vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
Underwriting manager here. It's not a big deal. Call your processor or loan officer tomorrow to make sure it's been cleared. My guess is that the underwriter or loan officer noted the discrepancy and corrected it in their systems. You'll have to sign a updated 1003 and 4506T at closing with correct info.  In other words...no biggie, no worries. Not a show stopper at all.
I'm sure it depends on the company, but I routinely run balances greater than 0 on my credit card. The reason is simple: I already budgeted to spend the money, I know I'm going to spend the money, and it's easier to put the extra money on the card at the beginning of my budget period rather than waiting until I spend the money and get a bill. There are 2 relevant numbers: First is the balance on your bill. It can show a positive or negative value, as people have talked about. The balance on my card tends to update fairly infrequently. The second is the available credit. When I overpay on my card, the available credit does not show more than the available debt. The latter value, however, updates for me immediately -- I can see within minutes any transaction on my credit card based on the credit available. One important caveat: Refunds don't always immediately process. You may have to wait days or weeks until that money shows up in your account. Spending the money before it appears in your account will cause your card to behave exactly as if you don't have the money.
"Winnings are taxed in the year you receive payment.  Period.  Constructive requires an unqualified right to receive immediate payment.  One qualification is that lottery tickets must be verified.  Large winners usually have to wait a day or two, which voids the ""immediate payment"" clause.  Here's an extreme example:  If you don't cash the ticket until July after you've already filed your income taxes, is the state going to issue a retroactive W2G?  That's kinda hard when the IRS requires that tax reporting be received by January 31st.  Which year do you get to deduct the state income taxes paid/withheld? Benton"
This is surprising, I'm not sure if they do this anymore. I got an overdraft fee a couple months when they tried to pay the balance on my CC. I had plenty in savings to cover it. I called and argued with them because they re-ran the draft to pay the CC the next day too, when they should have been well aware there weren't funds in the checking account, but they wouldn't do anything about it.  The first time I've ever had a gripe with them.
"To avoid nitpicks, i state up front that this answer is applicable to the US; Europeans, Asians, Canadians, etc may well have quite different systems and rules. You have nothing to worry about if you pay off your credit-card statement in full on the day it is due in timely fashion. On the other hand, if you routinely carry a balance from month to month or have taken out cash advances, then making whatever payment you want to make that month ASAP will save you more in finance charges than you could ever earn on the money in your savings account. But, if you pay off each month's balance in full, then read the fine print about when the payment is due very carefully: it might say that payments received before 5 pm will be posted the same day, or it might say before 3 pm, or before 7 pm EST, or noon PST, etc etc etc. As JoeTaxpayer says, if you can pay on-line with a guaranteed day for the transaction (and you do it before any deadline imposed by the credit-card company), you are fine. My bank allows me to write ""electronic"" checks on its website, but a paper check is mailed to the credit-card company. The bank claims that if I specify the due date, they will mail the check enough in advance that the credit-card company will get it by the due date, but do you really trust the USPS to deliver your check by noon, or whatever? Besides the bank will put a hold on that money the day that check is cut. (I haven't bothered to check if the money being held still earns interest or not). In any case, the bank disclaims all responsibility for the after-effects (late payment fees, finance charges on all purchases, etc) if that paper check is not received on time and so your credit-card account goes to ""late payment"" status. Oh, and my bank also wants a monthly fee for its BillPay service (any number of such ""electronic"" checks allowed each month). The BillPay service does include payment electronically to local merchants and utilities that have accounts at the bank and have signed up to receive payments electronically.
this piece offers a step-by-step guide you can use to get rid of errors in your annual credit report. it also tackles pointers you should always remember when writing a credit dispute letter. please tell your friends about it so that they might read it too!
After talking to two CPAs it seems like managing it using an imprest system is the best idea. The base characteristic of an imprest system is that a fixed amount is reserved and later replenished as it runs low.  This replenishment will come from another account source, e.g., petty cash will be replenished by cashing a cheque drawn on a bank account. Petty cash imprest system allows only the replenishment of the spend made. So, if you start the month with €100 in your petty cash float and spend €90 of that cash in the month, an amount of €90 will be then placed in your petty cash float to bring the balance of your petty cash float back to €100. The replenishment is credited to the primary cash account, usually a bank account (Dr - Petty Cash a/c, Cr - Bank a/c) and the debits will go to the respective expense accounts, based on the petty cash receipt dockets (Dr- Expense a/c, Cr - Petty Cash a/c). In a non imprest system where a fixed amount is issued every month, e.g., €100 every time cash is required, there is no incentive to ensure all money issued has been documented because when money is all spent a check for a fixed amount is issued. It is much more difficult to reconcile a non imprest system as you never know how much exactly should be in the float. In an imprest system the amount requested is documented, the documentation being the petty cash dockets and their associated receipts or invoices. So at all times you can check how much should be left in the petty cash float by deducting the amount spent from the opening petty cash float.
