Slashdot Mirror
Our ATM Is Broken, Go To Jail
Actually, I do RTFA writes "This community recently discussed possible criminal prosecution for people who took advantage of faulty slot machine software. At the time, many here drew an analogy to a hypothetical ATM that dispensed too much money. Well, apparently, that too may result in criminal charges. Although they suspect that someone may have tampered with the ATM, they are considering charging anyone who got extra money from it." Here is an editorial musing on the morality of such unexpected windfalls.
Go directly to jail. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200.
A couple of 30-somethings embark on the ultimate roadtrip
How about employers who make direct deposits to your bank account and then, four weeks later, send a collection notice saying,"Ooops. We overpaid you."
the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
This is yet more evidence of how materialistic our society has become. It is NOT a crime to not report the observation of a beating or death. Yet it is a crime to take advantage of a faulty slot machine? Something is F'd. Big business has too damned much influence over the laws of this country. They don't care if people die as long as they get their fucking loot back.
Table-ized A.I.
Where is there an ATM that does anything in increments other than 20?
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?
as the article says, the machine knows who got too much money and didn't come forward about it.
How we know is more important than what we know.
when that bank errors in your favor, your screwed but when the bank errors in their favor, your screwed?
Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
"The next morning when we had come back in, someone had plugged it back up," she said.
Well, if it was plugged up I don't see why they were concerned about it giving out money...
This guy's the limit!
Didn't your local friendly MMORPG teach you the consequences of exploiting bugs?
Seriously, just because you were not the one who hacked the thing, doesn't give you the right to exploit the flow. It's like stealing stuff from a shop because the window was broken by someone else.
Accidents do happen, and it should be the burden of the prosecution to prove the defendant knew of the exploit, and not vice versa, but if you see someone withdrawing 1 grand (max daily limit) from a machine that happens to give out $20s instead of $5s (especially if person never previously withdrew such large amounts), and of course the person conveniently "forgot" to check the amount he got, then you got a pretty good circumstantial case of malicious intent, and then the defendant better have some good justification for these actions.
Because bank lines were cut, some banks did NOT turn off their Manhattan ATMs so that customers could obtain emergency cash. Of course, when this was discovered, this was abused. I havent heard of the followups of any persecutions, if any.
FEMA disbursed cash with low identity proof threshholds because the assumption was many people lost their IDs during the disaster. This was abused (and mocked in the media). FEMA is trying to collect the cash, but many of the thieves dont have much. Its a dilemma: damned if you are too tight with aid; damned if you are too loose.
every one I've seen specifies in the event of an error in your favor, you have pre-approved them to just direct debit your account.. no notice required...
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
I personally ran into this problem myself. Back a couple of years ago, I drove up to my bank to get some cash. A guy came out of the ATM with a big sh*t eating grin on his face. I went in and chose to get $60 cash and was then handed $120. Just my luck!
When I came out, he asked if the same thing had happened to me and I said yes. We both left and went about our ways.
An article showed up in the news paper that had explained that a programming up date that had been updated that day had caused the machine to dispense double your withdrawal. In turn, the bank would withdraw the money from your account for the additional money that was dispensed.
I would think that they should eat it as it was their mistake (they have insurance), but the other side of it is that I don't think I should go to jail for some guys programming error.
That editorial was poorly written and filled with grammatical errors.
$20 and $50 are common..
there was a story a few years ago of one (the sands?) where the 50s were loaded into the 20's slot...
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
Mine only included a clause pertaining to bank or in transit errors: not deliberate deposits by the company.
the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
This one of the ATM's that is still set to the default password?
So, there are some people who took advantage of an ATM defect (whether bug, intentional, or accidental programming error, error in loading cash, whatever.)
The bank knows who they are.
Why don't they just debit their accounts the correct amounts and forget about it?
The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
How big must the 'windfall' be before we report it? When you're checking out at the supermarket and you notice your item rang up for $2.99 instead of $3.99 that it was supposed to, do you say something? Most of us probably wouldn't say anything, but would raise hell if it was supposed to be $3.99 and it rang up for $4.99. If it's just a $1 difference in our favor, we don't report and let it slide even though we know it's an error in their system. Is that now a crime? If not, then where do we draw the line? If $1 in our favor is not a crime, but say $100 in our favor is, what's the cutoff? Does this just apply to ATM/Slot machines? What if I bought ten items that were $1 off, do I report it then? How about fifty of those items?
It just seems to raise too many questions.
Things you think are in the Constitution, but are not.
Actually in many cases you are obligated by law to report accidents, injuries, and render assistance. This is true if you drive a car and also see "Maritime Law".
Also there have been some cases in municipalities where witnesses failed to report murders and rapes and were successfully prosecuted.
I pulled into a gas station a couple of years ago and the pump was set to $0.12 per gallon. I filled up and noticed it. So I told the owner, hoping for a free tank of gas. They made me pay the difference. Plus I probably paid another ATM transaction fee. Sucks being honest!
Taking stuff that does not belong to you is a crime. If you help yourself to goods from a store because the clerk had stepped out the back for a pee is a crime. Taking money from an ATM that is wrongly configured is also a crime.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Yes ... "diebold".
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
My feeling was that if my employer didn't accept that I never noticed I was being overpaid, it would have been cause for my dismissal.
Your groceries come to $7 something, you hand her a $10, she gives you $12 something (ie. change for a $20). What do you do? I've seen two reactions to this: what I've seen my parents' do... I tell her I only gave her a $10 and worked it out. Did that in front of a friend and no amount of reasoning seems to stop his whining:
him: "You idiot! You could have had $10 bucks."
me: "It's not screwing the man... she's responsible for her till."
him: "It's like she dropped it on the street and you found it."
me: "Not even close... it's like I SAW her drop it and have the chance to return it."
Aannnnd... end scene. I seriously could not understand his reasoning and he couldn't understand mine.
Although, I have to admit, if something rings up lower than it's real price and the cashier wont get screwed, I'll probably not say anything.
Anyone else?
So if the bank overcharges me or pays out less money than I got debited at the ATM, I can charge them with a crime, right?
This space left intentionally blank.
People in the USA have no problem taking the cash out of my wallet before returning it
You shouldn't generalize like that. I'm in the USA, and I'd always return a wallet fully intact, and wouldn't ever pocket money in your 7-11 scenario.
In fact, I remember when I was 5 my dad and I found a wallet in the airport. He opened it to look at the license, closed it, looked at me and said "never take anything from someone's wallet, even if you find it on the ground like this. Always return it or give it to security."
So, people with lack of proper role models/home training, yes. But this doesn't include the entire population of the USA.
The face-to-face equivalent of this is: you purchase a $5 item. You hand the clerk a $20 bill, He/she proceeds to give you three 20's in change instead of 3 5's. If you choose to say nothing and keep the money, then (1)is that "wrong," and (2)is that theft?
