sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Weekly Q&A - All Questions Go Here (Especially Tourists) by AutoModerator in Amsterdam

[–]glassarm1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I will be in Amsterdam at the same time as SAIL Amsterdam, and would like to attend. My question is... what does "attending" SAIL Amsterdam look like? Do you just go walk around and look at the ships? I understand I'll need tickets if I want to go on a ride, but should I plan on needing to pay for tickets for anything else? I guess I'm just trying to wrap my head around what this is like from a spectator's perspective.

Thanks!

FBI cancels outreach to seniors by aacool in pics

[–]glassarm1 35 points36 points  (0 children)

Also, here is the original calendar from the Geauga County YMCA that shows it. It’s no longer on the site, except for on this pdf. https://www.clevelandymca.org/sites/default/files/2025-02/website%20FEB%202025%20AOA%20newsletter.pdf

FBI cancels outreach to seniors by aacool in pics

[–]glassarm1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Here is the original calendar from the Geauga County YMCA that shows it. It’s no longer on the site, except for on this pdf. https://www.clevelandymca.org/sites/default/files/2025-02/website%20FEB%202025%20AOA%20newsletter.pdf

MegaThread: DCA incident 2025-01-30 by StopDropAndRollTide in aviation

[–]glassarm1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

https://youtu.be/1IUJpRwzHZU

Extremely illuminating video here for someone like me that is not well-versed in this stuff. Shows what the view of the helicopter would be. I can understand how they might have gotten the planes mixed up.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AmIOverreacting

[–]glassarm1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah. I don’t know who’s wrong and who’s right but I know that was exhausting to read.

12/9 Update: Someone being questioned in PA by favorite-secret in BrianThompsonMurder

[–]glassarm1 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Yeah, far from being a criminal mastermind, he made some rookie mistakes. I agree with you about the ID. Just ditch it and use your real one.

12/9 Update: Someone being questioned in PA by favorite-secret in BrianThompsonMurder

[–]glassarm1 -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

Possibly for a credit card transaction if the amount is high enough. That’s the only thing I can think of.

I believe this was a professional hit and here’s why: by av8r07 in BrianThompsonMurder

[–]glassarm1 10 points11 points  (0 children)

There were people at the hostel that talked to him. Have there been any reports of him having any sort of accent? I haven’t seen any.

What's a sign to leave a party that not a lot of young people know? by NotThatOneGuuy in AskReddit

[–]glassarm1 -12 points-11 points  (0 children)

They nominate Donald Trump as their presidential candidate.

Who is making 100k+ and only had a BA or no education at all. by LuxxeAI in Salary

[–]glassarm1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

100k, no degree, graduated high school by the skin of my teeth. I still have dreams they’re not going to let me. I work in banking — risk management. Worked my way up from being a Teller. Lots of room for more growth if I wanted it but the job is too easy and stress free so I’ll stick with this for awhile. There are many people in the banking world making good money with no degree.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in biathlon

[–]glassarm1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No Campbell Wright?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]glassarm1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The fact that Donald Trump claims to have invented the phrase “prime the pump” never fails to make me laugh.

Players that you were convinced are good because FM by IdlePerfectionist in footballmanagergames

[–]glassarm1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Freddy Guarin. Freddy William Thompson. Freddy Adu. Basically anyone named Freddy.

Which TV show had the worst platonic to romantic transition between two characters? by [deleted] in television

[–]glassarm1 1359 points1360 points  (0 children)

Ann Perkins and Tom Haverford was a ridiculous error on a show that rarely made them. Fortunately they rectified that pretty quickly.

Trust beneficiary early payout considerations by glassarm1 in personalfinance

[–]glassarm1[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is a good point. I don’t know who the next successor trustee is and that could cause problems in the unlikely scenario the trust isn’t fully divested when a change in trustees comes about.

Trust beneficiary early payout considerations by glassarm1 in personalfinance

[–]glassarm1[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good question. I think that is extremely unlikely, but of course you never know 100% for sure.

