FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF OMAHA

2015-05-20

Clinton, TN

Communication tactics

Debt collection: Credit card

Threatened to take legal action
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2015-05-20

San Antonio, TX

Other fee

Credit card:

Complaint: I had been a client of First National bank of Omaha since the early XXXX. I just recently noticed they charged me an annual fee of XXXX which I never agreed to. I sent them an e-mail asking why and when had this started because when I applied for the card it had none. The response it happened in XXXX because of the card upgrade that took place. I do n't recall approving them to upgrade or even requested for an upgrade. The credit line with them had even reached up to XXXX but I requested to bring it down about 8 years ago. What is bad they have been charging me this fee and apply it to a XXXX percent interest rate, I only use the card only when promo of lower rates are offered. At this rate nobody would be able to pay them down. They agreed to reverse XXXX fee if I agreed to close my account. I have but I want to request all other fees in the past be reversed to include that high interest rate being charged on them. The question how much have I lost. I calculated an estimate of interest on the ann. fees being charged.
Company Response: Closed with monetary relief

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2015-05-13

IL

Deposits and withdrawals

Bank account or service: Checking account

Complaint: THE PROBLEM WITH FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF OMAHA STARTED IN THE MONTH OF XXXX XXXX AFTER MY DIRECT DEPOSIT FROM XXXX THE ALLOTTMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF {$200.00} INTO ACCT NO XXXX ROUTING NO XXXX STARTED OFF AS A NORMAL TRANSACTION BUT THAT WAS SHORT LIVED IN EXACTLY 24 DAYS MY PROBLEMS BEGAN .SOME ONES INFINITE WISDOM DECIDED TO DEPOSIT AND ELECTRONIC DEPOSIT FROM XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX E/FILES REFUND DISBURSEMENT INTO MY ACCOUNT XXXX ROUTING NO XXXX IN THE AMOUNT OF {$5700.00} EVEN THOUGH THEY KNEW THIS NAME OF THE IRS REFUND WAS NOT MY NAME THEY DEPOSITED THE FUNDS ANY WAY THEY PROCEEDED TO FREEZE MY ACCOUNT RATHER THAN RETURN THE FUNDS TO THE IRS OR XXXX XXXX TO HAVE THESE FUNDS RETURNED TO CORRECT ACCOUNT HOLDER.I AM UNABLE TO PAYBILLS THAT HAVE BEEN OUTSTANDING SINCE XXXX XXXX XXXX THEY REFUSE TO ANYTHING TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM.I HAVE CALLED CUSTOMER CARE FOR THE LAST MONTH NO SUCCESS EVERY ONE TWIDDLING THEIR THUMBS I AM ALL TALKED OUT
Company Response: Company believes complaint caused principally by actions of third party outside the control or direction of the company Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-05-13

MO

APR or interest rate

Credit card:

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-05-12

Quartzsite, AZ

APR or interest rate

Credit card:

Complaint: On approximately XXXX/XXXX/15, I did a balance transfer to Firstbank Card. The offer from Firstbank Card was 0 % for 12 months, with a 3 % balance transfer fee. A few days ago while going over the the credit card statement from Firstbank Card I realized that I had a finance charge of {$160.00}. I called first bank so that they could explain. They stated that the balance transfer was at 0 % for the first month and thereafter at 16.99 %. I stated that was an error made on there part and insisted that they listen to the audio recording which took place during the initial transaction. On XXXX/XXXX/15, I was advised by a representative as per supervisor XXXX out of the XXXX, Nebraska office that the audio tape was indeed listened to and that I did agree to the terms that they claim. I am pretty upset as I feel as I was duped, being that I would never agree to such a transaction.
Company Response: Company believes the complaint is the result of a misunderstanding Closed with monetary relief

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-05-07

Achille, OK

Deposits and withdrawals

Bank account or service: Checking account

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-05-05

Benton Harbor, MI

Managing the loan or lease

Consumer Loan: Installment loan

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-04-28

Alpharetta, GA

Credit line increase/decrease

Credit card:

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-04-28

Euclid, OH

Billing disputes

Credit card:

