Scheduled Maintenance: The site will be offline Sunday, October 13, at 7:00 PM Eastern (23:00 UTC) for a forum software update. The update should take less than 1 hour.
TheTimeLord wrote: ↑Sun Sep 29, 2024 12:18 pm
I bet if the OP had been hacked he would be praising Fidelity for not allowing the hacker to withdraw the funds until October 22nd.
Good point. Just to be safe fidelity should put a 5 year hold on the money.
OR, and hear me out, they allow legitimate transfer and not illegitimate ones? You know…like do the basic function of a financial institution. It’s a radical concept I know
I would guess that a verification system would require a different model for transfer. I know when I was in Europe, transfers were instantaneous if the parties were verified participants. People often had their banking codes on their personal "business card" in case they needed to receive money from someone like Venmo/Zelle is used today. A payment would go nowhere if the recipient wasn't already verified in the banking system. Not sure what they do these days -- that was 2003.
We have that with FedNow and RTP. But banks haven’t implemented it for whatever reason. Instead we stick with checks and ACH, which are antiquated ways of moving money. Checks are especially mind boggling.
Even developing economies have safer and faster money movement than we have in the US.
TheTimeLord wrote: ↑Sun Sep 29, 2024 12:18 pm
I bet if the OP had been hacked he would be praising Fidelity for not allowing the hacker to withdraw the funds until October 22nd.
Good point. Just to be safe fidelity should put a 5 year hold on the money.
OR, and hear me out, they allow legitimate transfer and not illegitimate ones? You know…like do the basic function of a financial institution. It’s a radical concept I know
I would guess that a verification system would require a different model for transfer. I know when I was in Europe, transfers were instantaneous if the parties were verified participants. People often had their banking codes on their personal "business card" in case they needed to receive money from someone like Venmo/Zelle is used today. A payment would go nowhere if the recipient wasn't already verified in the banking system. Not sure what they do these days -- that was 2003.
We have that with FedNow and RTP. But banks haven’t implemented it for whatever reason. Instead we stick with checks and ACH, which are antiquated ways of moving money. Checks are especially mind boggling.
Even developing economies have safer and faster money movement than we have in the US.
I am 71YO and not expecting the US banking system to join the late 20th century in my lifetime. I used to have some hope but have learned to manage my expectations better as I age.
When you discover that you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount.
jebmke wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 10:32 am
I am 71YO and not expecting the US banking system to join the late 20th century in my lifetime. I used to have some hope but have learned to manage my expectations better as I age.
tACKJAYE wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 10:24 am
Their Brokerage account partners with two external Banks, one for direct deposits and one for Direct debits.
torso2500 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 29, 2024 2:21 pm
If I had to pick, I guess I'd say Schwab because they are a bank vs a brokerage partnering with banks for banking services. In theory they have more experience with banking concerns so would deliver banking more efficiently. In practice, who knows. If you're asking who will never place a long hold on your deposit and/or be cagey around fraud concerns, probably no provider will make that promise. Not until the way transfers work and the regulatory environment see some change.
ok, Schwab still has the distinction of being a bank for at least some services vs Vanguard and Fidelity. That's what I attempted to get across. Sorry I wasn't laser accurate enough for this forum
TheTimeLord wrote: ↑Sun Sep 29, 2024 12:18 pm
I bet if the OP had been hacked he would be praising Fidelity for not allowing the hacker to withdraw the funds until October 22nd.
Good point. Just to be safe fidelity should put a 5 year hold on the money.
OR, and hear me out, they allow legitimate transfer and not illegitimate ones? You know…like do the basic function of a financial institution. It’s a radical concept I know
I would guess that a verification system would require a different model for transfer. I know when I was in Europe, transfers were instantaneous if the parties were verified participants. People often had their banking codes on their personal "business card" in case they needed to receive money from someone like Venmo/Zelle is used today. A payment would go nowhere if the recipient wasn't already verified in the banking system. Not sure what they do these days -- that was 2003.
We have that with FedNow and RTP. But banks haven’t implemented it for whatever reason. Instead we stick with checks and ACH, which are antiquated ways of moving money. Checks are especially mind boggling.
Even developing economies have safer and faster money movement than we have in the US.
