This is a mainstream news site folks and this ain't no conspiracy bullshit.....

It was meant for Texas Customers only but went out nationally.....

Get fucking ready...do it....



Citigroup Warns Customers It May Refuse To Allow Withdrawals
John Carney | Feb. 19, 2010, 2:57 PM | 5,033 | comment 7

Tags: Financial Services, Banks, Wall Street, Citi

Citigroup Umbrella eBay
The image of banks locking their doors to keep customers from making withdrawals during a bank run is what immediately came to mind when we heard that Citigroup was telling customers it has the right to prevent any withdrawals from checking accounts for seven days.

"Effective April 1, 2010, we reserve the right to require (7) days advance notice before permitting a withdrawal from all checking accounts. While we do not currently exercise this right and have not exercised it in the past, we are required by law to notify you of this change," Citigroup said on statements received by customers all over the country.

What's going on? It seems that this is something of an error. The seven day notice policy only applies to customers in Texas, Ira Stoll reports at The Future of Capitalism. It was accidentally included on customer statements nationwide.

"Whatever the explanation, it doesn't exactly inspire confidence in Citi," Stoll writes. "But it's hard to believe a bank would be sending out a notice like that on its statements."


http://www.businessinsider.com/citigroup...als-2010-2

abnormal unnatural socialistic

Damn, that was a big fuckup.

Checking accounts are demand deposit accounts which essentially mean pay it out NOW.....

We're fucked....

Okay, how exactly will something that might be implemented on April 1st stop a run on the banks before then?

I mean there's a lot of days between now and then.


Oooooops....forgot about the possibility of a false flag.....on lets say a bank. That should leave a little leeway.....and the implementation of a bank holiday..so they can 'upgrade their security' up until lets say a week before the 1st is a possibility

Omega  Wrote:

Checking accounts are demand deposit accounts which essentially mean pay it out NOW.....

We're fucked....

Yeah, DDA is supposed to imply instant, unlike savings accounts almost all of which have always reserved the right to impose a notification period.

If the banks, the large ones like Citi, are preparing statements like this one..... :-/ Trust me, they don't go through the hassle of preparing something like that unless it's necessary...

Get your shit outta Citi NOW!!!






(b)(1) "Demand deposit" means a deposit that is payable on demand, or a deposit issued with an original maturity or required notice period of less than seven days, or a deposit representing funds for which the depository institution does not reserve the right to require at least seven days' written notice of an intended withdrawal. Demand deposits may be in the form of:

(i) Checking accounts;

(ii) Certified, cashier's and officer's checks (including checks issued by the depository institution in payment of dividends);

(iii) Traveler's checks and money orders that are primary obligations of the issuing institution;

(iv) Checks or drafts drawn by, or on behalf of, a non-United States office of a depository institution on an account maintained at any of the institution's United States offices;

(v) Letters of credit sold for cash or its equivalent;

(vi) Withheld taxes, withheld insurance and other withheld funds;

(vii) Time deposits that have matured or time deposits upon which the contractually required notice of withdrawal as given and the notice period has expired and which have not been renewed (either by action of the depositor or automatically under the terms of the deposit agreement); and

(viii) An obligation to pay, on demand or within six days, a check (or other instrument, device, or arrangement for the transfer of funds) drawn on the depository institution, where the account of the institution's customer already has been debited.

(2) The term demand deposit also means deposits or accounts on which the depository institution has reserved the right to require at least seven days' written notice prior to withdrawal or transfer of any funds in the account and from which the depositor is authorized to make withdrawals or transfers in excess of the withdrawal or transfer limitations specified in � 204.2(d)(2) for such an account and the account is not a NOW account, or an ATS account or other account that meets the criteria specified in either � 204.2(b)(3)(ii) or (iii) below.

(3) Demand deposit does not include:

(i) Any account that is a time deposit or a savings deposit under this part;

(ii) Any deposit or account on which the depository institution has reserved the right to require at least seven days' written notice prior to withdrawal or transfer of any funds in the account and either--

(A) Is subject to check, draft, negotiable order of withdrawal, share draft, or similar item, such as an account authorized by 12 USC 1832(a) ("NOW Account") and a savings deposit described in 204.2(d)(2), provided that the depositor is eligible to hold a NOW account; or

(B) From which the depositor is authorized to make transfers by preauthorized transfer or telephonic (including data transmission) agreement, order or instruction to another account or to a third party, provided that the depositor is eligible to hold a NOW account;

(iii) Any deposit or account on which the depository institution has reserved the right to require at least seven days' written notice prior to withdrawal or transfer of any funds in the account and from which withdrawals may be made automatically through payment to the depository institution itself or through transfer of credit to a demand deposit or other account in order to cover checks or drafts drawn upon the institution or to maintain a specified balance in, or to make periodic transfers to such other account, such as accounts authorized by 12 USC 371a (automatic transfer account or ATS account), provided that the depositor is eligible to hold an ATS account;

(iv) Checks or drafts drawn by the depository institution on the Federal Reserve or on another depository institution; or

(v) IBF time deposits meeting the requirements of 204.8(a)(2).




http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rul...c7500204.2

SøuŁ  Wrote:

Okay, how exactly will something that might be implemented on April 1st stop a run on the banks before then?

