On March 9, 2016, Stock Yards Bank & Trust Company (“SYB”) was served with a valid Notice of Garnishment Summons and Order to Answer Interrogatories, issued by the Marion Superior Court, in an action in which a third party creditor had received a judgment against Mr***, the complainant
Mr*** states he was made aware of the account freeze on the same day as the bank’s receipt of the Order, and visited a branch where he claims he received assurances from a bank employee that the bank would “refund any fees and pay all checks and debit transactions that come through up to the amount of the freeze.” Despite this contention, SYB’s investigation with its employees did not indicate that promises of any kind were madeFurther, despite Mr***’s suggestion that there was a verbal contract between he and the bank to cover these checks, the account terms are in fact controlled by “Terms and Conditions of Your Account,” which have been recently provided to Mr*** be separate correspondence, and which require any variation to the terms thereof to be in writingThese terms advise that “…we (SYB) will not have any liability to you if there are insufficient funds to pay your items because we have withdrawn funds from your account.” The garnishment order was in an amount sufficient to cause Mr***’s account to immediately be overdraftedDespite this, Mr*** failed to deposit further funds to cover the items that were presented, almost daily, against the account for the next monthIt also appears that Mr*** made no efforts to prevent the items, such as recurring ACH drafts or checks, from being presented against his account for the next month, thus explaining why there were additional fees continuously assessed against the account, of which Mr*** now complains SYB certainly has sympathy that Mr*** has incurred hardship pursuant to the garnishment issued by a third party judgment creditor against his account, but SYB steadfastly maintains that it has acted solely in compliance with the terms governing the account. SYB further notes that it has been working separately with counsel for Mr*** towards a mutual resolution Sincerely, Molly ** *** Counsel for Stock Yards Bank & Trust Company Molly ** *** | Morgan & Pottinger, P.S.CSouth Fourth Street, Suite | Louisville, KY Tel| Fax [email protected] www.morganandpottinger.com
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
Despite what their counsel says, I had a verbal agreement with Yvonne *** (Branch Manager) and Heather *** (Yvonne's boss) that they would take care of the situation and asked me to not close the account. They failed to do what they said! I do find it interesting that they are wanting to wave ALL NFS FEES & OVERDRAFT FEES associated with the account, but they are not willing to reimburse use for out-of-pocket fees we occurred with this issue. If they're not at fault as they say, why are they willing to waive hundred's of dollars in fees?
Regards,
*** ***
On March 9, 2016, Stock Yards Bank & Trust Company (“SYB”) was served with a valid Notice of Garnishment Summons and Order to Answer Interrogatories, issued by the Marion Superior Court, in an action in which a third party creditor had received a judgment against Mr***, the complainant
Mr*** states he was made aware of the account freeze on the same day as the bank’s receipt of the Order, and visited a branch where he claims he received assurances from a bank employee that the bank would “refund any fees and pay all checks and debit transactions that come through up to the amount of the freeze.” Despite this contention, SYB’s investigation with its employees did not indicate that promises of any kind were madeFurther, despite Mr***’s suggestion that there was a verbal contract between he and the bank to cover these checks, the account terms are in fact controlled by “Terms and Conditions of Your Account,” which have been recently provided to Mr*** be separate correspondence, and which require any variation to the terms thereof to be in writingThese terms advise that “…we (SYB) will not have any liability to you if there are insufficient funds to pay your items because we have withdrawn funds from your account.” The garnishment order was in an amount sufficient to cause Mr***’s account to immediately be overdraftedDespite this, Mr*** failed to deposit further funds to cover the items that were presented, almost daily, against the account for the next monthIt also appears that Mr*** made no efforts to prevent the items, such as recurring ACH drafts or checks, from being presented against his account for the next month, thus explaining why there were additional fees continuously assessed against the account, of which Mr*** now complains SYB certainly has sympathy that Mr*** has incurred hardship pursuant to the garnishment issued by a third party judgment creditor against his account, but SYB steadfastly maintains that it has acted solely in compliance with the terms governing the account. SYB further notes that it has been working separately with counsel for Mr*** towards a mutual resolution Sincerely, Molly ** *** Counsel for Stock Yards Bank & Trust Company Molly ** *** | Morgan & Pottinger, P.S.CSouth Fourth Street, Suite | Louisville, KY Tel| Fax [email protected] www.morganandpottinger.com
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
Despite what their counsel says, I had a verbal agreement with Yvonne *** (Branch Manager) and Heather *** (Yvonne's boss) that they would take care of the situation and asked me to not close the account. They failed to do what they said! I do find it interesting that they are wanting to wave ALL NFS FEES & OVERDRAFT FEES associated with the account, but they are not willing to reimburse use for out-of-pocket fees we occurred with this issue. If they're not at fault as they say, why are they willing to waive hundred's of dollars in fees?
Regards,
*** ***