Those countries all had one thing we are currently lacking. Legislation/Regulation. In some cases it might have just been the severe threat of one of those. Waiting for a market solution means we have to wait for the current solution to cost more than moving to a completely new solution. Not just the processing costs but the actual migration and education costs as well. The U.S didn't start adopting chip cards until there were several massive data breaches of card details.
Zelle access is at around 80% currently. Meaning it's available to 80% of people holding checking accounts, not that 80% of the U.S. population is using it. Which probably explains why some of the people in my life who do work for me act like they've never heard of it and just ask for a check. I should probably start talking to them and seeing if I can persuade them to come into the digital age...
hafjell wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 9:59 am
An acquaintance on here has been dm-ing with some very rational counterpoint: they are freezing your money to protect you from fraud. Ok, I'll buy it for now and see how this resolves.
The freezes and 27-day holds aren’t to protect your money, they are to protect Fidelity’s money.
True, protecting your money is just a happy coincidence.
Many of those affected aren’t in danger of losing money. They are just being caught up in Fidelity’s ham handed approach.
hafjell wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 9:59 am
An acquaintance on here has been dm-ing with some very rational counterpoint: they are freezing your money to protect you from fraud. Ok, I'll buy it for now and see how this resolves.
The freezes and 27-day holds aren’t to protect your money, they are to protect Fidelity’s money.
True, protecting your money is just a happy coincidence.
Many of those affected aren’t in danger of losing money. They are just being caught up in Fidelity’s ham handed approach.
From the threads I have read on this forum I have a different impression of Fidelity's handling of things than you do.
IMHO, Investing should be about living the life you want, not avoiding the life you fear. |
Run, You Clever Boy! [9085]
PersonalFinanceJam wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 11:07 am
Zelle access is at around 80% currently. Meaning it's available to 80% of people holding checking accounts, not that 80% of the U.S. population is using it. Which probably explains why some of the people in my life who do work for me act like they've never heard of it and just ask for a check. I should probably start talking to them and seeing if I can persuade them to come into the digital age...
One of the problems with Zelle is the relatively low transfer limits. It’s fine for paying people for small services, but can’t be used for bigger purchases or payments, depending on your bank.
The other problem is the amount of misinformation about the service. You see it all over this forum. Clark Howard acts like it’s the most dangerous financial product ever created, and people believe it and repeat it. In reality, it’s perfectly safe and extremely convenient. As long as you aren’t sending money to people you don’t know. But that could happen with a wire or cash or a check too.
hafjell wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 9:59 am
An acquaintance on here has been dm-ing with some very rational counterpoint: they are freezing your money to protect you from fraud. Ok, I'll buy it for now and see how this resolves.
The freezes and 27-day holds aren’t to protect your money, they are to protect Fidelity’s money.
True, protecting your money is just a happy coincidence.
Many of those affected aren’t in danger of losing money. They are just being caught up in Fidelity’s ham handed approach.
From the threads I have read on this forum I have a different impression of Fidelity's handling of things than you do.
I haven’t seen much praise for Fidelity’s handling of this matter on this forum.
PersonalFinanceJam wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 11:07 am
Zelle access is at around 80% currently. Meaning it's available to 80% of people holding checking accounts, not that 80% of the U.S. population is using it. Which probably explains why some of the people in my life who do work for me act like they've never heard of it and just ask for a check. I should probably start talking to them and seeing if I can persuade them to come into the digital age...
One of the problems with Zelle is the relatively low transfer limits. It’s fine for paying people for small services, but can’t be used for bigger purchases or payments, depending on your bank.
The other problem is the amount of misinformation about the service. You see it all over this forum. Clark Howard acts like it’s the most dangerous financial product ever created, and people believe it and repeat it. In reality, it’s perfectly safe and extremely convenient. As long as you aren’t sending money to people you don’t know. But that could happen with a wire or cash or a check too.
Indeed I agree, but ACH limits are all over the place too when initiated from the banks side. BofA has a ridiculous $1K limit, Chase is $10K, and Cap One is $25K which helps get us to the current predicament of people trying to pull money via ACH. The limits for Zelle could be relatively easy to raise to something more palatable if the banks wanted to. Again, I think they are waiting for regulatory bodies to figure things out. Which gets us back to some of my previous remarks of are we ready to tell grandma that she isn't getting her money back if she zaps it instantly to the nice man on the phone just looking out for her.
I agree the disinformation here and elsewhere about Zelle is mind blowing.
