If I tried, I couldn’t make up a story like this. First, there was the problem, then, there was the solution, and now comes the comedy. I hope you’re wearing your laughing pants.
Catching everyone up to date quickly:
- Google Adsense technical gitch screwed up my address change for a month
- The check is already six weeks overdue per Google’s schedule
- I chatted with them via email for a week
- Result, I must wait until the check is redeposited in my Adsense account and whatever monthly check issuing cycle that hits is when I get a new check sent out (maybe July, maybe August)
- I blogged about the experience
- Matt Cutts from Google stopped by, tipped his white hat and passed the case to someone in Adsense management
- A day later my check was sent via FedEx
So, today I go to cash the check. I’m standing at the teller window, and realize, gee - this is taking a long time. She looks up at me and says, “There aren’t sufficient funds in the account to cover your check.” *stunned silence* I say, “Excuse me, could you repeat that?” She does. My reaction?
First, denial and disbelief. I say, “Are you sure? Do you know who Google is? You’re kidding me, right?” She says she does know who Google is, but that this particular account doesn’t have enough funds to cover my check. I’m too stunned to move. I look down at the check handled back to me and look back up at her confused.
Next, shock and awe. I say to the teller, “How does a gazillionaire company like Google have a bank account with so little money in it?” She laughs. I laugh. What else is there to do?
Finally, the teller suggests I call someone. I stare at my mobile phone realizing I don’t have any numbers for any of the people I’ve spoken to at Google. She says, “Call the number on the check.” Great idea! So, I do.
It’s the main inbound number at Google. The Voicemail Lady and I have an exchange. You all know her voice.
Voicemail Lady: If you know the extension of the person you’d like to reach, dial it now followed by the pound sign.
Me: Nope, I don’t know any extension numbers.
Voicemail Lady: Press 8 to dial by name.
Me: Great! Pressing 8. *whistling to myself a bit*
Voicemail Lady: Please enter the first few letters of the last name.
Me: Hmmmmm, Brian the payments operations guy probably won’t work as a name in this system. That’s the result of Google’s employee privacy policy. I don’t know the guy’s last name. I know, Matt Cutts! Surely, Matt can get me transfered to Brian the payments operations guy or someone else. I type in Cutts.
Voicemail Lady: Please enter more characters.
Me: More characters for his last name? Or should I start on his first name, now? I’ll do both alternatively until some combo works.
Voicemail Lady: Please enter more characters.
Me: Entering Cutts, Matt.
Voicemail Lady: That userid is not valid. Goodbye.
So, finally I get over the enter more characters hurdle and hear what I believe was Matt’s voice - sternly.
Matt: This voicemail box is not active. It is not checked on a regular basis. Do not leave messages in this voicemail box. Beep.
So, I call back having heard an option given by the Voicemail Lady for customer service.
Voicemail Lady: For customer service/technical help press 5.
Me: I’m so there!
Voicemail Lady: (gives options 1 & 2) Press 3 for all other questions.
Me: Done.
Voicemail Lady: As Google does not currently authorize customer support, please see our website.
Me: Doh!
Google sent me a bad check! Now what?
I’m sure this is a result of someone trying to do something outside the normal and timed operations of this huge monolithic organization, but still…. WTF?
July 14th, 2007 at 8:39 am
You had a tough day dude!!.
Google is taking the heck out of you!!.
Good luck…….:)
July 14th, 2007 at 7:49 am
ROFL that’s just like my experience with Adbrite, they sent me an actual BAD check - the bank actually said the check bounced. I never went with that company again (too much of a headache). I say make Google pay -ask them for
1) A proper cheque + expenses (they have to pay if there are any repercussions from an invalid cheque)
2) Make them pay you interest on the late payment.
3) Free Swag! Never hurts to ask =D
July 14th, 2007 at 7:22 am
I would sure love to see the bank stamp Insufficient Fund on the check when it was returned!
July 14th, 2007 at 6:55 am
Speaking of Google, perhaps it’s time to admit that the emperor is buck naked? Google is no longer an asset to small business. It’s digressed into a black box designed to extract as much money as possible from small business while giving back as little value as possible. This piece explains why Adwords is something to be skeptical about: “Why Google Adwords is Not Helpful to Small Business” http://smartstartup.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/07/a-fable-doing-b.html
July 14th, 2007 at 6:40 am
Ok dude CHILL, I used to work at Google and still DJ on occasion and once for a paid DJ gig I picked up the check in person from accounts payable and tried to cash it that very same day and guess what no luck I freaked like you did but then I thought gee thats weird oh well I will try again tomorrow. Booyah! check cashed no problem. Basically I tried to cash the check before it made it’s way through the system. Maybe since it was sent muy rapido fedex this is what happened to you.
