Bank says "no hands then no cash"

[Bloodwhiner]

Bank of America refused to cash the man's check because he couldn't give them a fingerprint -- he is a double amputee!

story link

Does no one have common sense anymore?

 

[Robert Maxwell]

More likely, some peon bank teller doesn't want to risk their job by violating company policy.

They should have an alternative method for people who don't have hands.

 

[Alpha Romeo]

Since when do you need finger[prints to cash a check>?

 

[Shazam!]

How does a guy with no arms get a wife yet I'm still single >: (

I bet it's because he's rich and/or has a massive cock.

 

[Shazam!]

EDIT: Double post

 

[Sakrysta]

I'm curious as to why he felt going to the bank the check was issued from would be easier than going to his own. Your own bank cashes checks made out to you from all kinds of sources. When you do business with a bank where you don't have an account, they always ask for pretty strict methods of identification before handing you money.

I'm not saying there shouldn't have been a way to accomodate the man, but I can think of more than one "benefit of the doubt" scenarios that would allow for the bank to not be villified for the event.

 

[SeerSGB]

Since when do you need finger[prints to cash a check>?

I don't know how common is it across the country, but I know some bank chains require you to fingerprint if you're not an account holder with that chain. The local Krogers and Food City require it when cashing a payroll check, and the Wal-Mart's Money Center (again the local one, don't know if it's company wide) require one for all check cashing or money order cashing transactions.

 

[Rii]

I'm curious as to why he felt going to the bank the check was issued from would be easier than going to his own.

It was probably closer.

 

[Sakrysta]

^Yeah, but according to the article, he left, went back to his office, called his wife, and told her never to make him go to her bank again. The logic escapes me...

 

[Rii]

He probably just wanted an excuse to ring her and rant.

 

[Rocketman]

And quite right they are. Anyone can have a fingerprint these days; it's no longer limited to the handed.

 

[sidious618]

But what about...?

 

[Rii]

And quite right they are. Anyone can have a fingerprint these days; it's no longer limited to the handed.

Yeah. The real problem here is that unlike passwords you can't change your fingerprint or any other biometric identifier. A compromised fingerprint becomes useless even to identify its legitimate owner. Once you run out of fingers, eyelashes, retinas, etc., you're fucked.

 

[Mike Farley]

"That's just shocking to me," he said. "This can't have been the first time this has ever come up."

I feel for the guy and the bank certainly should have found a way to accommodate him, but just how common does he think people with NO hands/arms are? It very easily could have been the first time a person with a pretty rare disability has tried to cash a check at a bank that he didn't have an account at. Someone has to be the first. Why not him?

 

[tharpdevenport]

"That's just shocking to me," he said. "This can't have been the first time this has ever come up."

I feel for the guy and the bank certainly should have found a way to accommodate him, but just how common does he think people with NO hands/arms are?

Well, according to a quick Google search, since 2001, Afghanistan and Iraq have brought us about 2,000, and that's on top of previous wars and surviving vets, and people who lose arms in accidents here in the U.S., so...

 

[Mr. B]

That's sad. I was hoping this was just a story about some stupid teller but the bank manager turned him down too. At the very least the bank manager could have called his boss.

 

[JuanBolio]

The teller should've offered to make a plaster cast of his penis.

Its the only way to be sure.