I have not read the entire thread, but my experience with Fidelity is there is absolutely a difference in push vs pull.
If you PULL from another account into Fidelity, there will be a 3-day hold on funds. This goes away over time as they establish "trust" with the other account once a few transactions have happened. I don't recall how many transactions it took, but in my case for a year or so I had to avoid pull for large amounts due to this.
If you PUSH to Fidelity (via ACH), the funds are immediately available the day the deposit shows up in your account. You can absolutely purchase assets with that, however until the PUSH settles, they will not let you re-trade (i.e. sell) those assets without it triggering a violation.
(AGE minus 23%) Bonds | 5% REITs | Balance 80% US (75/25 TSM/SCV) + 20% International (80/20 Developed/Emerging)
PersonalFinanceJam wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 11:07 am
Zelle access is at around 80% currently. Meaning it's available to 80% of people holding checking accounts, not that 80% of the U.S. population is using it. Which probably explains why some of the people in my life who do work for me act like they've never heard of it and just ask for a check. I should probably start talking to them and seeing if I can persuade them to come into the digital age...
I have used Venmo a million times
Outside of Bogleheads I’ve never even heard someone mention the word Zelle. When I’ve looked it up at my bank the low transfer limits make it a relatively pointless innovation
“Life is more than grinding it out in some drab office setting for an arbitrary number. This isn't a videogame where the higher score is better” |
- Nathan Drake
ScubaHogg wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 2:11 pm
I have used Venmo a million times
Outside of Bogleheads I’ve never even heard someone mention the word Zelle. When I’ve looked it up at my bank the low transfer limits make it a relatively pointless innovation
Works great for paying my sister for our share of our phone bill and other such payments. I like that it is bank to bank rather than through a 3rd party like Venmo. And I don’t do banking on my phone.
LilyFleur wrote: ↑Sun Sep 29, 2024 11:46 am
So you transferred your cash from BOA to Fidelity right before needing to use it to buy real estate? Did you have some concerns about being able to move the cash from BOA to escrow?
PersonalFinanceJam wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 11:07 am
Zelle access is at around 80% currently. Meaning it's available to 80% of people holding checking accounts, not that 80% of the U.S. population is using it. Which probably explains why some of the people in my life who do work for me act like they've never heard of it and just ask for a check. I should probably start talking to them and seeing if I can persuade them to come into the digital age...
I have used Venmo a million times
Outside of Bogleheads I’ve never even heard someone mention the word Zelle. When I’ve looked it up at my bank the low transfer limits make it a relatively pointless innovation
That’s a lot of money, evenat $1 per txn
When you discover that you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount.
indexfundfan wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 10:04 am
To get Ally's 1-day ACH, you need to have done at least two $250 "slow" transfers, both in and out with the external account, and it becomes effective two months after.
Thanks for sharing this information. I had never deciphered the pattern. I just noticed that some were 1 day and some were 3.
When you say in and out, are those both pushes and pulls from the Ally side, or is it pushes both ways?
ScubaHogg wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 2:11 pm
I have used Venmo a million times
Outside of Bogleheads I’ve never even heard someone mention the word Zelle. When I’ve looked it up at my bank the low transfer limits make it a relatively pointless innovation
Works great for paying my sister for our share of our phone bill and other such payments. I like that it is bank to bank rather than through a 3rd party like Venmo. And I don’t do banking on my phone.
Zelle is also instant, unlike Venmo. A couple clicks in your banking app or website and it’s done. With Venmo you have to manually transfer from Venmo to your bank, or pay a fee to make it instant. And there’s also the issue of something happens to Venmo and you’ve got money sitting in your Venmo account. Could be a hassle to get it back.
But back to the main point, instant, secure, and verifiable transfers do exist in the US. But banks haven’t implemented them. As noted above, until there’s a major push by consumers or some regulation forcing the banks’ hands, we’re going to continue to have this consumer unfriendly check and ACH system and institutions like Fidelity can continue to lock money up when these fraud events happen.
ScubaHogg wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 2:11 pm
I have used Venmo a million times
Outside of Bogleheads I’ve never even heard someone mention the word Zelle. When I’ve looked it up at my bank the low transfer limits make it a relatively pointless innovation
Works great for paying my sister for our share of our phone bill and other such payments. I like that it is bank to bank rather than through a 3rd party like Venmo. And I don’t do banking on my phone.