For the most part, honesty and fair play normally demands that you point out the error. After all, anyone can make a mistake when distracted, and the bottom line is that money will come out of the (probably very poorly paid) employee's pocket when the register doesn't balance at the end of the day. For me, I would be honest most of the time, but it depends on how I've been treated in the course of the transaction. For example, once at a Wal-Mart the clerk clearly rang the purchase up wrong, and gave me about $10 too much in change. When I politely tried to point that out to her, she got very huffy and defensive and insisted that I didn't know what I was talking about and that she did not make such mistakes. Needless to say, I pocketed THAT Hamilton. But is that "theft?" The possibility never occurred to me, and I've never heard of anyone being arrested for getting too much change and not returning it.
"Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket." -- Eric Hoffer
Criminal charges in this case are absurd. But not as absurd as an ATM analogy.
If you request $100 from an ATM and it dispenses $120, so long as you count your money (and nearly everyone does) you KNOW FOR A FACT that an error has occurred. You requested X and got Y.
However, who is to say whether a slot machine that seems to pay out more often is 1)a programming error being exploited or 2)a run of good luck. Now, if the slot machine is paying out and you're not getting three-of-a-kind (or whatever it takes to make one of those things pay... I must admit I've never gambled) then it's clear to the operator (you) that the machine is broken and an error has occurred. However, just because it seems to pay out a bit more often than other machines isn't the sort of thing a normal human being is able to detect.
In fact, some casinos purposely adjust the odds of the machines close to the entrances in order to lure people into the casio with the sound of small, frequent payouts. It's by design.
Now if I go to the bank to return a $20 (meaning I get in line maybe for hours, and risk getting laughed at for my stupid honesty) will I get anything other than not getting arrested? What motivation will anyone have to return seemingly insignificant amounts of cash? A cookie at least? ;_;
Give Kashyyyk back to the Wookies
I remember this being discussed because people found manuals and found out the default password. This is pretty sad, if you think people are stupid enough not to try a default password, than you're stupid enough to be robbed. It's like writing down your PIN number on your ATM card. It's a retarded move.
Do they keep track of the serial numbers of bills dispensed?
taking stuff that don't belong to you is theft. Which part of this concept is so hard to understand???
There was an unknown error in the submission.
If you do $5.00 denominations, you can train the kids to withdraw less money more frequently, of course incurring a fee every single time. So if you take $5.00 out 4 times, or $20.00 out once, your fees can be $4.00 instead of $1.00.
Gotta love it.
My mom says I'm cool.
Even assuming one does notice the extra $20, what are you going to do about it? It would cost them more than $20 to send a courier to pick it up, and I'm certainly not taking time out of my day to fix their mistakes.
The fact that FEMA gave out some money that was scammed doesn't really bother me or a lot of other people I know. You know that is going to happen. Try to minimize it, and it is just part of the cost. What people are PO'd about is the lack of planning and leadership. It is the old officers rule - you can screw up if you are decisive about it. You can even make wrong decisions if you'll admit it and take the heat. All that works as long as people see you have some kind of plan. That wasn't there and there was no responsibility - buck stops here mentality except for political infighting issues. That was the problem with FEMA/Homeland Security.
Withdrawing cash from an ATM != a game of luck. Anyone else notice that one little problem?
But for a while now I've taken it on faith that when i withdraw $100 in $20 bills I get 5 bills. I take the money and stuff it in my wallet without counting it, mostly because sometimes I withdraw from not the safest neighborhoods and I don't want to be standing around flashing cash while I count.
Does this mean that if I am guilty of being lazy/preoccupied/safety conscious and not count my money after withdrawal I could go to jail?
There is one major difference. The average person can probably tell if they're being overpaid by an ATM, whereas I doubt the average person can tell the difference between a faulty machine and a winning streak. It should be the duty of a casino to make sure their machines aren't faulty, and if they are then they should eat the cost. Joe Gambler is NOT a casino machine tech and the limits of his knowledge is typically that you put coins in and sometimes coins come back out, but he could more than likely figure out that if he withdrew $20, he shouldn't be getting $200.
IMHO these people are certainly guilty of something, though IINAL so I don't know exactly what. They took advantage of a situation and took money they clearly realized was not theirs. I don't think this is any different than walking out of a store without paying if you get to the front and find the cashier is in the bathroom. I've said it before, these are not difficult decisions; you know what's right, you just need to choose to do it. "Stickin' it to the man" is simply rationalization of your own immorality.
What's sad here is that apparently a couple dozen people found out about this and it nobody had the honesty to report it.
Maybe they got some of their voting machine code in there by mistake.
if (Republican)
{
Total += 20;
}
My solution to situations like these which makes me feel morally happy is to inform the relevant person/business and then let them fix it. If they don't then I take it to mean that they don't care and are happy for me to keep the money. The nice thing with this is that generally the companies which give rubbish service end up screwing themselves since they are ignore my informing them.
For example when getting too much (or too little) change returned I'll point it out and then it gets fixed right away. However as a grad student we had a really terrible company running the pay phone in our student hostel who would take ages to fix problems and never refunded money when the phone swallowed money without giving credit. So when burglars broke open the cash box below the phone we informed the company and true to form it took them over a week to send anyone to fix it. Lets just say that in that time we all more than recouped the cost of all the money it had swallowed previously (it was in the UK and we had an American, Italian, Australian and Malaysian in the hostel in the time before really cheap international calling!).
The nice thing was that because we had informed the company of the break in and damage in advance when they tried to recoup the missing money from the college they (and us) were covered legally (they refused to respond in a timely manner and therefore were liable). The other great thing about this was that afterwards response times on problems dropped to same/next day!
So does this count as completely moral behaviour? Given that the same company had screwed us in the past by not refunding money swallowed by the machine, that we did inform them of the issue beforehand and that I was not one of the people making long, expensive international phone calls I did not have a problem with it. Indeed I think it was a rather good example of poetic justice.
It is quite probable that someone used your son's bank account to laundry money. Some guys in that line of work may make it appear that it was _you_. I would report it in writing to the bank, with a receipt, that I would keep carefully.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
The catch-22 here is that if you actually did count your cash immediately, and found that the machine had given you fives instead of twenties, that the bank probably would not take your word for it.
That is especially true if you did not catch it immediately
Now obviously someone who goes to that machine after hearing about the malfunction is stealing. But I don't think it's in their interest to imply that customers who simply grab the cash and trust the machine are being criminally negligent.
The problem with that strategy? When they get bigger than you, they'll go out of their way to hurt you. That's why bulling people for being more intelligent than you, but physically weaker, is quickly becoming a losing strategy - someday, they'll control your paycheck, or your computer ... or the world.
Everything is subjective.
An ethics column in Aspen Colorado. Oh what the idle rich do speculate about. And here I am trying to make ends meet and make medical bills. Oh no - ethics and ATMs from the land of 50 million dollar plus mansions. That's fucking news!
Hey Slashdot - go fuck yourself.
I've read the story and the more insightful thing isn't the story but everyone's commentary. Throw in all the piracy stories and I think it's clear that I'd be very cautious about hiring anyone from this forum.
Or did it give it out occasionally instead of bills?
we have a connivence store chain here called WaWa (like 7-11, but good) and their ATMs all do $10 increments. we used to have a bank here in the Philadelphia area that had ATMs that would do $5 bills. they were eventually swallowed up and their magic red ATMs disappeared.
as others pointed out, some casinos have higher denominations than $20.