July 14th, 2007 at 6:06 am
You my friend were the victim of a stupid teller, and not Google. The way large corporations structure their bank accounts, is through the use of concentration, disbursement and receivable accounts. The disbursement and receivable accounts “ZBA” up to the concentration account. ZBA stands for Zero Balance Account. All these accounts are Zero Balance, and any disbursements and receivables “ZBA” up at the end of the day. By trying to cash the check for cash, the teller looked at the account and saw a Zero balance instead of realizing what type of account it was.
The fact that the manager at the bank didnt know either is plane stupid. If you would have deposited the check into your account, the check would have been sent to a “controlled disbursement” site and you would have had no problem. I would find out why the bank employee didnt see it was a ZBA account.
As for the CSR not knowing who to call, one word, TREASURY. Large companies have entire treasury staffs. Who do you think invests all those billions? It is not Serge Brin.
I would call the bank and ask if they can be any more stupid by not knowing the structure of the accounts. Just the account numbering can usually tell you the type of account.
July 14th, 2007 at 4:51 am
I love how people don’t read the whole blog before posting or commenting.
1) Obviously, she tried to cash the check at the bank which Google’s check was drawn at.
2) I used to work at credit union and if someone tried to cash a check that was not covered by the account, we would bounce it, stamp it and give it back to the customer.
3) Google does not have a customer service department!
July 14th, 2007 at 4:48 am
sure is newsworthy. don’t you have a family, friends, pet gecko to attend to?
July 14th, 2007 at 4:43 am
DC,
You say, “a simple call to the CSR department probably would have been the best bet.”
In the article above, I say,
“Voicemail Lady: For customer service/technical help press 5.
Me: I’m so there!
Voicemail Lady: (gives options 1 & 2) Press 3 for all other questions.
Me: Done.
Voicemail Lady: As Google does not currently authorize customer support, please see our website.”
How does one call something that doesn’t exist?
July 14th, 2007 at 4:34 am
To address another comment mentioned above, typically corporate checks are “signed” digitally or in rare cases with a signature stamp. Macy’s checks (everything from payroll to purchasing) are “signed” by one of our senior executives who happens to hold the title of “Assistant Treasurer”. It is inconceivable that a customer complaint would ever reach her, her secretary, or anyone in her pyramid. Every major company of which I’m aware has customer service representatives trained in this sort of thing, and a simple call to the CSR department probably would have been the best bet.
July 14th, 2007 at 4:28 am
Just thought I’d stop by and offer my two cents. I work in the treasury department for Macy’s, Inc. (formerly FDS, Inc.), and am deeply involved with cash flow management and bank account administration.
I can attest to the fact that large corporations have more bank accounts than you think - most of them are set up for one or more of the following three reasons: to add additional security to the account structure, to simplify the “flowchart” nature of these accounts or make the system a “one way” system, or to take advantage of tax laws and loopholes. Macy’s has more than 400 open bank accounts with roughly two dozen banks in the US and abroad. We have an entire team of people that work on maintaining them, but you’d be surprised how difficult it can be to make sure that each account is doing exactly what you want it to do at all times. I suspect that I know exactly what the situation was on Google’s end at the time the check was issued - someone simply failed to request a list of outstanding checks before closing or “zeroing out” that particular account. Although it hasn’t happened to us in a while, it’s not an uncommon mistake.
To address the comment of someone above, I’m fairly certain that there are laws in place that protect corporations from these types of slip-ups…the same way that you’re not going to spend 10 years in the pen if you accidentally bounce a check.
Glad to see that someone’s helping you out, though. Not sure you’d get the same kind of service from a lot of other people.
July 14th, 2007 at 4:25 am
Not to worry about “bank expert”… usually bank experts can spell “holes” correctly.
I enjoyed your story. The only way it would have been better would have been if Sallie Mae have bounced the check instead. I will settle for Google, though.
Best wishes,
NSF
Thresh
July 14th, 2007 at 4:24 am
I thought I got a bad adsense check from Goggle too. The bank sent me a letter that they were holding the funds for a week until the check actually cleared. i told my wife about it and we both were laughing so hard. It did clear though and now I am looking forward to the next check to see if there is a problem.