Complaint: I paid my credit card via the issuers website on the day it was due. I received a letter from them XXXX week later stating that my bank had indicated that the information submitted was incorrect and I was charged a {$20.00} late fee. I immediately called the credit card company and was told that the late fee could not be removed because I inputted an incorrect checking account number. I realized, after I had hung up, that my checking account information was saved on the credit card 's website and I could not have inputted it incorrectly because it was already there. All I did was enter the payment date and amount. I then called my bank ( there was no information regarding this transaction on my bank website ) and was told that the reason the payment was rejected was because the " 0 '' was omitted from the beginning of my checking account number when it was sent to them for payment. I called the credit card company back and spoke to someone in Credit Card Accounting. I was told that my checking account information was incorrect ; therefore, my payment was late and the fee was assessed. I tried to explain that I do not work for the credit card company or the bank and my checking account information was saved to " their '' website. How could I have entered the information incorrectly? She told me she would remove my checking account information ( and did so immediately ) from my account and I would have to re-enter it so I could make the payment again. I was then transferred to the credit department to see if they would waive the {$20.00} late fee. The person I spoke to was very rude and actually hung up on me. He told me that there was no payment account information associated with my account. When I tried to explain that was because the woman I spoke to before him had removed it he accused me of trying to blame her for my late payment. I said, " I 'm not blaming her for my late payment. I 'm telling you that is why there is no checking account information associated with my account. Because she just removed it. '' Not long after that was when he hung up on me. I called back and spoke to someone else and explained the same thing to him. How could this be my fault when all I did was enter the amount and payment date? He put me on hold to " speak to his supervisor '' and came back and said that his supervisor refused to waive the late fee and that I should make my payment. I asked if I could make the original {$50.00} payment or if I had to make the new {$57.00} payment they were now asking for. He stated that I could make the original {$50.00} payment but that if the remaining {$7.00} was not paid by XXXX XXXX, XX/XX/2015 that my account would, again, be late. I told him that I was not looking to get out of making any payments and that the XXXX payment would be made just like XXXX, XXXX and every other payments had been. That 's when I got a little heated and told him that that is how big banks make their money ... by screwing the little people who have no recourse. He actually told me that I should contact my bank again because even if the " XXXX '' had been omitted from the account number they still should have put the payment through. Unbelievable! How can I be charged a late fee for a mistake that I did n't make? I understand that this is all done electronically now but, is there not someone at the credit card company whose job it is to enter this information? Accounts receivable, maybe? This is no longer about a {$20.00} late fee on a {$50.00} payment, but the principle of the matter. Everyone at the credit card company that I spoke with insisted that I omitted the beginning XXXX from my account. I asked each XXXX of them that if that were the case how did they get paid in XXXX ( and every previous month ) without a problem? I 'm still waiting for an answer. I believe it 's more of a " the XXXX at the beginning of an account do n't mean anything '' mentality on the credit card company 's part.
Company Response: Company believes complaint is the result of an isolated error Closed with monetary relief

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-04-24

Alpharetta, GA

Payoff process

Credit card:

Complaint: The Banks holding Credit-Card Debt are UN-FAIRLY manipulating their " Payment Allocation '' ( methodology ) to FAVOR " Pay-Down '' of LOWER Interest-rate " Remaining Balance-Due '' while INCREASING those " Remaining Balance Due '' amounts remaining at HIGHER Interest rates as-follows : See Your " Charge Summary '' as those " Line-Items '' depicting ( Your ) various " Purchases '' or " Cash Advance '' or " Balance Transfer '' or " Special/Loan/Program '' followed by It 's " Terms '' itemized as " APR '' with " Fixed Interest '' ( terms ) depicted as ( f ) and " Variable Interest '' ( terms ) depicted ( v ), then followed by " Balance Subject to Interest Rate '', then " Days Rate Used '', and finally that " Interest Charged '' ( You ) over those ( Days ) It was accrued as-such. Whereas I have XXXX ITEMS on My " Charge Summary '' for them to " Allocate Payment '' - and DESPITE that I PAID OVER {$36.00} MORE THAN My " Minimum payment Due '' of {$240.00} ( for actually paying {$280.00} ) - The Banks " Payment Allocation '' rather went-down exampled as-follows : ( A ) " BT SPECIAL '' ( Balance Transfer Special ) amount of {$10000.00} [email protected] % ( v ) RATHER INCREASED {$1.00} to {$10000.00} for NO PAYMENT ALLOCATION WHATSOEVER ~ AND DESPITE ME PAYING MORE THAN {$36.00} ABOVE the " minimum-payment due '' AND well-before It 's " Due Date ''. ( B ) " BT SPECIAL '' outstanding-balance of {$600.00} [email protected] % ( v ) DECREASED to {$570.00} for the " Payment Allocation '' to It of {$29.00} ( C ) " BT SPECIAL '' outstanding-balance of {$1800.00} [email protected] % ( f ) DECREASED to {$1600.00} for a " Payment Allocation '' of {$170.00} ~ Indeed HERE is where THEY apply THE LION-SHARE of that {$280.00} " Payment '' ... toward paying-down what " Balance '' I 've secured at Low/Fixed-Interest :? IT 'S A PROBELM TO CONSUMERS WHEN " PAYMENT ALLOCATIONS '' ARE RATHER MIS-ALLOCATED TO RATHER CAUSE AN INCREASE IN OUTSTANDING DEBT! IT 'S A PROBLEM TO CONSUMERS WHEN PAYING THE MINIMUM PAYMENT DOES N'T AT-LEAST ABATE " NEGATIVE AMORTIZATION '' ( Growth vs. Reduction ) OF ONES " DEBT ''!! IT 'S A PROBLEM TO CONSUMERS WHEN PAYMENT ALLOCATIONS RATHER PERPETUALLY INCREASE THOSE BALANCES " REMAINING '' AT HIGHER INTEREST DESPITE ONE MAKING MORE-THAN THE " MINIMUM PAYMENT DUE '' BECAUSE IT 'S UN-FAIR AND ETHICALLY WRONG!!! The Example again : Whereas My " Minimum Payment Due '' was {$240.00} - and I rather-paid {$280.00} - My " XXXX XXXX BT Special '' @ 6 % FIXED APR " Balance Subject to Interest Rate '' ( Balance Outstanding ) DROPPED for a payment-allocation made toward IT of {$170.00} ... BUT My " XXXX XXXX BT Special ''@7.99 % VARIABLE INCREASED for an additional {$1.00} BEING ADDED TO IT ... THIS DESPITE PAYING MORE THAN THE " MINIMUM-PAYMENT DUE '' PAYING THE " MINIMUM PAYMENT DUE '' SHOULD ALWAYS AT-LEAST SATISFY MAINTENANCE OF THE ACCOUNT STATUS-QUO vs. INDUCE ANY NEGATIVE AMORTIZATION ~ AS IT IS RATHER DOING EXACTLY AND DESPITE ( ME ) MAKING MORE-THAN THAT " MINIMUM PAYMENT DUE ''. This has gone-on for years now despite MINE AND OTHERS protests to " Creditors '' and SHOULD therefore now go to FEDERAL Court as a Class-Action Lawsuit to STOP IT!!! This CURRENTLY ALLOWED PRACTICE OF THE BANKS is an UN-FAIR manipulation of that methodology employed to calculate " Payment Allocation '' and IT MUST STOP NOW with Mine, Yours, and Our protest TODAY, Thank You.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-04-23

