In that Case, Get an Earful of This!

A memorable ending for a phone to the bank.

The identity of this bank shall be concealed by using the unbreakable code name of - say - ZNA Bank.

For a bit of background, ZNA Bank has been strictly observing banking rules (& etc) with Mine Host. They have been refusing to allow depositing of cheques made out to "Wayside Motel" on the basis that the account is in the name of "Wayside Hotel" (sweet smile: "You'll just have to contact the drawer sir, & get them to reissue a cheque in the correct name") & other such infuriating conduct.

Then Mine Host discovers that ZNA has been taking orders for chequebooks (on one of his accounts) from members of his staff, who are not signatories to that account. These non-signatories then wrote a pile of cheques, all of which were honoured by ZNA Bank.

Mine Host is relishing the forthcoming "Please Explain" meeting he will be having with the branch manager.

For those unfamiliar with the twists of modern banking, (".. to better serve your financial needs"), it is not that they honoured cheques without verifying the signature that will embarrass the bank, but the issuing of chequebooks to non-signatories.
That they have been honouring cheques written with an invalid signature will not cause the bank to bat an eyelid. In our improved modern banking system this is the problem of the account holder.

With this bit of background in mind, one can imagine Mine Host's distress when the transaction banking helpdesk refused to discuss anything with him. For he was unable to satisfy the bank's security requirements & the operator was "unable to confirm identity".

It would seem the security procedures for mere phone conversation with the bank are considerably tighter than those required to have a chequebook printed & handed over.

Mine Host, by now experiencing a transitional mood, expounded down the phone on the subject of security procedures as they applied to telephone conversations or chequebook possession. During this delivery of opinion he may have used the "BS" word to describe the actions of ZNA Bank.

The operator then got all indignant & prissy, as if it was Mine Host and not the bank who was out of order, and in a stern tone of voice informed Mine Host that if he persisted with "language like that" she would terminate the call.

Mine Host reflected briefly on this.
The bank was refusing to talk to him, thus the call was going nowhere anyway,
The bank had sins aplenty,
The operator would not tolerate any "further" bad language,
The operator had stated emphatically that it was impossible to identify the caller,

Mine Host then gave her very good reason to terminate the call.