Jeff
July 14th, 2007 at 4:20 am
I still think that you should:
1) Deposit the check, if it clears, apologize
2) If it comes back canceled, auction it on ebay with the “canceled” stamp - talk about huge profit!
July 14th, 2007 at 4:18 am
I work at a bank and I can tell you what probably happened. If you try to cash a check and it’s more then your own account the cashier is cashing it against then they won’t allow allow it sometimes because techincally they’re not supposed to. Most people just do it though
July 14th, 2007 at 4:11 am
Rick,
Makes sense except my bank was not involved in this transaction. My account was never a consideration. If the account had the funds, it would have been cashed. I think it was and still maybe a timing issue.
July 14th, 2007 at 4:09 am
Wow. All I can say is wow. All in all, as long as your rent check doesn’t bounce, I’d say that this story is worth any three bouncing checks from Google.
July 14th, 2007 at 4:05 am
It could also be that YOUR account did’t have enough money to cover the check.
When cashing a check for a customer, a teller generally needs to verify that it has what’s known as “recourse”, which means the customer has to have enough money in their account to reimburse the bank in case the check turns out to be bad. Tellers have the option of waiving the recourse for well-known customers or for checks that come from well-known companies.
Waiving recourse is generally done at the teller’s discretion, but if the check turns out to be bad and the bank can’t collect its money back from the customer, there’s hell to pay. If this happens enough times, or for enough money, the teller can lose his/her job.
Perhaps you don’t fit into any of the “waiving” categories, and the teller either didn’t recognize Google or didn’t want to take a chance with it (the check could be a fake).
To avoid this, simply deposit the check. The bank will kinda-sorta credit your account with the amount, but it won’t be available for withdrawal until the check clears all the way through.
July 14th, 2007 at 4:04 am
Hi Tim,
It wasn’t my bank that told me.
July 14th, 2007 at 4:02 am
Bank Expert,
I see that you are so sure of your position that you posted it anonymously. Typical troll behavior.
This is story is not false. I wish it were, but you neglect reading and comprehension in your diatribe. Ask Matt Cutts, Google employee who commented here, if these are not the facts.
July 14th, 2007 at 4:01 am
Sadly that bank broke the law when it told you it had insufficient funds. Your bank could be in a lot of trouble for telling you the check had insufficient funds.
July 14th, 2007 at 3:51 am
I used to work at a bank and it’s possible, as you said, it was just an untimed check… A lot of large companies will use a ’sweep account’ where a large sum of funds are invested overnight or for very short terms and then “swept” back into the account on a pay day… this is most likely what happened. but seriously, you would think they would have a better handle on things like that.
July 14th, 2007 at 3:47 am
This made up story is so full of wholes it isn’t funny. After working in the banking industry for over 20 years there are so many wholes that prove this story is 100% BS.
1. The only way the teller would be able to access the information about Google’s account is if depositor banked at the same bank as google (not necessarily the same branch, but the same branch).
2. Google would likely have corporate accounts. With their banking volume they would have overdraft automatically in place on their accounts as a blanket courtesy of the bank.
3. In the event that there was no overdraft, typically a bank would have the account flagged and a small cheque like the one in this story would be put through out of courtesy to the banks major client.
4. He mentions he isn’t sure who to call about the cheque, yet all cheques must be signed. That might have been a good place to start?
I must congratulate the writer of this story! Did a great job driving traffic to your blog with this lie!!!
July 14th, 2007 at 3:45 am
Auction the check on eBay!
July 14th, 2007 at 3:43 am
@Ian
“Google, although a very large company in market cap, tries to maintain a smaller number of employees. If they had a call center devoted to fielding the issues associated with their services it would bite into profits instead they devote an automated system…”
Are we supposed to feel sorry for Google because they wouldn’t be able keep their profits high if they have to open call centers for Adsense problems?
Boo hoo. Sorry, but I don’t agree. If they want to use automated lines, then make Adsense perfect. Otherwise, get some people in there to help out your paying customers.
Adsense is a for-profit business, and Google SHOULD have a support center to handle any and all issues related to any payment processing. If you are trying to get money that is owed to you, a company should have a way for you to contact a live representative. Otherwise, don’t offer those services or expect backlash from paying customers (or worse, expect them to move to competitors).
We are not talking about a complaint of one of the many free Google services. This is the exchange of real money.
July 14th, 2007 at 3:35 am
its good to know that if I ever need customer support from Google all I have to do is blog about it.