Remember, carrying debt on a credit card and waiting to pay it is increased risk in the event something happens and you can't pay it off. I have 1 CC and I have it set to auto-pay on the day it's due (paid in full each month as I don't carry debt anymore - learned that lesson a hard way :) ). So the day it's due it auto-drafts out of my checking. No worries of late payments, missed payments, etc. If you feel that having any balance is bad then by all means pay it off the minute you get your statement. It should come at the same time each month (or close to the same time) and you should be able to setup an auto-payment to pay it off in full as soon as the new statement goes live. To be honest, those extra few days of supposed interest saved by keeping the money in your checking account is so minimal that's it's probably not worth it. Most checking is horrible in interest (all my 'high interest' checking accounts are now less than 1% APR. boo.) and if you're late 1 day then bam! All that earned interest is gone in 1 late fee...
In the case of regulated, exchange-traded options, the writer of an options contract is obliged to maintain a margin with their broker, and the broker is obliged to maintain a margin with the clearing house.  (Institutional writers of options will deal directly with the clearing house.) In the event that the writer is unable to make a daily margin call, the broker (or clearing house) may automatically close out (all of) their positions using existing margin held.  If there was a shortfall, the broker (or clearing house) would be left to persue the client (writer) to make good on their obligations. None of this effects the position of the original buyer of the options contract.  Effectively, the buyer's counterparty is their broker's clearing house account.
It doesn't matter if the buyer breaches the contract during the due diligence period, because most due diligence periods allow the buyer to breach the agreement without cause.  Unless there is due diligence money added to the contract (different from earnest money), then breaching the contract costs nothing to the buyer. This happened to me.  I learned the hard way:  until the due diligence period is over, the buyer can renege without consequences.  It's one of the risks of being a seller.
If it was me, I'd wait until/if you get contacted again by the collection agency.  Once you do, I'd offer to settle for less.  Perhaps 1000-1250 to start, and I would not go any higher than 2K.  Get it in writing that this settles your debt in full, and do not give them direct access to your checking account. You can pay them by certified check or with a prepaid credit card or something.  If you do the latter, throw that prepaid card away, and never use it again. You may also try to get them to agree that you do not owe the full 5K, and again get that in writing.  Otherwise, you will be 1099'd for the difference between it and the amount you settle and therefore it will be treated as income.  I'd stick 2k in a bank account for a while, perhaps two years, and you are free to use the remaining 3K to meet other goals.  After two years, I would check my credit and see if it is still in the report.  You might also choose to dispute the collection and see what happens there.  If it is successful it will come off your report. Prior to a big credit decision (aka buying a home), I would check on the status of this collection.  Only at that time would I contact that collection agency and again try to settle.  If I contacted them, I would start the negotiations around 500 or so.
"I don't know the details of whether or not you should pay this money, or who is at fault. But clearly, you believe that you do not owe the money, and the bank investigation seems to agree with you, since they gave you your money back.  Since you have your money, and they haven't sued you, the only issue yet remaining is your credit report. Here is what I would suggest.  First, make sure you check all three credit reports, to see which reports the collection appears on. Then dispute the report with each credit bureau reporting the problem. There is an article on CreditKarma that explains the process. When you file your dispute with the credit bureau(s), they will investigate. This usually involves asking the creditor for proof of the debt, and if you didn't sign anything, they probably won't have any proof. Hopefully, the credit bureaus will come to the same conclusion as the bank did, and remove the collection from your credit reports.  In my opinion, it doesn't make sense to pay them now, if you don't believe you owe it. Paying them won't remove all the bad stuff from your credit report (but it will improve it), and you don't want to pay them and then immediately sue them.  If, however, the credit bureaus side with the landlord and leave this on your report, paying the $300 is better on your report than leaving the ""unpaid debt"" on there."
It is possible but unlikely. Securities firms would prefer never to settle externally; rather, they prefer to wait until the liabilities can be netted.  They are forced to make and take payment in three business days. The reason why is because settlement is costly in the same way as any other business would prefer to build trade credit instead of taking or making payment rapidly. The only circumstance where a financial firm would wish to take full delivery is when a counterparty is no longer trusted to be solvent.
