On the morning of Sept. 25, 2014, Tom Bednar was sitting in the bedroom of the Raleigh, N.C., home he shared with his wife, Marla, and two sons when Marla entered the room crying.
She had just looked at the bank account for their three-decade old business, Marla Enterprises, to find it empty. Now, Capital Bank was requesting close to $18,000 to cover the outstanding checks the couple had written.
After transferring money to straighten out their finances with the bank, the Bednars learned just what had happened with the $115,018.01 they had in their bank account: The United States Secret Service seized the money.
“We got no warning,” Tom Bednar said in an interview with The Daily Signal. “Nothing.”
http://dailysignal.com/2015/05/26/a...rth-carolina-man-continues-fight-for-justice/
After Secret Service Seized $115,000, North Carolina Man Continues Fight for ‘Justice
Discussion in 'News & Current Events' started by Revmitchell, May 27, 2015.
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
So they seized all their money all because they withdrew less than 10000 on multiple occasions. No proof of wrong doing just suspicion. This is what you get with big government.
We should be able to withdraw whatever we want as often as we want however we want. -
and at the other extreme - I tried to put $20 cash into my wife's savings (non-joint) account. The bank would not let me do so.
Why
Because in the past people have been depositing drug money into someone's else's accounts (in cash) and the banks got into trouble. -
Once I had the state of California seize $6200 from my checking account because they said they hadn't received my tax payment. They later found it under a desk in Sacramento and said "oops". I was unaware that they could do such a thing until it happened to me. Nothing bounced but it could have - no warning, nothing.
The only way it could have been worse was if it had been the federal government, like it was in this guy's case. Happy to read in the article that they had changed the law so this couldn't happen again but they should reimburse him for his expenses incurred all because of the SS. -
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Ignorance of the law is no defense.
-
And misuse of the "intent" of the law is even worse than this man's ignorance of it. Good Grief!!!