I once went into a car parts store to buy a battery. I picked up the battery, and absent-mindedly walked out of the store with it. When I got to my car, I was horrified to realize I hadn't paid for it. I went back into the store to the counter and said I'm sorry, I'd forgotten to pay for it. The cashier looked shocked, then rang me up, and I paid and left with it. I'm always glad I wasn't caught, because no cop or judge would ever have believed my excuse that I just forgot to pay for it.
The editorialist's comment that "The measuring stick is less what's right than the odds of getting caught" struck a resonant note with me.
.max
I've been acting in loco parentis for the last year for my two 6 and 8 year old little girl nieces, to whom i've often 'splained to that "even bad people can do the right thing when you watch them, but good people do the right thing when nobody is looking".
This shit is not rocket science. sheesh -- even John Whorfin knew it.
I ordered some stuff from viewaskew.com (kevin smith), one of the items had not arrived and I sent an email asking about the remainder of my order, they reshipped the entire order; when I saw this i called them up and explained and they said cool, we'll send you a return shipping label, what would you like for free from our store? !!! :) They knew I did not have to call and tell them, but i had and rewarded me for my honesty. They did not have to reward me either, they work just like I do and I don't want to get ripped off, so I don't rip off others.
If you have a bunch of shitty things happen to you in your life it's because karma works.
I could not understand why a bank employee seemed so disturbed at my knocking on the door (after closing) and returning $20 overpayment an ATM made. It was explained to me years later: I caused them grief by forcing them to either trace the error or redo their balances.
...
There is the law, its words, its intent and its enforcement. The reality differs at the best of times, and now
I withdrew $300 once from an ordinary small ATM inside a 7-11 in Campbell CA, and it gave me two hundreds and five twenties. I wish the bank ATMs everywhere could do that.
From the editorial:
Perhaps the ATM was designed to falsely record erroneous transactions, and the difference is skimmed by a maintainer. Meanwhile, the bank recovers their "losses" by billing them in relatively small amounts back to their customers.
It's almost as good as Office Space.
I didn't come across a lot of posts from /.'s who've worked in financial institutions. So, let me clear some things up. Forgive me if the exact details are off but it's been almost 10 years since i worked on the customer service side.
/. said that he o
- Any large cash transaction needs to be reported. I believe the amount is $10,000. You can deposit checks that are larger than this amount, and they do not need to be reported. There should be no way around this, even if you make 2 separate deposits at two different times on the same business day. A total $10,000/min limit exists for this report. And for those of you wondering, this isn't an uncommon event in a bank that works with businesses primarily.
- All money is accounted for, and double checked. So if you "deposit" more money than you were supposed to, its actually really easy to find out who's it is at the end of the day. Believe it or not, it is also easy when the CSR is short to find out who owes the money. Once the error is found, it is fixed immediately by debiting or crediting your account.
- There is nothing you can't do in a bank. If you have a check to deposit, and they want to put a 1 part or multiple part hold, don't be afraid to ask them to release more of the money right away or sooner. Oh wait that has nothing to do with this, but is still helpful. Always talk calmly and don't get upset!! The bank can almost always help you out.
- Accepting deposits has never been a problem, and even though bank of america sucks, and might require some form of ID, if i recall correctly, as long as they get "A" form of id, they'll take the deposit. I have done this for a friend many years ago, and they took my drivers license as the ID.
- Withdrawing money is a different story all together. When i worked on the CSR side, we were required to contact the customers home branch and request a fax of their signature card. That card is exactly what it sounds like, a card with their signature, but with a date and a bit of other useless info. The customer always has to sign a withdrawal slip or a check to cash on the spot, so you have proof of their signature. You compare that signature to the signature cards and if it's a match or close enough, they get their cash. When customers change their signature, and this is admitted on their behalf, then they are given a chance to write out their old signature. If the signature was close, then we'd look at the other info on the card to try to prove that it really is the account owner.
- With cards having magnetic stripes now, this is much safer, as long as no one has your PIN. But the signature above part is still important in case the ATM eats your card or it's lost/stolen. So make sure you take care when signing for a new bank account.
- ATMs are stocked with a LOT of cash at some point of the day, sometimes multiple times. Although i never really got to get a GOOD look at the machines, i was assured by everyone and the techs who went out to service them that "they don't make mistakes." Now, check my signature
- When an ATM dispenses money and it doesn't add up when the machines are checked, you pull up the records of it's transactions. And like i said before, and difference is easily found. In the cases that i've been aware of where large sums of money were paid out once or repeatedly, their cameras have come into play to help identify the end user. Regardless, the card holder is responsible. If the card was stolen, used and an extra $3,000 paid out, the account holder is responsible. That is why you MUST call and report your lost/stolen card immediately!
- If you are even short changed at an ATM, make sure to report it immediately to the branch if they are operating under normal business hours. If they are closed, call it in immediately and find out what you are required to do. Under normal circumstances you will get your money either through credit to your account or cash on the spot.
- One guy on
My abilities are only limited by my imagination
The same mechanism by which you would be caught for getting $20 instead of $5 should protect you from getting $5 instead of $20. Put the complaint in writing, list the serial numbers of the bills, have the bank clerk give you a date-stamped photocopy of your complaint, ideally have them photocopy the bills with the serial numbers showing, and don't spend those bills. Easiest way to assure the latter is to deposit them straight back into your account and get the clerk to give you a receipt for those specific bills with serial numbers on them, then withdraw the amount of money you originally wanted.
If the ATM made a mistake and didn't give you the correct amount of money the banks response would be it makes mistakes sometimes and since you can't prove that it didn't give you the correct amount(because the bank won't let you look at the ATM logs and security tape) you have to deal with it.
If a shopkeeper accidentally gives you too much change ($10 note instead of a $5, one too many $1 coins, etc) it's their own damn fault, and you are not an evil criminal for opting not to bring it to their attention and give the extra back. You simply get a little more money than you otherwise would have, and the shopkeeper needs to wear the expense of an error they made, same as the rest of us.
In my opinion, the same thing applies with slot machines and ATMs. If the people running them are so concerned about the correct amount of money being dispensed, they should be testing/maintaining them a bit better. The end user is not an evil criminal for simply hanging on to a bit of unexpected extra cash they get.
OK, maybe I'm not of two minds. I think that those who got the extra money should have given it back. That would be The Right Thing To Do.
Did you ever give a store clerk a $10 bill and get change for a $20 bill? What did you do? I told the clerk of the mistake and gave back the extra $10. What's in your wallet? Ill-gotten money? Or money you deserve to have?
Breaking a machine, or in this case taking advantage as a broken machine is criminal activity. But unless I can prosecute the CEO of bank for criminal negligence when I have no money for week due to the firms mistake, then I don't see how the bank should charge me for criminal activity when their machines give me $400 instead of $100.
...
The first time is an accident and you should not go to jail. However, if you continue asking for $100 then you are knowingly comitting a crime and should go to jail. I expect that the people to be prosecuted are those who engaged in the latter.