Zelle is also instant, unlike Venmo. A couple clicks in your banking app or website and it’s done. With Venmo you have to manually transfer from Venmo to your bank, or pay a fee to make it instant. And there’s also the issue of something happens to Venmo and you’ve got money sitting in your Venmo account. Could be a hassle to get it back.
But back to the main point, instant, secure, and verifiable transfers do exist in the US. But banks haven’t implemented them. As noted above, until there’s a major push by consumers or some regulation forcing the banks’ hands, we’re going to continue to have this consumer unfriendly check and ACH system and institutions like Fidelity can continue to lock money up when these fraud events happen.
The really funny part is while Zelle is thought of as a real time payment system (and its structure certainly is) it technically uses ACH for the banks to actually move the money between themselves. Which raises an interesting question. A potential benefit of FedNow is the fact that money moves nearly instantly between the Fed master account of the different banks. So could Early Warning take Zelle and swap out the guts to have most of it run on FedNow so the actual money moment happened real time as well. Could be a way to jump start more utilization.
ScubaHogg wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 2:11 pm
I have used Venmo a million times
Outside of Bogleheads I’ve never even heard someone mention the word Zelle. When I’ve looked it up at my bank the low transfer limits make it a relatively pointless innovation
Works great for paying my sister for our share of our phone bill and other such payments. I like that it is bank to bank rather than through a 3rd party like Venmo. And I don’t do banking on my phone.
Zelle is also instant, unlike Venmo. A couple clicks in your banking app or website and it’s done. With Venmo you have to manually transfer from Venmo to your bank, or pay a fee to make it instant. And there’s also the issue of something happens to Venmo and you’ve got money sitting in your Venmo account. Could be a hassle to get it back.
But back to the main point, instant, secure, and verifiable transfers do exist in the US. But banks haven’t implemented them. As noted above, until there’s a major push by consumers or some regulation forcing the banks’ hands, we’re going to continue to have this consumer unfriendly check and ACH system and institutions like Fidelity can continue to lock money up when these fraud events happen.
The really funny part is while Zelle is thought of as a real time payment system (and its structure certainly is) it technically uses ACH for the banks to actually move the money between themselves. Which raises an interesting question. A potential benefit of FedNow is the fact that money moves nearly instantly between the Fed master account of the different banks. So could Early Warning take Zelle and swap out the guts to have most of it run on FedNow so the actual money moment happened real time as well. Could be a way to jump start more utilization.
I think it works on ACH only because with a centralized system (Zelle) they are able to verify that the source bank does in fact have the funds available. So basically the bank is moving money "instantly" when in reality it takes 1-3 days for them to transfer the money behind the scenes. However they deem this as low-risk because of the ability to verify funds.
I don't get it why so few banks seem to support FedNow though - its faster and more secure for the bank themselves -- especially given how Chase and others were sued for Zelle frauds (which were the customers' fault for the most part).
(AGE minus 23%) Bonds | 5% REITs | Balance 80% US (75/25 TSM/SCV) + 20% International (80/20 Developed/Emerging)
PersonalFinanceJam wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 11:07 am
Zelle access is at around 80% currently. Meaning it's available to 80% of people holding checking accounts, not that 80% of the U.S. population is using it. Which probably explains why some of the people in my life who do work for me act like they've never heard of it and just ask for a check. I should probably start talking to them and seeing if I can persuade them to come into the digital age...
I have used Venmo a million times
Outside of Bogleheads I’ve never even heard someone mention the word Zelle. When I’ve looked it up at my bank the low transfer limits make it a relatively pointless innovation
That’s a lot of money, evenat $1 per txn
I get it free with my Amex
“Life is more than grinding it out in some drab office setting for an arbitrary number. This isn't a videogame where the higher score is better” |
- Nathan Drake
fetch5482 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 5:02 pm
I think it works on ACH only because with a centralized system (Zelle) they are able to verify that the source bank does in fact have the funds available. So basically the bank is moving money "instantly" when in reality it takes 1-3 days for them to transfer the money behind the scenes. However they deem this as low-risk because of the ability to verify funds.
There is also precedent. It's essentially the way the credit/debit card networks function as well. Zelle just removed the cards and had the payments flow in one direction. Many of the card networks themselves were once just interbank links for banks to move money between themselves. What is old is new again.