July 14th, 2007 at 3:32 am
I don’t know how it works in the US, but here in europe if a check is bounced twice the company or person is blocked by a period of time of using checks… the losses that will overcome from this will make them do no evil, as they always like to say.
July 14th, 2007 at 3:29 am
It’s amazing what will get Google’s attention. I’ve been trying for over a month to get any response at all from Matt Cutts about an issue with an unknown penalty that Google has on our company’s website. That’s Matt’s area, but he doesn’t have the time to look into the problem or even respond (nor does anyone else at Google). But every now and then some obscure thing in a blog manages to get his attention while the rest of us are ignored.
July 14th, 2007 at 3:07 am
Great story. It supports my theory that even though these conglomerate companies have some of the smartest people in the world working for them, operationally they’re clusters.
July 14th, 2007 at 2:30 am
Thanks Matt. It’s nice to know there are real people at giant corporations willing to go the extra mile to fix a problem they could have walked away from.
As the brits would say, “Jolly good show ole chap”.
July 14th, 2007 at 2:24 am
I know its Matt because…well, just because. I work for his webhost.
July 14th, 2007 at 2:21 am
First of all, most banks require that you have the amount in your checking or savings in order to cash the check just in case the check doesnt clear(my bank does that anyways). Why didnt you just deposit it into your bank account, I bet that would have worked.
July 14th, 2007 at 2:16 am
This is why I would recommend that you take advantage of their wire transfer program, much less hassle, especially for us Canadians (some banks wants 30 business days to clear US checks, yep. 1.5 months. Why? Because they can be canceled for quite some time so the bank likes to err on the side of caution). Once a wire shows up it is yours. Plus you don’t have to worry about your address/etc.
July 14th, 2007 at 2:15 am
Deposit the check into your ATM so they won’t run the check in front of you.
It’d be great to see a snapshot of the NSF stamp on the Google check
July 14th, 2007 at 2:09 am
@Carol:
Google, although a very large company in market cap, tries to maintain a smaller number of employees. If they had a call center devoted to fielding the issues associated with their services it would bite into profits instead they devote an automated system that works for around 99.8% [-pulled out of thin air] of the correspondences. The issue is the remaining 0.2% and the unfortunate reality is that every year long time google users fall into this 0.2%. Frequently they are far less vocal and just vanish after aggravated useless correspondences with low level employees.
My recommendation for Matt would be to eliminate the scripted CSR and hire/train employees to understand what CS situations require immediate escalation and a bending of the rules. The real issue here is no longer google’s payment system but it is instead the insidious creeping of corporate policy ruling out over good business practice. Probably the largest threat to google at all.
July 14th, 2007 at 2:05 am
May be adsense had a certain process and steps for issuing and sending checks, and in order to solve your problem they had to ignore some of these steps which caused the problem ..
it’s still weired and kinda funny
July 14th, 2007 at 2:05 am
Notes 1. Passing a bad check is a felony. Depending on the state you live in you are entitled to charge fees to google for having bounced the check to you. 2 if you can’t reach someone att google there is the local DA, (a crime has been commited.) most DA’s would love to be on the front page.
July 14th, 2007 at 1:58 am
What a story you have
July 13th, 2007 at 7:36 pm
Carol Anne,
Matt is Matt. I know, because 1)Brian the Adsense operations management guy told me that Matt contacted him, 2)I left a comment on Matt’s blog which is why he came back here. Please don’t bash the one guy who is helping when he didn’t have to. Thank you, Matt.
July 13th, 2007 at 7:10 pm
Nice comment, Mr. Cutts. Thanks for stepping up.
Of course, on the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog, so how do we know this is THE Matt Cutts of Google who tried to help our poor blogger out? Could that post be from an anonymous party trying to raise false hopes?
Finally, that Google (and Yahoo, and AOL, and others) don’t ever offer the option to talk to a human being is just, plain STOOPID. It alienates your customers, and drives them to your competition. It’s simply penny-wise and pound-foolish.
July 13th, 2007 at 7:02 pm
I’ve already seen people discussing this internally, so they’re checking into what happened. Sorry that you got an extra dose of comedy that you no doubt didn’t want.
July 11th, 2007 at 8:49 pm
Matt Cutts’s surname is too short for Google’s internal telephone system. Who knew?! Is this the first cheque from Google that ever bounced? This is history…
July 11th, 2007 at 6:22 pm
LMAO!!! Love the hysterical reenactment!!!