They can bankrupt me with no significant repercussion
You can sue them. And if the CEO knowingly repeatedly "improperly credits a bad check" he can go to jail to. Things seem perfectly symetrical to me. Either compare one accident to one accident or repeated abuse to repeated abuse, not one accident to repeated abuse.
Yeah, well now you're a thief. Using a trademarked phrase like that. I think I hear CapitalOne's Vikings and pillagers coming right now.
Just because you can, does not mean you should.
I'm old enough to remember the first ATMs that had 20s, 10s and 5s and to have read stories about the occasional misloading of the 5s or 10s magazine with 20s. ATMs quickly evolved to 20s only. Years later I was in Las Vegas and asked an ATM for 240. I saw 4 bills come out and my initial reaction was "Sh*t, they are never going to believe me". Then I noticed two of the bills were 100s.
FWIW, ATMs in Europe dispense assorted denominations. However Euro denominations come in different sizes, so misloading magazines is not an issue there.
You're missing GP's point. There's a reason there are square quotes around "crime" the first time around in that quote; it's a reductio argument, in favor of precisely the conclusion you're "correcting" GP towards.
You've also missed GP's bigger point:
Now I bet you that is the real issue here behind the possibility of prosecution. If you knowingly, with premeditation and planning, withdraw money from an ATM that's dispensing too much money, well, that's clearly theft, and the cops sure better try to see if they can catch and prosecute.
And TFA certainly suggests this is what's happened:
So, the suspicion is that somebody went out of their way to go to that ATM acting on the knowledge that it was handing out excess money, with the intent to take advantage of this fact; and that somebody may have rigged the machine, too.
The people who used this ATM during the time in question will be checked out. The cops's first priority will be to find the ones that carried out a relatively clear theft as described above. Threats of prosecution may be made towards some who didn't, in order to get them to spill the beans about telling their pals to come take advantage of the ATM. Most of the people who used the ATM will probably not be worth prosecuting for anything more than a misdemeanor, if at all.
Are you adequate?
I'm a long-time Commerce Bank customer (bank employees always confused by less-than-10-digit account number). It used to be that Commerce Bank would not charge you to use other bank machines, but you'd still sometimes be charged by the ATM owner. However, for at least the past year, Commerce Bank (in New york City, at least) has been refunding our account with what the OTHER banks charge when we use their ATMs. Very nice - all ATM use is essentially free.
Lose essential liberties to get temporary safety = get only hassles and security theater.
Thank you, Steve...for such an astute observation! Both excellent AND magnificent at the same time..and also strangely arousing..
--
Wasn't HomelessInLaJolla's UID lower...?
(In an awkward coincidence, this is my Sig for all of my comments.)
About 20 years ago, I was working in a shopping mall, and the ATM at the end of the mall where I worked accidentally had $20 bills loaded in the $10 slot. I was looking to buy a book, and needed about $7, so I withdrew $10. There were a couple of guys at the machine when I walked up who were taking out cash $10 at a time (ie, they were getting $20 for each withdrawl) up to their daily limit. As I walked away with my $20, they said "hey, don't tell anyone".
A few days later, the bank corrected the error and updated my balance to a withdrawl amount of $20 instead; I received a letter about a week later explaining the error and apologising for any inconvenience because of their error. I wasn't overdrawn, and I suspect they would've waived any charges on a single withdrawl that caused that.
But for a couple of guys who willfully took advantage of the error? I'm sure they got more than a letter and a balance adjustment.
Insanity is a gradual process; don't rush it.
More like scott:tiger
...or maybe even gaben
:)
Homonyms are fun!
You're driving your car, but they're riding their bikes there.
From TFA:
Annette Parker, a supervisor at Eagle's Truck Stop, said she unplugged the machine after overhearing conversations about the excess payments."The next morning when we had come back in, someone had plugged it back up," she said.
Annette should be charged with Gross Stupidity. Are you telling me that an ATM in an unattended installation was incorrectly dispensing $$ in favour of the customer, and she *unplugged* a machine that could be plugged back in? Jesus Jupiter, what did she think would happen?
Round these parts, unattended ATM's (those not in a 24 hour store, with no staff in the vicinity, etc.) are locked down in terms of access to the power source, network connection, etc. In the case in the article, anyone, can uplug/replug the device, and perform diagnostics, etc. This was well covered last September: http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/09/21/181 9242. Why does the installing company's dereliction of duty combined with bonehead attendants turn into a criminal charge for the customer who came up on the good side of bank service charges for once in her life?
Okay, this is a little silly - but seriously, at what point has the vendor done such a crappy job that it is their problem, not the customer's?
[17] Leary, T., White, C., Wood, P. R., Bhabha, W. D., and Wirth, N. Lambda calculus considered harmful. In Proceedings
Regardless of anything else, this bank is monumentally stupid. By graciously admitting error and fixing their foolish mistake, they could have generated goodwill. At this rate, expect them to lose all these customers, a good chunk of their relatives, friends and casual acquaintances, and everyone else who hears about this through newspaper, radio, tv, internet etc.
The man always wins. The only way you can even think about keeping money is if you find a bundle of cash that fell off the back of a Brinks truck. I have no moral problem with keeping that money, but if an ATM shoots out twenty dollar bills, there's a video camera recording every second of the transaction, and my ATM card is in the machine, so The Man will come knocking at my door sooner or later.
Who said the federal government ever returns it?
am I supposed to read that as 'chicks not for free' or 'bang chicks for free'?
I dont know what kind of value system you folks follow, where you justify profiting from someone else's mistakes , and where litigating is the only way to get what is rightfully yours.
Thankfully, here , its not uncommon to read about cabbies who , when they found a bag of cash passengers left behind, went great lengths to track down the passengers and return the money
Every once in a while, I get overpaid by busy store clerks who mistake a 100 rs bill for 500 while returning change. Pointing it out doesnt make me a hero.Its what is expected of me.
Ditto for when I mistakenly overpay the store clerk.
No-one is FORCING you to use a particular bank. If you don't like your bank's service, take your money somewhere else. If you don't like banks in general, put your money in a safety deposit box or something. Unfortunately, living bank-less is not only rather difficult in many ways, but also potentially dangerous. Yes, you can get paychecks cashed at some stores and pay many of your bills with cash, but not all. Some companies will simply not accept cash, even at a local office. Money-orders will get you farther, but cashing third party checks is a real pain if you don't have a local bank of the correct denomination. Now, how do you buy a car? A house?
The dangerous part comes in when you realize that every list the government prints to tell people what to watch for regarding "terrorists" and other criminal masterminds includes people that pay cash, especially for large bills. Why is this guy trying to stay off the radar? Where does he get all this cash? Is he laundering money? Why does he have $20,000 in a safe deposit box? Buried in his back yard?
There was an article recently about a pair of truck drivers arrested because the cab of their truck contained a large amount of cash. Not cash and drugs. Not cash and guns. Just cash. The cash was a priori considered evidence of criminal activity and was ceased. Now, I am not saying that criminal activity is *not* likely, but the assumption is interesting isn't it?