I don't get it why so few banks seem to support FedNow though - its faster and more secure for the bank themselves -- especially given how Chase and others were sued for Zelle frauds (which were the customers' fault for the most part).
I don't follow this. Faster and more secure than ACH or check sure. However, absent regulatory clarity I think they would just face the same issues from Zelle when people get tricked into sending money to people they shouldn't.
PersonalFinanceJam wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 11:53 am
are we ready to tell grandma that she isn't getting her money back if she zaps it instantly to the nice man on the phone just looking out for her.
Perhaps there should be a policy of requiring bank clients to attend a seminar (or webinar) and pass a test before they're allowed to use Zelle. If they don't do it or don't pass the test, they'll have to go to the branch or have an authorized person (who has passed the test) to do it for them. People that can't manage the basics should be declared financially incompetent.
However, the one thing that banks could do a lot better on is verifying who their Zelle customers are. You shouldn't be able to open a bank account, set up Zelle and them immediately receive a large number of transactions or a lot of money. Perhaps the scammers are farming, ageing the accounts to make them look legit, but this should still be a point to focus on and one where I think they can do better. Zelle shouldn't be like bitcoin. KYC!
nisiprius wrote: ↑Sun Sep 29, 2024 3:09 pmThis source says that using FedNow costs a bank $0.045 per "credit transfer." This source says the average fee for an ACH transfer is $0.29
Those prices are not directly comparable. The first is what it costs banks to use FedNow. The second is the average cost to the end-user (non-bank) entity for ACH.
The typical marginal ACH fee appears to be well under a cent, ranging from 35/100 of a cent to 2/100 of a cent. (SameDay ACH transactions cost a tenth of a cent more, plus a 5.2 cent SameDay entry fee to be paid from the originating to destination financial institution.)
For comparison, the marginal wire transfer cost is probably 3.8 cents for large institutions, though it can be as high as 94 cents.
In any case, FedNow is more expensive than regular ACH, though greater usage could solve the types of issues discussed in this thread since they're irrevocable. ACH transfers can be reversed for 60 days in most cases involving fraud with a consumer account. Absent a requirement to implement it to keep using ACH (like the SameDay ACH mandate), I don't see adoption becoming near-universal in the next few years.
hafjell wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 9:59 am
An acquaintance on here has been dm-ing with some very rational counterpoint: they are freezing your money to protect you from fraud. Ok, I'll buy it for now and see how this resolves.
The freezes and 27-day holds aren’t to protect your money, they are to protect Fidelity’s money.
True, protecting your money is just a happy coincidence.
There is no evidence that anyone who was not directly involved in fraud has lost money or had their account compromised, in the recent spate of fraud that resulted in Fidelity's account restrictions.
Accounts that had fraudulent checks deposited, in order to turn around and quickly withdraw the money, were either people using mobile deposit themselves to deposit fraudulent checks in their accounts or people colluding with fraudsters to have fraudulent checks deposited in their accounts and then splitting the proceeds. Fraudsters got access to people's accounts to engage in this fraud, because gullible/ignorant/greedy individuals shared their account credentials with the fraudsters. No one's accounts were hacked. This was basically social engineering.
So no one who was not personally engaged in fraud is being protected by the current account restrictions.
The reason Fidelity is imposing restrictions on innocent accountholders, is because it's hard for Fidelity to know who is engaging in fraud and who is not. They look for patterns that might be fraud, but it turns out Fidelity's algorithm for identifying these sorts of patterns is very crude and so very large numbers of perfectly innocent people are getting caught up in the restrictions. This is why people are complaining. Other financial institutions, like Chase, were able to deal with the sudden spate of fraud without punishing a large cohort of innocent clients.
So the restrictions are in fact providing zero protection for those of us who were not part of the fraud schemes. Unless you feel that Fidelity needs to be protecting you from yourself.
fetch5482 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 5:02 pm
I don't get it why so few banks seem to support FedNow though - its faster and more secure for the bank themselves -- especially given how Chase and others were sued for Zelle frauds (which were the customers' fault for the most part).
I don't follow this. Faster and more secure than ACH or check sure. However, absent regulatory clarity I think they would just face the same issues from Zelle when people get tricked into sending money to people they shouldn't.
FedNow is designed and operated by the fed. Zelle was developed by the big banks together. So them getting sued for latter is easier than FedNow where they're just using a service provided/backed by the government.