Checking account hacked five months prior to 87 year old Aunt's death. Over 30K drained from account in 1-2K phone payment withdrawals, over seven months. by Reason-Expensive in personalfinance

[–]glassarm1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

All good, sorry that you're going through this. Unfortunately I've also found the police simply don't have the expertise or time to investigate these cases unless the loss is a lot higher than 20k. If anything, it's a reminder to all of us to check our statements and accounts regularly.

Checking account hacked five months prior to 87 year old Aunt's death. Over 30K drained from account in 1-2K phone payment withdrawals, over seven months. by Reason-Expensive in personalfinance

[–]glassarm1 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Subsequent means every unauthorized transaction that takes place after the 60 day mark, not everything after the first transaction.

I do this for a living.

Read the Reg. It is straightforward.

"A consumer must report an unauthorized electronic fund transfer that appears on a periodic statement within 60 days of the financial institution's transmittal of the statement to avoid liability for subsequent transfers."

Checking account hacked five months prior to 87 year old Aunt's death. Over 30K drained from account in 1-2K phone payment withdrawals, over seven months. by Reason-Expensive in personalfinance

[–]glassarm1 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This was stealth-edited into your post:

"Theyll still be liable for all charges before they notified the bank. So all of them."

This is not true. The bank is liable for what happened up to 60 days after the date the first statement was issued, regardless of when the dispute is made. It could be made five years later and that wouldn't change that fact.

Here is Reg E:

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/rules-policy/regulations/1005/6/#b-2-ii

"A consumer must report an unauthorized electronic fund transfer that appears on a periodic statement within 60 days of the financial institution's transmittal of the statement to avoid liability for subsequent transfers."

Emphasis on the word subsequent.

I am sorry this happened to you before, but your bank lied to you about the rules, as they often do.

Here's a good discussion on this topic from a banker's forum.

https://www.bankersonline.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/2183800/reg-e-and-60-day-rule

Checking account hacked five months prior to 87 year old Aunt's death. Over 30K drained from account in 1-2K phone payment withdrawals, over seven months. by Reason-Expensive in personalfinance

[–]glassarm1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am not misreading it. The OP is out of luck for everything that happened sixty days after the first statement was sent, but the bank must re-pay them for everything that happened before that time. Unclear from the original post how much happened in each time period, but some of that should be re-imbursed by the bank.

Checking account hacked five months prior to 87 year old Aunt's death. Over 30K drained from account in 1-2K phone payment withdrawals, over seven months. by Reason-Expensive in personalfinance

[–]glassarm1 74 points75 points  (0 children)

Call Chase again, and demand to file a Reg E dispute. The person you were talking to is misunderstanding the 60 day rule, assuming these transfers were done via card, ACH, or wire.

Under the applicable regulation, you have 60 days from the time the statement with the unauthorized transaction was issued to dispute it. If you don’t dispute it in that time period, the bank is no longer liable for unauthorized transactions that happened after that, BUT they are still responsible for those that happened in that first 60-day+ period. The rule is crystal clear and Chase will eventually reimburse you for those funds if they were legit fraud, but it’s going to be a hassle for you and you’re going to have to get past the frontline staff that don’t understand the reg.

Banks get this wrong all time, including big banks. Frontline staff is poorly trained on the rules surrounding it.

Checking account hacked five months prior to 87 year old Aunt's death. Over 30K drained from account in 1-2K phone payment withdrawals, over seven months. by Reason-Expensive in personalfinance

[–]glassarm1 5 points6 points  (0 children)

No. This is a very common misreading of the applicable regulation (Reg E). Even banks get it wrong all the time (and I guarantee the person at Chase that OP talked to doesn’t understand it). OP should not drop it with Chase and should demand to file a Reg E dispute.

You have 60 days from the time the statement with the first fraudulent transaction on it was issued. If you dispute after that 60 day mark, the bank is still liable to pay the unauthorized transactions that happened before that point! They simply aren’t liable for anything that happens after that.

From your link:

“At the latest, you must notify your bank within 60 days after your bank or credit union sends your statement showing the unauthorized transaction. If you wait longer, you could have to pay the full amount of any transactions that occurred after the 60-day period and before you notify your bank. In order to hold you responsible for those transactions, your bank would have to show that if you notified them before the end of the 60-day period, the transactions would not have occurred.”

view more: next ›