Given you mention a check clearing, in addition to debit card holds as JoeTaxpayer notes, you may also have funds that are on hold for that reason.  While the bank may have stated it would be a one day hold, some banks may mean business days (Monday-Friday), and so it will become available on Monday. This is because checks are not always instantly withdrawn from the other account (although this is becoming much more common post-electronic check reform), so the bank wants to make sure it actually is getting the money from the check; after all, if the check you deposited bounces, the bank doesn't want to end up footing the bill. The bank allows you some portion up front, largely as a customer service; the amount varies from bank to bank, but it's generally a small amount they don't mind risking.  $200 is a pretty good amount, actually; back when I was just out of college and frequently spending the last $50 in my account, the pre-clearance amount was usually $50. If the bank does this to you regularly and you feel that it is unfair in how long it holds checks, you might consider shopping around; different banks have different hold policies, or might allow you a larger amount up front.  In particular, online banks tend to have more favorable terms this way.
You did not explain your financial situation; paying the $55 may be trivial, or it may be a hardship. Before you settle any debt, you should send a letter (keep a copy and proof you sent it, certified), and demand that the debt collector provide proof that you owe the debt. Often this proof does not exist, or is insufficient to gain a judgement (you would need legal help here). And should a debt collector agree to settle the debt for a lower amount, you need to get that agreement in writing. Be aware that when you settle a debt, the collector can (and will) send you a 1099 for the portion of the debt which has been forgiven, and can report to the credit bureaus that you settled a debt for less than the full amount (negative mark against credit). Derogatory credit items will haunt you for years. Decide whether saving $20, $30 or even $55 is worth the trouble. Probably not. Learn from this. When a company sends you something you did not order, contact them, and send it back or demand they pay shipping, and send them a letter demanding $5/day storage and $20 handling fee to ship it back to them. Disclaimer: Heed the insane ravings of a deranged heretic at your peril... hire a lawyer.
"My bank's bill payment system saves nothing more than writer's cramp and stamps.  When a paper check is required they mail it, but it's drawn on my account just as if I'd written it out by hand and mailed it myself.  There is no ""temporary account"", and at the time of month when I take care of the bills, my balance oscillates up and down depending on what's cleared and what hasn't.  I'm going back to mailing checks because it saves a day or two of time between payment initiation and check clearing, which sucks.  And electronic payments aren't much better.  It recently took about five days for a payment to my car insurance company to be processed--and the amount is finalized and subtracted in the bank's website only after clearance.  I can't know what I have without balancing the account every. frigging. time. IIRC bill payment systems were a lot more seamless and user friendly when they first became widespread."
But be very careful as this is an alternative to bankruptcy, and like bankruptcy a debt agreement will appear on your credit file for seven years and your name will be listed on the National Personal Insolvency Index forever. Further Assistance and Help If you have trouble reading any PDS, or want further information or help regarding any issues I have raised or any other part of your financial situation you can contact Centrelink's Financial Information Service. They provide a free and confidential service that provides education and information on financial and lifestyle issues to all Australians. Learn how to manage your money so you can get out of your debt and can lead a much more comfortable and less stressful life into the future.
In order not to create a huge risk of fraud, the rejecting here is really easy: If you tell your bank that you reject the payment, The practical rule is that the payment is approved if you didn't reject within the first 6 weeks after the bank sent the account statement. In other words, until 4 1/2 months after the withdrawal (in case you have a bank that does only quarterly account statements), the one to get the money cannot be really sure that he actually has the money. I think (but I'm not completely sure, maybe someone else can comment/edit) that these two possibilities are also what is used with debit card payments (EC/Maestro card - these are much more common here than real credit card payments). -- end of Germany specific example --"
Agreed. What this settlement does is ensure that the people who committed the fraud are safe. The current management, employees, shareholders, and customers have nothing to do with what happened 7-10 years ago, but they are the ones that will end up paying to permanently close any potential liability to the people who commited fraud.
The true answer is it depends because  it is up to the credit card issuer to follow the right path when issuing a replacement credit card. http://www.bankrate.com/finance/credit-cards/will-replacement-card-hurt-my-score.aspx Typically, issuers will transfer the account history to the new trade line, says Barry Paperno, the consumer operations manager at FICO, the creator of the FICO scoring formula. The new account should have the old open date, so you should retain your payment history, he says. The credit limit and balance should also stay the same. http://blog.credit.com/2014/02/lost-or-stolen-credit-card-hurt-your-credit-scores-76724/ How Issuers Report Replacement Cards We asked the major card issuers how they report replacement cards to credit reporting agencies: American Express: The new card has the same open date and “Member Since” year as the previous card. The balance on the old account number is transferred to the new account number. All payment history transfers over. Bank of America: All transactions and account history are transferred to the new account number when there is a card replacement or renewal. Capital One: The new account number with all the original account data (original open date, etc.) is reported along with a notification to the bureaus that the new account number is replacing the old.  The two tradelines can then be ‘merged’ into one, so that all the applicable payment history, balance, etc. is now under the new account number. Chase: The original tradeline does not change. The history on the account remains, just the account number field is updated with the new account number. There is no “new” tradeline in this scenario.