(AGE minus 23%) Bonds | 5% REITs | Balance 80% US (75/25 TSM/SCV) + 20% International (80/20 Developed/Emerging)
PersonalFinanceJam wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 11:53 am
are we ready to tell grandma that she isn't getting her money back if she zaps it instantly to the nice man on the phone just looking out for her.
Perhaps there should be a policy of requiring bank clients to attend a seminar (or webinar) and pass a test before they're allowed to use Zelle. If they don't do it or don't pass the test, they'll have to go to the branch or have an authorized person (who has passed the test) to do it for them. People that can't manage the basics should be declared financially incompetent.
However, the one thing that banks could do a lot better on is verifying who their Zelle customers are. You shouldn't be able to open a bank account, set up Zelle and them immediately receive a large number of transactions or a lot of money. Perhaps the scammers are farming, ageing the accounts to make them look legit, but this should still be a point to focus on and one where I think they can do better. Zelle shouldn't be like bitcoin. KYC!
I use Zelle to transfer money between my own accounts. I can do this because every financial institution I use I create a unique email address for to receive alerts and that email address can be registered for Zelle use too. I made a transfer from US Bank to another institution and received pop up screens to be sure I knew who I was sending money to and for extra security US Bank put a 24 hour hold on my Zelle transfer so I could cancel it in case I was being scammed. After the 24 hours the money was moved to the account I was sending it to in seconds. Since then no more holds have happened.
bd7 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 7:42 pm
...
However, the one thing that banks could do a lot better on is verifying who their Zelle customers are. You shouldn't be able to open a bank account, set up Zelle and them immediately receive a large number of transactions or a lot of money. Perhaps the scammers are farming, ageing the accounts to make them look legit, but this should still be a point to focus on and one where I think they can do better. Zelle shouldn't be like bitcoin. KYC!
I set up a new BofA account as I'm going for their rewards status. I zelled some money to myself from a different account and BofA indicated there would be a 1 business day hold. It was a small amount and the hold ended up being less than a day, but clearly some institutions are implementing some controls.
wilsonbh wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 2:13 am
For a very long time now, Fidelity has been marketing their CMA accounts as an alternative to banks. Now, with this latest fiasco, it's going to be a hard sell.
I am curious how many customers have actually been impacted?
I have seen 0 changes from before on either my taxable brokerage accounts or CMA, and still have $500k/day check deposit limits on all accounts and holds on ACH transfers from external bank accounts (initiated from Fidelity) are still only 2 business days. However, I did not want to tempt fate today and did a large ACH push from Ally to Fidelity which should arrive tomorrow. These are funds I don't need any time soon, but I am interest to see if all the funds are marked as immediately available to withdraw. The money is coming from an account that I transfer money from to Fidelity (usually via ACH Fidelity pull) at least a couple times a month. I rarely push from Ally, but they must recognize my Fidelity CMA as a legitimate account since it is only a 1 business day transfer (for some other accounts I do not transfer to often it is a 2-3 business day transfer).
To get Ally's 1-day ACH, you need to have done at least two $250 "slow" transfers, both in and out with the external account, and it becomes effective two months after. Basically, Ally wants to have a "history" of transfers with the specific external account before offering you 1-day ACH.
I expect funds pushed into Fidelity to be available immediately.
As expected the entire >$5k amount pushed yesterday via ACH from Ally to my Fidelity CMA was immediately available for withdrawal today. I was able to instantly transfer some of the funds to 2 separate Fidelity taxable brokerages accounts where I bought ETFs in one and some T-Bills at auction on the other.
PersonalFinanceJam wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 11:07 am
Zelle access is at around 80% currently. Meaning it's available to 80% of people holding checking accounts, not that 80% of the U.S. population is using it. Which probably explains why some of the people in my life who do work for me act like they've never heard of it and just ask for a check. I should probably start talking to them and seeing if I can persuade them to come into the digital age...
I have used Venmo a million times
Outside of Bogleheads I’ve never even heard someone mention the word Zelle. When I’ve looked it up at my bank the low transfer limits make it a relatively pointless innovation
That’s a lot of money, evenat $1 per txn
I get it free with my Amex
I was referring to the amount of funds transferred. Plus, a million transactions is a lot of work -- although if done in batches maybe not too bad; we used to do 30,000 EDI transactions a month but they were all automated batches.
