Racketeering.
Is it legal for Wells Fargo to decide that they will loan me money, at a flat interest of $35 per transaction, to complete recurring transactions when I have no money in the account?
Furthermore, is it legal for them to require "protection" money from me if I don't want them to loan me money when I haven't asked for a loan? Because that seems to be what paying them for "overdraft protection" is.
These are tactics used by organized crime.
They could easily deny those transactions when there is no money in the account but they say they can't do that.
They CAN do that. It's just that they won't do that.
That's called stealing.
Now if I want to stop any further "loans" to be approved without my knowledge you might think that I could close the account thereby blocking all transactions. No. They won't close the account until the negative balance has been paid. So if it takes a week for me to get paid, then they have that whole week to process more "pre-authorized" payments for which they can continue to decide that they will loan me the money to complete those payments at a fee of 35 dollars per transaction.
This is extortion.
We have protection rackets. We have robbery. We have extortion.
At this point, given that it is an organization which is committing these crimes, we have all of the requirements, according to federal law, to qualify this as "racketeering".
Am I wrong?