Oops, Your Balance Is: ($211,010,028,257,303.00)

from the math-is-hard dept

A few years ago, an honest Virginia man reported a bank error that resulted in an extra $1.8 million dollars in his bank account — not once, but three times. Where did all of that money come from? Perhaps they have now found the source. This week, a Georgia man was notified that he had a negative balance of $211 trillion at his Wachovia bank account. His debt makes the national debt, which is only slightly over $9 trillion, seem like small potatoes. Luckily for him, Wachovia reports that the balance was caused by an isolated banking error, and that he was not liable for any charges related to the negative balance. In this case, the error was that his account number was entered in place of his balance. Like the $218 trillion phone bill we saw in 2006, why are errors of this magnitude not caught by some sort of bounds checking algorithm in the bank’s software? Furthermore, if an error this size gets through all of the checks and balances, then what other, less noticeable errors are falling through the cracks every day?

Filed Under: ,
Companies: wachovia

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Oops, Your Balance Is: ($211,010,028,257,303.00)”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Steven Ashley (user link) says:

The Errors Are Getting Bigger And Bigger

I wouldn’t want to be the head of Wachovia’s QA department right about now.

As more and more data is made available online, the larger and larger the data breaches are likely to be. But in this case we aren’t talking thousands or millions of records, we are only talking about one that we know of.

So in this case it appears to be a simple miss by the QA department, a huge miss but a simple miss none the less.

TriZz says:

Re: @oops


Why even come out and say that the customer isn’t going to be held responsible for that? I mean, seriously. If I walked into a bank and showed them my -2 trillion account balance, I’d just hand it to the bank manager and say “fix that”.

I’d probably do the same if I found my account off by a million dollars too.

steve (user link) says:

Re: Re: Poor guy..

You can do LOTS with a bank account and the dirty secret is that YOU have to suffer while the bank checks for Credit fraud if you file a complaint against a charge.

I had an account with FifthThird Bank (5/3) that I just reacently went though this hell… a Gas company put a $97 charge (not much, but its the principal of the matter) against my account. When I contested it, the bank couldn’t produce any valid check or signiture for the charge, but it was labled as an Electronic transaction. The company took the $97 and 53 bank had to try and track it down.

I’ll let you read more here if you want:


But basically you can NOT stop an electronic transaction from taking your money. And with scanned checks and OCR imaging of checks, this will happen more and more.

I do computers for a living.. I DONT trust them when autimated with my money. I’ve since closed the account and carry cash only. I have another account to cash checks and then take the cash. Don’t trust banks… Especially the more and more they rely on computers.

Mythos says:

Guess Work

I work in the check processing department for a bank. You don’t want to know how poor quality control is… We often just guess at account numbers that we need to re-enter but can’t read off the check. The demand is on meeting deadlines not accuracy. I get a small bonus for decent accuracy, but I have an hour long meeting with people I don’t like for missing a deadline.

sean says:

Should have charged the bank

A guy in Ireland, retiring to Portugal, transferred the proceeds from his house sale, and instead of 310k, he got about 30 million, due to a misplaced decimal point. He called the bank, told them that they made an error, and asked for a harrassment fee because of all the bother they put him to.

He got it to, about 60k euro IIRC – the bank could either give it to him, or start an international court case…

Brian says:

Re: Should have charged the bank

This is a clear sign of what is wrong with the world. Now I am sure there were some issues connected with him getting too much money but how does any of that warrant 60,000 euro unless it was to cover expenses connected with the transfer of the excessive funds back to the originating bank. Back when everyone was not looking for a “payday” event he would have had the money sent back and had a good story to tell at parties. Now he wants paid because he was wronged in some way. I really hope the next time he makes a mistake the people affected find some means to get their pound of flesh.

Sean says:

Re: Comment to Sean (18)

I can’t find that article, but here’s another similar situation with a Dubliner in Spain;

He transferred just over ยฃ1k to Spain and instead of getting pesetas, he got Euros (this was before the changeover) for the same numeric value… he stashed the cash, got arrested, and had his accounts frozen. I don’t know how it ended so I suspect he came to a nice confidential out-of-court settlement.
These may require registration;

Matt says:


All these companies are not taking technology seriously, and it is a major flaw in their part.They don’t want to spend the money to keep their hardware and software updated. As said earlier…. there are ways to check for a 211 trillion withdrawl…. Just like TJ Maxx using WEP encryption to protect their networks…. unencrypting transactions sent to the bank… etc etc etc…. These companies need to get with the picture.

deviceone says:

old tech

I work in a datacenter, and I’m not suprised that the actual transaction processing machines are the oldest of the lot. Many of them are DEC VAX 6000s from ~1985. The reason, I’m told by one of the engineers, is that the older machines are much less likely to fuddle it up, because they arent nearly as complex as the blades and modern clusters.

squegie says:

computers do it, humans can't

My sister deposited a check in an ATM — one with a fancy check scanner. The check was for $30 and instead of $30.00 it had “xx/100” for the change. When the receipt printed, she had over $32 million in her account. This was on a weekend and she figured it would get corrected on Monday. When she checked again on Wednesday, the entire balance was available and the original $30 had been taken out of the check writer’s account (my sister told them to let her know if $32 million was withdrawn). She finally told the bank and they corrected her balance (they said it definitely would have been flagged within a week when the bank does their balances).

Anyways, the machines are given a high degree of trust against errors. At M&T Bank, the people are not. Different people have different levels of trust. Average bank tellers usually can’t do more than $10k in a single transaction. So if you’re cashing out your $15,000 check they have to call over the next person up to get it cashed. For many branches, $100k and up require branc manager approval. Even branch managers have limits imposed and that limit is a lot lower than “what’s in the vault”. So if you had $500k in the bank from selling off your mansion on the hill and wanted to cash out, some phone calls would have to be made.

John (profile) says:

Database programming

So what database programmer designed the banking software to allow a number that high into the “balance” field? Is there really any possible chance that any account can hold hundreds of trillions of dollars?

Or were the programmers planning for super-duper inflation when we all walk around with trillions of dollars in our pockets so we can pay for $2 trillion cans of sodas and $1 trillion snacks?
“That’s one Gig Gulp and one Snickers bar. $3 trillion please.”
“Do you have change for a $50 trillion bill?”

And it’s good that we’re glad that the bank said the guy wouldn’t be responsible for paying back that amount. If the US can’t pay back $9 trillion, how in the world will a single guy pay back $200 trillion?
I know it’s a cover-their-butt statement, but come on: does the bank really need to say this? Isn’t it obvious?

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop ยป

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...