When you discover that you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount.
indexfundfan wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2024 10:04 am
To get Ally's 1-day ACH, you need to have done at least two $250 "slow" transfers, both in and out with the external account, and it becomes effective two months after.
Thanks for sharing this information. I had never deciphered the pattern. I just noticed that some were 1 day and some were 3.
When you say in and out, are those both pushes and pulls from the Ally side, or is it pushes both ways?
“Life is more than grinding it out in some drab office setting for an arbitrary number. This isn't a videogame where the higher score is better” |
- Nathan Drake
Schwab is perhaps better for bank features.... but does not have auto-liquidating mutual funds to pay bills etc... to me that is the killer feature of Fidelity in their CMA.
So, at this contentious moment in time, what’s the best bet for depositing a large certified check? I’m receiving a check tomorrow for proceeds from a house sale. It was arranged by siblings and I did not realize that wiring the resultant funds would not be an option.
My choices are Fidelity- 20 year relationship for retirement accounts, two year relationship for CMA- or capital one, 20 year relationship for daily banking. Capital One ought to be the easy choice, except they closed all their branches with an easy reach.
So now I’m flummoxed. Do I schlep out to the branch an hour away, or do I take a chance on Fidelity’s mobile deposit? It would be exceedingly convenient to access the funds within five business days, but not strictly necessary.
HelenaJustina wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2024 5:44 pm
Low three figures.
Edit:Ugh low six figures
It’s been a trying day.
You would likely not be able to do that with C1 mobile app. I know on mine there is a $50K limit for mobile deposit. Like the advice above said you should probably check your your deposit limits in the apps first before trying to decide. If your limit in Fidelity is still pretty high then I'd say you should expect a longer hold.
HelenaJustina wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2024 4:28 pm
So, at this contentious moment in time, what’s the best bet for depositing a large certified check? I’m receiving a check tomorrow for proceeds from a house sale. It was arranged by siblings and I did not realize that wiring the resultant funds would not be an option.
My choices are Fidelity- 20 year relationship for retirement accounts, two year relationship for CMA- or capital one, 20 year relationship for daily banking. Capital One ought to be the easy choice, except they closed all their branches with an easy reach.
So now I’m flummoxed. Do I schlep out to the branch an hour away, or do I take a chance on Fidelity’s mobile deposit? It would be exceedingly convenient to access the funds within five business days, but not strictly necessary.
How quickly do you need access to the funds? Would you be OK if they were Available to Invest but not Available to Withraw?
HelenaJustina wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2024 4:28 pm
So, at this contentious moment in time, what’s the best bet for depositing a large certified check? I’m receiving a check tomorrow for proceeds from a house sale. It was arranged by siblings and I did not realize that wiring the resultant funds would not be an option.
My choices are Fidelity- 20 year relationship for retirement accounts, two year relationship for CMA- or capital one, 20 year relationship for daily banking. Capital One ought to be the easy choice, except they closed all their branches with an easy reach.
So now I’m flummoxed. Do I schlep out to the branch an hour away, or do I take a chance on Fidelity’s mobile deposit? It would be exceedingly convenient to access the funds within five business days, but not strictly necessary.
To deposit a check that big, I'd happily drive more than an hour to physically deposit the check at a branch. No way would I take a chance on mobile depositing at Fidelity (or anywhere else) even if the check amount did not exceed the deposit limit.
I tried calling Fidelity today about some funds left in a closed account. I have premium services or whatever the higher tier is. I was on hold for 20 minutes before I hung up because no one answered. I've never waited on hold that long. Has anyone else noticed an issue with customer service, or is this perhaps related to this transfer/deposit/lock issue?
HelenaJustina wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2024 4:28 pm
So, at this contentious moment in time, what’s the best bet for depositing a large certified check? I’m receiving a check tomorrow for proceeds from a house sale. It was arranged by siblings and I did not realize that wiring the resultant funds would not be an option.
My choices are Fidelity- 20 year relationship for retirement accounts, two year relationship for CMA- or capital one, 20 year relationship for daily banking. Capital One ought to be the easy choice, except they closed all their branches with an easy reach.
So now I’m flummoxed. Do I schlep out to the branch an hour away, or do I take a chance on Fidelity’s mobile deposit? It would be exceedingly convenient to access the funds within five business days, but not strictly necessary.