When you want the transaction to be concluded in the current year vs an expiration in the next year.
The fact that your credit card has seen the payment is strong evidence that the transaction did in fact take place.  But it's not unusual for there to be a delay of one or two business days before transactions show up in your online banking records.  Saturday and Sunday are not business days.   I bet you will see it on Monday.  If it's not there by Tuesday, you could call the bank.
There are statutes of limitations on how long they can wait before coming after you.  14 years certainly exceeds it, which I believe means you are not legally required to pay. statutes of limitations by state The most likely scenario is that this is a scam.  Second most likely is that this is a collections agency trying to trick you into paying even though they don't have legal authority to force you.  In that case if you do pay them anything, then the statute of limitations restarts and they can legally start giving you trouble, so definitely don't do that. If they keep harassing you, you can probably take legal action against them.  That's the worst case scenario, though.  I'd just ignore them. At this point, if they are legally entitled to any money, which I highly doubt, they will need to take you to court.  They are not going to do that over $1000. Blocking their number might be a reasonable idea. I would doubt whether they can even do anything to your credit rating over this issue.  If you are worried about your credit, you can check your oustanding debts and negative incidents at www.annualcreditreport.com and see if you see anything.  I would be surprised. Edit: You might read up about time-barred debts (assuming it's not a scam.  I still think it is). FTC page on time-barred debt
In a nutshell, as long as they (Sparkasse) choose to. I work with banks where it happens the moment I submit the transaction (so the next screen already shows the new totals), and I work with banks that make it take 3 days. In the past, Sparkasse and Raifeissenkassen were especially famous to take a looong time ('Wir nehmen mehr als Geld und Zinsen...' - they supposedly work with the money inbetween, as it is gone from the source account but not arrived in the target account yet); that might have changed (or not). Probably Sparkasse has a statement in their fineprint on how long they make it take. I would expect one business day in today's environment, but I didn't look it up.
"If any creditor thinks they're going to put their fuck up on my ""identity"" they got on another thing coming. I will not waste my time clearing up my credit score, I will not waste my time electronically verifying my identity, they will see a certified letter, and then they'll see me personaly in a court room."
It could be a delay because of the Automated Clearinghouse (ACH) process. At least that's the explanation on this thread at the PayPal forums, and on Prosper.com.
**Lock-up period**  A lock-up period, also known as a lock in, lock out, or locked up period, is a predetermined amount of time following an initial public offering where large shareholders, such as company executives and investors representing considerable ownership, are restricted from selling their shares. Generally, a lock-up period is a condition of exercising an employee stock option. Depending on the company, the IPO lock-up period typically lasts between 90–180 days before these shareholders are allowed the right, but not the obligation, to exercise the option.  Lockups are designed to prevent insiders from liquidating assets too quickly after a company goes public.  ***  ^[ [^PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=kittens_from_space) ^| [^Exclude ^me](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiTextBot&amp;message=Excludeme&amp;subject=Excludeme) ^| [^Exclude ^from ^subreddit](https://np.reddit.com/r/business/about/banned) ^| [^FAQ ^/ ^Information](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiTextBot/wiki/index) ^| [^Source](https://github.com/kittenswolf/WikiTextBot)   ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.24
"This is a technical term referring to the ""double entry""-styled book keeping of trades by brokers. Suppose a client executes a buy order with their broker.  The broker's accounting for this ""trade"" will be recorded as two different ""deals"" : One ""deal"" showing the client as buyer and the broker as seller, and a second ""deal"" showing the broker as buyer and the clearing house as seller.  The net result of these two deals is that the broker has no net position while the client has a net buy and the clearing house has a net sell with respect to this broker's account as accounted for internally by the broker. (And the same methods apply for a client sell order.) The client/broker ""deal"" record - i.e., the client side of the trade - is called the ""client side booking"", while the broker/clearing house ""deal"" record is called the ""street side booking""."
"Inflation, like trade deficits or surpluses, have winners and losers in an economy. Clear losers are people who are on a fixed income, as they often have a fixed income and a prices keep on going up, meaning they can afford less.  Numerous articles on the internet discuss the inflation of the 1970s, here are Google's results.  I'm not so sure that governments want ""some inflation"" as much as they desperately want to avoid deflation. Deflation means that the price for today's product, like a car, will decrease in price tomorrow (or a month from now) which creates a powerful incentive for people to put off a purchase until later, which brings consumer demand down in a country's economy."