I mean there's a lot of days between now and then.


Oooooops....forgot about the possibility of a false flag.....on lets say a bank. That should leave a little leeway.....and the implementation of a bank holiday..so they can 'upgrade their security' up until lets say a week before the 1st is a possibility

Update: Citibank has now released the following statement by way of explanation: "When Citibank moved to unlimited FDIC coverage in 2009, we had to reclassify many checking accounts to allow for immediate withdrawals in order to ensure all customers qualified for the additional coverage. When we moved back to standard FDIC coverage with most major banks in 2010, Citibank decided to reclassify those accounts back to make them eligible again for promotional incentives. To do so, Federal Reserve Reg D requires these accounts, called NOW accounts, to reserve the right to require a 7-day notice of withdrawal. We recently communicated this technical requirement to our customers. However, we have never exercised this right and have no plans to do so in the future."
http://www.futureofcapitalism.com/2010/0...rawal-gate

Not saying I condoned the IRS kamikaze dude, but what can we expect before this is all over?

I am not ashamed that I had to fight a smile when I heard that he targeted the IRS...

You guys would agree, but not on a public forum......precursors.. Damn, it's good to be alive!

Max Powers  Wrote:

Update: Citibank has now released the following statement by way of explanation: "When Citibank moved to unlimited FDIC coverage in 2009, we had to reclassify many checking accounts to allow for immediate withdrawals in order to ensure all customers qualified for the additional coverage. When we moved back to standard FDIC coverage with most major banks in 2010, Citibank decided to reclassify those accounts back to make them eligible again for promotional incentives. To do so, Federal Reserve Reg D requires these accounts, called NOW accounts, to reserve the right to require a 7-day notice of withdrawal. We recently communicated this technical requirement to our customers. However, we have never exercised this right and have no plans to do so in the future."
http://www.futureofcapitalism.com/2010/0...rawal-gate

This is believable..

You would be ASTOUNDED if you knew how much your checking account was reclassified, unbeknownst to you, for reserve requirements, etc.

NOW accounts and DDA require different reserve ratios.

Thanks for the find, MP!

no problemo MM

Showtime  Wrote:

Not saying I condoned the IRS kamikaze dude, but what can we expect before this is all over?

I am not ashamed that I had to fight a smile when I heard that he targeted the IRS...

You guys would agree, but not on a public forum......precursors.. Damn, it's good to be alive!

I laughed my ass off.




DISCLAIMER: TO ANY CLANDESTINE AGENCY THAT MAY BE READING THIS.....KISS MY ASS.

Nothin' like a little joke here and there...heh

Seriously I don't need black helicopters landing on the roof my building in the middle of the night.

Seriously it was a joke.

Max Powers  Wrote:

Update: Citibank has now released the following statement by way of explanation: "When Citibank moved to unlimited FDIC coverage in 2009, we had to reclassify many checking accounts to allow for immediate withdrawals in order to ensure all customers qualified for the additional coverage. When we moved back to standard FDIC coverage with most major banks in 2010, Citibank decided to reclassify those accounts back to make them eligible again for promotional incentives. To do so, Federal Reserve Reg D requires these accounts, called NOW accounts, to reserve the right to require a 7-day notice of withdrawal. We recently communicated this technical requirement to our customers. However, we have never exercised this right and have no plans to do so in the future."
http://www.futureofcapitalism.com/2010/0...rawal-gate

Luv ya Max NICE FIND BUT THEY AIN'T OFF THE GODDAMN HOOK.....

Damage is done......

Omega  Wrote:

Max Powers  Wrote:

Update: Citibank has now released the following statement by way of explanation: "When Citibank moved to unlimited FDIC coverage in 2009, we had to reclassify many checking accounts to allow for immediate withdrawals in order to ensure all customers qualified for the additional coverage. When we moved back to standard FDIC coverage with most major banks in 2010, Citibank decided to reclassify those accounts back to make them eligible again for promotional incentives. To do so, Federal Reserve Reg D requires these accounts, called NOW accounts, to reserve the right to require a 7-day notice of withdrawal. We recently communicated this technical requirement to our customers. However, we have never exercised this right and have no plans to do so in the future."
http://www.futureofcapitalism.com/2010/0...rawal-gate

Luv ya Max NICE FIND BUT THEY AIN'T OFF THE GODDAMN HOOK.....

Damage is done......

hard to stop a stampede huh?