Back in April, I used the Fidelity iPhone app to deposit a $25k cashiers check when I sold a vehicle. Worked without any problems and convenient for me since the nearest Fidelity branch is 200 miles away.
HelenaJustina wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2024 4:28 pm
So, at this contentious moment in time, what’s the best bet for depositing a large certified check? I’m receiving a check tomorrow for proceeds from a house sale. It was arranged by siblings and I did not realize that wiring the resultant funds would not be an option.
My choices are Fidelity- 20 year relationship for retirement accounts, two year relationship for CMA- or capital one, 20 year relationship for daily banking. Capital One ought to be the easy choice, except they closed all their branches with an easy reach.
So now I’m flummoxed. Do I schlep out to the branch an hour away, or do I take a chance on Fidelity’s mobile deposit? It would be exceedingly convenient to access the funds within five business days, but not strictly necessary.
At Fidelity it might be held for 3-4 weeks, but you should be able to invest it, just not withdraw. Although there have been problems with moving money around within Fidelity too.
I prefer depositing checks at my bank, which is about 20 minutes away. Once it clears, pull the money into the brokerage. But it appears that pulling money into Fidelity isn't working very well either at the moment, if you plan to withdraw in less than 3-4 weeks.
NYCaviator wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2024 7:31 pm
I tried calling Fidelity today about some funds left in a closed account. I have premium services or whatever the higher tier is. I was on hold for 20 minutes before I hung up because no one answered. I've never waited on hold that long. Has anyone else noticed an issue with customer service, or is this perhaps related to this transfer/deposit/lock issue?
I imagine that Fidelity is getting swamped with calls.
HelenaJustina wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2024 4:28 pm
So, at this contentious moment in time, what’s the best bet for depositing a large certified check? I’m receiving a check tomorrow for proceeds from a house sale. It was arranged by siblings and I did not realize that wiring the resultant funds would not be an option.
My choices are Fidelity- 20 year relationship for retirement accounts, two year relationship for CMA- or capital one, 20 year relationship for daily banking. Capital One ought to be the easy choice, except they closed all their branches with an easy reach.
So now I’m flummoxed. Do I schlep out to the branch an hour away, or do I take a chance on Fidelity’s mobile deposit? It would be exceedingly convenient to access the funds within five business days, but not strictly necessary.
Do you have a Fidelity taxable brokerage account? It seems that Fidelity is being more cautious with mobile check deposits into the CMA vs taxable brokerage accounts for some reason (at least that is what people in Reddit are saying, CMA check deposit limited but not taxable brokerage accounts).
This person did an ACH of 500k, then was surprised their money was held.
I don’t think the amount really matters. $500k or $5, at no point during the transfer did Fidelity warn about an excessive hold. There was no way to know about Fidelity’s current….issues.. without reading threads here and Reddit. Not exactly the kind of transparency you’d expect from a broker.
Disagree. Ach get reversed. Pulling in a large amount and then trying to pull out again is a textbook red flag for fraud. Fidelity hold is reasonable
I didn’t say the hold was reasonable or unreasonable — the lack of notice before the hold is what is unacceptable.
Fidelity warns of an additional hold time before the money can be withdrawn when you submit an ACH pull. I posted the screenshot upthread.
That is the same warning screen always displayed when doing ACH transfers at Fidelity, and it does not speak to the new processing times at all.
If you are an existing customer, and ACH transfers have always been available anywhere between 1-5 days, per Fidelity's own terms and conditions, then it is reasonable to expect there has been no change to the process. Fidelity should explicitly state there is a new hold of up to 3-4 weeks, and not just weakly stating "oh, most of the deposit money is available in 1-2 days, but there may be an additional hold" which is not really telling the customer anything of substance.
This might be coincidental bad timing. They are currently in the process of mailing out new design debit cards to all current card holders (we just got ours this week) so I think there might be some logistical issues with trying to slot requests in with the current replacement activity.
I’ve been following this thread with a bit of concern, but I have over 2 decades with Fidelity with multiple employer 401k/equity comp accounts and so far none of my accounts have had any issues. Deposited a BoA credit card credit balance check a week ago, no hold. Personal and joint brokerage accounts along with personal and joint CMA accounts all still show $500k deposit limits. At the present time my plan is to continue to use Fidelity for transactional banking, but I am transferring more assets over to BoA/ML so that I have a more robust backup source of liquidity if the impact to accounts continues to spiral out.