It seems to me like the ATM is operating at the will of the bank. It was programmed by the bank, it accepts and dispenses tender for the bank, it engages in transactions. In the most significant ways, the ATM is a Teller, operating as an agent for the interests of the bank.
The ______ Agenda
I was with my dad at one point when he was getting cash at a bank (from the counter). He stepped away to let the next person up to the window and counted the money, the went back to the teller. "Excuse me, Miss. I think you counted this wrong." "Well, I'm sorry, Sir, you stepped away from the window and the transaction is over. That's our policy." "Fine. You gave me an extra twenty lady." She went white. You know she probably had to balance the till out of her pocket. We walked away.
As other people have noted. Banks (usually) will screw you no matter who the mistake is caused by. People owe little moral obligation to the bank (or any large company) these days. It is a matter of the moral obligation you owe to yourself and what you can live with.
In this particular case, I can easily see that anyone returning to the malfunctioning machine, specifically to take advantage, is acting as a criminal. As for the initial windfall? How much time and effort does it take to correct and what is your compensation? I have called the bank on my cell phone before when an ATM was malfunctioning in some way. If it is easy to get through, I report the problem. If they make it a hassle, I don't. Why am I obligated to fight their (arguably deliberate) poor customer service to correct their error, especially if it is small? The larger the error and the better their service, the more I feel obligated. They serve *me* remember? When I make a mistake with *my* customers, I eat it. If the mistake is large and needs to be corrected, they get something for their trouble. That is how business is supposed to work.
The thing with this story, that differentiates it from other (legitimate) businesses, is that this concerns banks.
Banks *create* money. Both in Canada, and in the US, banks are able to lend out more than they have; effectively printing their own money. In canada they do not actually have any money at all stored in their vaults, to correspond to your bank account(in the US, afaik, they need to keep 10% of what you deposited, printing only 90% of the money you withdrawl/deposit from them). They'll have some small-cash hanging around here and there, but your bank account is purely fictional. There's two ways you can think about this
1) it's immoral for the banks to create fictional money, just as it's immoral for induviduals to create fictional money from their mistakes.
2) it's moral for the banks to 'create money', just as it's moral for induviduals to 'create money' from their mistakes
With the coming of digital cash, this situation gets even stranger; I've been working at my current job for over 6 months now; I've not seen a single cent from my efforts. I've worked quite a lot of hours, yet, the "money" involved is a change in a data entry on two(+) computer systems (work, bank), and then another change in a data entry on two other computer systems (bank, student loans). Some of what I had saved earlier eventually makes it's way to the point where it can be used via debit card(food,rent), however the point of this story is there's no actual money involved. The whole system of incentives, rewards and such is entirely simulated. None of this is real. This whole discussion is pointless! The banks create whatever fucking reality they want.
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
If you go to a convenience store, and the cashier gives you too much change, you are under NO circumstances obligated to return the extra change. However, if the clerk short changes you, he or she IS obligated to fix the error. So if I go to an ATM and it gives me too much money, unless I take advantage of the situation, the same rules apply. (Unless, of course, when you opened your account, the bank probably made you sign a paper that states that if they make a mistake, it is your duty to fix it) At my bank, there is a 24-hour hold on all ATM deposits, in order to prevent fraud. So if I put money in an ATM, I can't take it out until 7AM the next business day.
in fact this asymmetry in rules does not stop just here. it probably does with pretty much any mistake. the bank CAN levy any fees at any time, even by mistake, and can get away with it, while the customers have no such right. their costumer complaint mechanisms are way too antiquated and take a long time. but, how come they can call the cops at the drop of a hat and even drag you to the court. the whole incident stinks, its the same even in the case of the slot machine. when you step into an ATM and if it dispenses less number of notes (by mistake) you have no way of informing the bank, for, once yu have stepped out of the ATM, you're outside their premises and hence their rules not applicable. bank rules stink, since they are one-way. the same for a software EULA, like that of MS. there is no choice too, since everyone writes such a EULA. we'd come to a situation where the providers of the service want to protect thier arse at any cost, and the customer has absolutely no choice.
It isn't moral to take advantage of such problems, but it should be legal. Why? Because making it illegal allows the operators of those machines to avoid responsibility for keeping the machines in good working order. In the case where the incorrect payout is caused by someone's tampering, then the person doing the tampering should be responsible for the entire damages.
As an ATM customer, I also don't count the money. First, I take out at least $300 at a time, and I'm not going to count that in public. Second, whatever the mistake, even if I happen to notice, I'm not going to waste time going through a pointless discussion with the bank anyway only to be potentially accused of lying or fraud; if the bank regularly makes mistakes that cost me too much money, I switch banks.
I made a small transaction at an ATM once and noticed it pegged the balance on my account way, like, obscenely way too high.
I didn't go and pull out shitloads of money thinking I could cash in. Didn't take a legal genius to realize that's not my money. I called the bank and told them what was up, and they were already aware of the problem and had fixed it by the time I got home.
If someone else visited that machine and thought, "Ka-CHING!" and cleaned it out thinking they were set for life, then they were stealing, plain and simple. Same as people who stiff retail stores when the cashier makes a mistake, or people who discover a slot machine that's basically printing money.
It's not enough to simply ask people to return the money they took, because then everyone will always act on impulse in such a situation, and never be given a moment of pause. Maybe you can make a case for treating opportunistic as opposed to pre-meditated theft differently, but it's still theft.
First off: it's "you're" or "you are".
Secondly: haven't you ever seen "It's a Wonderful Life"? When the bank errors in your 'favor', you aren't screwing the bank, you are screwing somebody else who put their money into the bank. The bank is simply trying to offset that by screwing you back.
One time i stopped in for a frappuchino, hot summer day, my total was like $4 something, i only had 2 in cash on me, so i pulled out my debit card. The girl behind the counter informed me that their phone lines were down and my drink was on the house. That made my day, and of course i put the $2 in cash i did have in the tip jar.
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
Banks can make significant amounts of money by intentionally ripping off customers and making it difficult to get their money as a matter policy. A customer may have the right to sue but it is unrealistic to think that is a viable possiblity for most people.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
No no no no no... what you need to do is spoof your MAC address and download kiddieporn and bombmaking instructions through the AP belonging to the guy whose dog keeps crapping on your lawn. It's only acceptable to abuse open or poorly-secured APs for revenge - never for tittilation or personal gain. Jeez... what have you got next to *your* moral compass? (I've got a huge hunk of magnetite next to mine).Simple really, Moral relativism, and Materialism took root. Make note that slashdot often complains about other's ethics. e.g government, business. Forgetting that you can't have government ethics, or business ethics if you don't have individual ethics. Keep also in mind that a lot of these young people will grow up and move into positions of authority and power. Bringing their ethics with them. A withdrawn ATM and major illegal copyright infringement will be the least of their transgressions when all is said and done. In the mean time keep your office supplies under lock and key.
