the account bounces or when an autopayment draft is rejected, the consumer is charged with an NSF fee for their insufficient funds to complete the transaction.

Many already believe this practice to be predatory as in some cases the fee can be larger than the transaction amount, disproportionately targeting or affecting low-income consumers who are often most affected by NSF fees.

Issues begin to arise, however, when banks start to charge multiple non-sufficient funds fees on the same transaction. Some banks may be attempting to re-process the same transaction that was the bank previously rejected, and when the transaction is rejected once again the bank charges an additional NSF fee. These fees can continue stacking up, leaving the consumer to potentially pay a significant amount of money just to get out of the red.

Banks are potentially violating consumer terms and conditions by charging multiple identical fees for the same transaction, which may be considered a breach of contract. This practice of charging multiple NSF fees on bounced checks or rejected autopayments can be considered deceitful and illegal if in violation of the consumer contract.

Have you been charged multiple non-sufficient funds (NSF) fees for singular transactions? Is this in violation of your contract with the bank? Let us know! Fill out the attached form and join the Shub & Johns investigation today!