Lake Arrowhead, GA

Identity theft / Fraud / Embezzlement

Credit card:

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-04-22

Brkn Arw, OK

Account opening, closing, or management

Bank account or service: Other bank product/service

Company Response: Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-04-22

St Heights, MI

Identity theft / Fraud / Embezzlement

Credit card:

Company Response: Company disputes the facts presented in the complaint Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-04-21

OK

Closing/Cancelling account

Credit card:

Complaint: A cashier 's check was issued directly to First National Bank XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX, XXXX, NE XXXX on XXXX. On the check in the memo field was my name as well as an account number ; the account number was incorrect with XXXX numbers wrong. The check was drawn / cashed on XXXX. I called on XXXX and verified payment was received and that there was a XXXX balance on the credit card account with customer service rep ; I then closed the account on the telephone call after confirming a XXXX balance. Payment was originally due on or about XXXX. On XXXX I received a robocall telling me that payment was over due. I immediately contacted customer service and to my surprise it had not been applied to my account. I contacted my credit union to look into what had happened. They informed me that payment had been drawn / cashed on XXXX. I, as well as the credit union loan officer XXXX called separately to find out what had happened. We called together on XXXX and advised FNB XXXX that the account number was wrong on the check, but my name was correct as well as provided Check number over the phone and we were advised that information was not good enough. My loan officer at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX faxed over front and back of the Cashier 's check that they had drawn / cashed to their accounting group on XXXX as instructed. The loan officer attempted to speak with them again and received no new information XXXX. I also called today on XXXX and have no new news about my payment that was drawn / cashed on XXXX. My account is now very past due and should have been paid in full and closed.
Company Response: Company believes the complaint is the result of a misunderstanding Closed with monetary relief

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-04-20

Smyrna, SC

Advertising and marketing

Credit card:

Complaint: I recevied a credit card offer from First National Bank of Omaha for 0 % APR on balance transfers for the life of the balance with no annual fee. The balance transfer portion of the account was re-priced to 17.99 % with no prior notice. I had no late payments or over-the-limit transactions. A notice of a {$49.00} annual fee being imposed on the account was also received on XXXX/XXXX/15. I believe these actions are in viloation of the Unfair and Deceptive Advertising Practices Act ( UDAP ), and I 've closed the account.
Company Response: Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-04-17

Garden Grove, CA

Customer service / Customer relations

Credit card:

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with non-monetary relief

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-04-06

Bancroft, KY

Identity theft / Fraud / Embezzlement

Credit card:

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with monetary relief

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-04-01

Longmont, CO

Payoff process

Credit card:

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2015-03-26

Victorville, CA

Making/receiving payments, sending money

Bank account or service: Checking account

Company Response: Company believes complaint caused principally by actions of third party outside the control or direction of the company Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2015-03-25

Harrisburg, VA

Billing disputes

Credit card:

Company Response: Company believes complaint caused principally by actions of third party outside the control or direction of the company Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-03-23

Hemby, NC

Closing/Cancelling account

Credit card:

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2015-03-21

Mboro, TN

Transaction issue

Credit card:

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-03-17

Redwood City, CA

Cont'd attempts collect debt not owed

Debt collection: Credit card

Debt is not mine
Company Response: Company can't verify or dispute the facts in the complaint Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2015-03-16

Buxton, ME

Account opening, closing, or management

Bank account or service: (CD) Certificate of deposit

Company Response: Company can't verify or dispute the facts in the complaint Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-03-16

Bell, CA

Delinquent account

Credit card:

Company Response: Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response