"I did not know it was broken" - that statement can be used in court. Come on, a machine breaks down and starts giving away money (for e.g). You are in a hurry and don't care to count your money. Can you be blamed? Play that card all the time. There should be regular maintenance (and removal of the mspaint with funny drawings too LOL) and malfunctioned machines should be locked. Are there no ways to have such a system? It's causality. Malfunctioned machine + Human Nature = mone $$$ (or euro, whatever the currency). Who's to be blamed? The Bank or the guy who maintained the machine. (unless you're Doctor Who who gains money by hovering his sonic screwdriver over an ATM machine, you are not a thief) I opt for being accused of "greed" rather than "theft" (though, if you think about it - greed does lead to theft but in this case, the person did not break the ATM).
Do I require the c-sig package to have a signature?
So the bank makes a mistake and I go to jail for it? Isn't that akin to handing someone the ability to send to jail whoever they please? It's neither in my power nor in my ability to know whether the machine is broken or faulty, I just use it and depending on whether the bank is too stupid to set it up properly, I become a criminal?
Logical consequence? I won't use ATMs anymore. I will go to your teller and have HIM give me my money. Let's see what happens when half of the US ignore your ATMs and want a human being to hand them their money.
Ok, ok. I know what's gonna happen. They'll up the charges for requiring "human assistance". That's what's broken about our bank system. You are dependent on them. You need an account. I don't know about the US, but here, having no account pretty much sends you on the street. No account, no job (because your employer will want to know an account to send your money to, no cash payment possible). No job, no account (because your bank won't give you one without a steady income).
Banks have way too much power.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Do we trust money at all? Money is a tool--do we trust our tools? Or do we trust ourselves, and our understanding of the physical world? Do we trust money, or do we trust the members in the society that makes use of it? Even so -- how much we 'trust money' is an essential function of the operation of these same banks (although in the larger picture, how much trust 'we' put in in those bits/peices of paper pretty much conforms to the opinion of the Fed/bank of canada's opinion). As far as my point; it doesn't change--creating instances of this class of tool of which we trust is a task normally done by the bank, but in this case is done by someone, accidentally, other than a bank. If the bank can do so(to some extent) without breaching that trust, so can that person. However; if the bank *is* breaching this trust (but in acceptable limits imposed by the fed/bank of canada, say), then that person too is breaching the trust.
But still; trust it to do what, exactly? Allocate resources efficiently? For 20$ of mis-freed cash, that's an insignificant drop in the allocative efficiency of the system; much worse to the allocative efficiency of the system would be the hiring of another teller. 20$ would be what, a ten thousanth of a billionth of the allocative efficiency of a system which is horrendously inefficient, is misallocated, slightly. But I digress...
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
I think the fact that you take ADVANTAGE of the deficiency is where the issue lies. It's a bit like leaving your front door open - that's still not an invite for others to come in and help themselves.
However, as someone else said - you're in a hurry and you just grab what it gives you, how are you going to know it made a mistake until much later? And will you be sure it as the ATM, or something else you got paid?
And can the bank prove exactly how much was dispensed? Logically, if that mechanism was reliable the bank wouldn't have that problem in the first place..
Insert
...someday, maybe I'll get six twenties out of a machine I make a a $100 withdrawal.
When it happens: fuck them if they're not smart enough to figure it out. I'll give it back when they ask. Otherwise, they can take out of the nickels, dimes and dollars they've been extracting from me over the years.
If that's a shoddy ethical framework...so be it.
While I sympathise with your predicament, my experience is that the situation isn't that lopsided.
First of all, IANAL, so take this just as someone searching Wikipedia for you, with the usual caveats that means. I say that because I'll take a bit of a legal definitions detour, but that's not really that necessary to illustrate the _moral_ point I'm making, so feel free to skip it if you want to.
The key element in any conviction in the western law system is the "Mens Rea", or "evil intent". (Well, literally "evil mind".) There are various degrees of it, ranging from premeditation (you actually planned ahead to do harm) to negligence (a reasonable person of average intelligence should have seen how an otherwise well meant plan could go wrong and harm someone.) "Criminal negligence" is somewhat a misnomer, in that it's usually not criminally punished, unless it was "gross negligence", meaning it involved "wanton disregard for human life". I.e., unless an ATM was dangling from the ceiling and fell on you, it won't qualify as such.
You'll probably have no case at all, even civil, unless it's the previous degree, namely "Willful blindness". I.e., someone had more than ample warnings that something can go bad, or it was blindingly obvious that it will cause harm, but they choose to pretend the problem doesn't exist.
Why I took that legal definitions detour is because it codifies the basic underlying moral idea: was it deliberate? Did that person _intend_ to do something wrong? Did they _know_ they did something wrong? Did they do anything to rectify the problem _if_ they became aware of it?
(Also, I don't know about the USA, but in Europe we have this clause that you can't keep an undeserved gain, even if it was an error. E.g., if you transferred some money to the wrong account by mistake, even if the recipient didn't know about it, they still have to give you your money back. That's another codifying a basic moral idea: money gotten by someone's error aren't yours to keep.)
And in that aspect, the bank doesn't seem guilty at all to me, and the situation isn't as equivalent as you paint it. Sorry.
1. The bank certainly didn't intend to rip you off there, and they _do_ correct it when they become aware of the problem.
1.a. I can assure you (well, second hand, because I have friends who worked for banks) that banking software is among the most tested and reviewed software ever made, ranking up there with the stuff they run in airplane control systems. Banks not only are more carefully monitored by the government, but also live by their reputation and face bigger money problems. Noone wants software who makes gross mistakes. And not just for little fish like you and me, but they also deal with massive corporate funds. Software which gets a brain-fart for a $100 transaction, well, you can see the problems it could cause when it does a $100,000,000 transfer for a takeover.
Most of the problems involving banks are human errors, like an absent-minded dolt putting a pack of $100 notes in the $10 tray of the ATM. And even those are very rare, actually.
1.b. At any rate, they _do_ fix the problem when they aware of it, and even offer assistance for your own problems, like when you entered the wrong sum or destination account. (As a personal anecdote, they sure have been nice and helpful when I typoed the sum I transferred to my insurance... by omitting the decimal point.)
And to get back to that moral point, you can't fault them for not automatically fixing something they don't even know about. So until you go tell them about it, wtf do you expect? Telepathy? By your own tale, you needed exactly _one_ trip to the bank to solve it, which doesn't seem that tragic.
2. By comparison the folks ripping off an ATMs and the like are not in the same category at all. You do count the money you get from the ATM, don't you? So you'd _know_ something went wrong. Plus there are cases where it's been deliberate by any reckoning. There are people who went back and took
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
Oh please. It's not like "not reporting a beating", it's more like hitting someone's car and driving away hoping that noone knows. We're not talking prosecuting people who just were nearby and watched the ATM being ripped off, but those who actively ripped it off.
Often went back to get more money until they maxxed their daily limit, and told their friends too to go there and withdraw money from that ATM. In which case it's premeditated too.
How about this simple concept: if you harmed someone, even unintentionally, you try to rectify the situation. If you bumped someone's car, you try to contact them and pay for the repairs. If you were playing baseball with your son in the backyard and broke a neighbour's window, you call the neighbour and offer to buy him a new glass pane. And if ripped someone off of some money, you give it back. If you don't, at the very least you're an asshole.
Additionally, I dunno about the USA, but here in Europe we have this legal and moral concept that gains made by someone's error aren't yours to keep. If you transferred too much money to someone's account, or to the wrong account, they have to give it back. If you gave a cashier two banknotes stuck together instead of one, she's expected to give you the right change nevertheless if she notices, not just hope you didn't notice. You'd expect no less if it were your money down the drain, wouldn't you?
So at least here, there would be no shadow of a doubt that the extra money _aren't_ legally yours to keep.
Bank or not, WTH is so difficult a concept there? It's not money falling from of the heavens or winning the lottery, and much less some infraction you just happened to notice as a bystander. It's money coming from someone else. If it was someone else getting your money by your mistake, you'd expect them to give you your money back, not come back to rip you off more. How is it screwed or lopsided if the same applies to banks?
Even in the relationship with banks you'd expect no less if the situation were reversed. If you (e.g., after a yard sale, or let's say you have a small shop) gave the bank more money than you thought (e.g., said you were depositing a 1000, but gave them 1100), you'd expect them to count the money and tell you you were wrong. You wouldn't expect the cashier to just silently pocket the extra money.
Why is it so lopsided to expect the same courtesy when the roles are reversed? If you got too much of their money, they too expect you to do the nice thing and give it back?
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
seems to be the Rule #1 of the gambling industry for its customers.
Well...
Ice
Sig? Where I go, I don't need
Here in Argentina a woman won 30.000.000 in a slot machine, she took a pic with her cell phone of the machine saying so. The casino claimed that the machine was broken and that those machines don't offer that much money, 30.000 at most. So they offered her that amount. She is suing them. Now all slot machines are required to have a banner that states the maximum prize.
Nobody ever heard of the slot programmer again...
First of all, the ATM was dispensing 20's in place of 5's. Most ATM's I use dispense 1 five dollar bill max regardless of your withdrawal (the rest being 20's or 10's). Therefore, I think if someone were taking advantage of this (e.g. withdrawing $7,000 for example) the paper trail would be obvious that the person was making deliberate withdrawals to maximize the number of five dollar bills dispensed. If you withdrew $25 and received $40, I think the case would be very weak that you took advantage of the flaw. In addition, I would highly recommend against anyone illegally profiting from something that involves recording your personal information (i.e. swiping your own debit card) in the process!
The plain simple truth is this: For every dollar you receive that is not yours, and if you don't try to correct the error as soon as you are aware of it that is theft. Patrons demand that businesses are accurate in billing you for goods and services and that their employees follow that policy of accuracy. Businesses demand the same accuracy from you, the customer. Now, don't take this to mean that mistakes don't happen, because they do. If you as a customer, are charged too much, you will likely insist that the error be corrected as you discover the error. Why would this be any different for a business? If an ATM spits out too much money, it is not yours to keep just because there was an error. By not reporting it, you are no better than common petty thief.
Life takes interesting turns, but the most interest is when you're off the beaten path.
There was just one time an ATM gave me too much money ($20). I stepped inside the bank and told the service manager, who wrote out a small slip of paper and had me sign it. She said the bank doesn't service the ATM, so the ATM company would take care of the issue. A week later, a credit for $20 appeared in the account. I figured they simply don't have a process in place to deal with customers returning money. As you say, cost of doing business.
With the exception of the veterans, I don't see how the examples you give are victims. The waitress at the restaurant can live within her means of income. If she can't, she should move to where her income potential is greater than her expenses. While doing that, she could/should look for opportunities to increase her marketability so that she's able to sustain a better standard of living. It's called "living on cash" "having a roommate (or several)" and "public transportation." She should look into it.
The stock clerks and cashiers are probably making union scale wages, and should also be able to live within their means.
The senior citizen who thinks he/she can get by on social security is living in a fantasy world, and failing to take measures to provide for their own needs during their lifetime was a serious error in judgment. Moreover, where is the family of that person to care for their needs? If they have lived financially irresponsibly and neglected relationships for a lifetime, why should I consider them a victim?
We need to care for our vets. You've got me on that one. However, vets too should work if they are able.
Exploited? For being required to keep the terms of the agreement they signed up for? I understand that the agreement is stacked against them, but they didn't *have* to sign it. If you feel strongly about it, it is *possible* to live without credit cards. Really.
But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
Minimum thresholds are just that. Going above and beyond looks real good to the regulators, which is a very, very important thing in the banking world.
Pessimists.net - as if life wasn't depressing enough.
Since I made money years ago when I bought and sold Enron stock not knowing that it was a criminal enterprise, does that make me a criminal?
Good for you. Yes, cashiers are usually taken aback when you do that. I once walked into a home-improvement store and picked up a small item, gone to the front to pay for it, then put it back, explaining that I'd accidentally put one in my pocket while looking for other stuff, and didn't realize I had it until a few days later. It was about a $2 item so I wasn't going to make a special trip for it, but I did pay for it eventually.
Jack, around ten years old, was leaving a convenience store when he spotted a wallet on the ground. He picked the wallet up and found it contained a driver's license, a credit card, and eighty dollars. Jack wasn't sure what to do, so he took the wallet back home and gave it to his father. Jack's father took the eighty dollars out, gave Jack forty and kept forty for himself, and mailed the wallet to the address listed on the license.
I was particularly appalled by this story because Jack told it to me as an example of how "cool" his dad was. Jack now has two children, whom I'm sure are now learning the same self-centered version of morality that Jack learned from his father.
I think of this story when I see a person cut in line, or yell at a store clerk, or engage in antisocial behavior in front of his child. The fact that you and Jack both remember how your father handled a moral dilemma is troubling when you see the examples being provided for children - in public, no less. I can only imagine the moral guidance these people are providing when they aren't subject to social disapproval.
For all we know the moon may be as conscious as a poet or a realtor, and extremely weary of its monotonous round. - HLM
A number of years ago Seafirst would dispense $5, $10 and $20 denominations. But they dropped the $5 denominations.
What this actually a software or software failure? Or is there a chance that humans (jellyware) were involved in the actual loading of the money?
It would be quite easy for someone to put $20 bills into a $5 bill slot at some point of the loading process. It isn't like the bills are different sizes.
If this is accidental, then it is the fault of the group servicing the ATM. They need to take some responsibility in the losses.
Of course, those who withdrew cash and expected $5 bills need to take some responsibility too. But the level of responsibility is somewhat less because they expected the machine to work properly. I can see instances where they may not look at the actual bills because they wanted $25 and they got two pieces of paper.
Now if there were people who noticed the problem and took advantage of it in some way out of the ordinary, like requesting to be paid in $5 bills as opposed to their normal $10s or $20s, they should be required to pay back what they got. Their actions would indicate foreknowledge of the problem.
I can see an instance where someone notices the discrepancy and tries a second withdrawl to see if it were a freak accident. If the discrepancy happens again, they may try it a third time, just in case. At that point I would hope that the experimentalist would notify the staff at the site as well as any contacts mentioned on the ATM. (I would also hope that the experimentalist would set aside the money to be returned at a later date.)
A number of years ago I withdrew $60 from an ATM. When I looked at the before and after numbers, I noticed that $120 had been pulled out. Thankfully I had a 'before' and 'after' picture that I was able to present to the bank so that I wasn't out the $60 they double withdrew.
The bank actually responded quickly and all worked out.
I have had a number of instances where I could have 'saved' a lot of money if I had kept my mouth shut when my 'guestimate' of what I would have to pay was way over what was being charged. In these instances, the per unit prices were right but the quantities were off.
Rather than face an ethical problem, I mentioned the possibility of an error to the sales person and they checked their numbers. Sure enough, they realized that they had been using the wrong quantities. Their positive responses were uplifting.
Since the businesses were local businesses that I like and support, I don't feel that I lost out by bringing up the mistakes. If anything, it allows me to sleep with a clean conscience.
I will admit that there have been times when I've realized that mistakes were made after I've returned home with the merchandise. If the mistakes are small enough, for or against me, I just let them slide. If they are large ones, either way, I'll see about correcting them. (The register receipt would have to be fairly easy to understand though. It is more than a little embarassing to try to correct something that is actually part of a deep discount deal.)
I usually do a quick count of the money I get from an ATM. On the other hand, I'm close to six feet tall, I have a heavy beard and I can look like the type that would love to beat you up if you tried something stupid. I also tend to use ATMs in 'safe' locations while staying very aware of the environment.
Other people may not feel safe about doing a count, especially if they can see at a glance that they got X bills when they were expecting X bills. Thus a request for $75 could result in 6 bills, three $20s and three $5s and result in a total of $120 if the $5s were actually $20s.
If this person already has some cash in their wallet, they may not realize what happened.
And if this person is elderly, female, invalid, handling infants or small children, or some in some other vulnerable state, they might forego the counting, especially if the ATM is in an unsafe location.
I used to work with a guy who filled ATMs with cash. He said his record with his employer had one blemish, when the ATMs he filled came up short by a few hundred dollars, each of them.
Turns out, a guy who covered for him while he was sick put the wrong bills in the wrong slot. That guy lost his job, customers who profited from it had their account balances satisfied to compensate for the extra cash withdrawn. Of course, had their account gone negative the bank would work it out with them.
Chewbacon
The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
Every crime costs you, sooner or later. The bank's cost of business, insurance inflation, the extra cost on the jurisdiction that gets called in to investigate, the cost of reporting to the feds (which eats tax dollars as the feds have to generate and process about three forests of paperwork for every incident), etc. And taking cash that isn't yours from that bank is a crime.
So even if the bank never took the money back, it costs every one of us. If eth bank takes the money back, it costs every one of us. If the bank for some reason can't tell who took the money, and you don't report it, you're ripping off everyone you know.
And the fact that a lot of people don't get that, or just don't care, is a big part of why western society is having a lot of the problems it does.
Yeah, I know it's fiction, but revisit Spiderman 1 (movie or comic, either way). Unlce Ben's death because Pete didn't give a damn about a robbery pretty well sums it up.
Everyone seems to be getting on the backs of the people who "exploited" the flaw. If I stood at a cash machine in the U.K., and I pressed the £20 button, and got £200, I would walk away, assuming it was MY error. I'd be pissed off that I'd pressed the wrong button, but that would be it. I probably wouldn't bother even checking my bank balance for a few days (I check my balance online roughly weekly), and by the time I'd checked it, I would almost certainly have spent about half of it, and deposited the other £100 in my account.
Now we have a problem. I have now spent money that wasn't mine to spend. I think that the bank should eat that cost, because it was their error that gave me that money to spend. So what about the other £100? How can the bank possibly take that off me? They can't prove that that's not, I don't know, birthday money or something. If my bank charges me £25 every time I make a transaction when my account is outside of its overdraft, and assuming I had £75 in the account before the accident at the cash machine, then I would assume I've been charged £25, and so I might as well spend the £200 rather than put the transaction on my card. But, a huge wad of cash burns a hole in my pocket, and my next paycheck's in two days, so I might as well blow it, after all, it's my money right? But, if I then get billed for the £200, that might REALLY put me over my limit, and then I'd pick up a lot of bank charges. My fault?
"OK, maybe I'm not of two minds. I think that those who got the extra money should have given it back. That would be The Right Thing To Do."
Interesting this "right thing to do". Seems that the honest always end up getting the short end of the stick. And for what? A good feeling? Unfortunately good feelings don't pay the bills, and keep food on the table. Knock the dishonest all we want, but their the ones with nice cars, great music, movies, and games, house, trophy wife, and they get to keep the good feelings to boot.
I agree with what you said; if you make the attempt and are not able to do anything about it, then yes -- that's their loss and your gain. My issue -- and what I believe to be stealing -- comes from the people who don't make the attempt.
First of all, the law has nothing to do with the amount of the deposit or withdrawl. Only the amount of cash in that transaction if it is $10K or over. So, the Silicon Valley senior marketing folks would have nothing to worry about depositing $15,000 checks biweekly. They're checks.
Secondly, if you deposit $9899.47 each night at 8:53 pm, that would be suspicious. And while the bank is under no obligation to file a Currency Transaction Report (CTR), since the amount is under $10K, they ARE obligated to file a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR).
SAR's are actually looked even closer than a CTR. $10K+ cash deposits and transactions occur routinely in the course of business. Structured transactions like the one you described would not. They are just that - structured to work around the CTR requirements.
Slot machine:
Scenario a.
You put in $1 and see 10 Credits. You look over and see 1 Credit = $1. You go to the ATM, pull out a grand. You put in 10 $100 bills, then cash out.
Scenario b.
You put in $1 and see 10 Credits. You look over and see the big flashing button to play all or bet max. You make a little bit of money, then loose a ton, because that is what slot machines are designed to do "TAKE YOUR MONEY!"
ATM:
Scenario a.
It's after hours and you need $100 to take your date out to the fair. The ticket & food Vendors take dollars not Visa. The ATM hands you $200, but your ballance shows only $100 withdrawn. You spend $200 dollars on your mom to find out she still wont put out.
Scenario b.
It's after hours and you need $100 to take your date out to the fair. The ticket & food Vendors take dollars not Visa. The ATM hands you $200, but your ballance shows only $100 withdrawn. You decide test it, being a programmer geek. You find that as your acout reaches $0 you have a lot of extra cash on hand! You spend $1000 (ATM has a $500 limit or you would have spent more) dollars on your mom to find out she still wont put out.
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
Don't even mention that. When you lose your stuff because the server crashed and you wound up naked due to a bug, tough luck, you're screwed. If you find some way to get free stuff due to a bug and they find out, tough luck, you're screwed.
Flawed analogy, some MMORPGs are way worse than banks.
Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
Wow someone else gets the pyramid scheme nature of banking that can only lead to inflation OR unsustainable exponentially increasing production in a pyramid scheme like fashion. I wish I had mod points to give you and I hope many people read your comment and think about it...
Tired of all the isms, don't exploit people as an employer, or a government, mmmmK?