I used my debit/check card for a purchase at XXXX 's XXXX XXXX. There were insufficient funds to cover the purchase but the purchased was approved. I had previously chosen to not have a purchase approved if funds were insufficient when the same thing happened a couple of years ago. I chose to have the purchase refused. My bank is USBank. After noticing the overdraft charge in the transactions listing from the online banking site, I called USBank and they said that it was linked to my XXXX XXXX XXXX account. I stated that I specifically chose not to allow charges to be approved if my checking balance was insufficient. I also stated that an no time did I change my account to use the XXXX XXXX XXXX as a source to cover any overages. USBank charges {$12.00} to cover the purchase with the XXXX XXXX XXXX. This also means that since I have used funds from my XXXX XXXX XXXX, I am now being charged interest on the amount from the XXXX XXXX XXXX and need to make monthly payments to the XXXX XXXX XXXX until the balance of used funds is {$0.00}. To be clear, I never chose to link the XXXX XXXX XXXX to my checking account to cover purchases made on insufficient funds. Those purchased were supposed to refused per my request. These changes were made without my knowledge. Further, I can not choose to delete the XXXX XXXX XXXX from overdraft coverage from the website. I must call the XXXX number of visit the local branch to remove it from overdraft protection coverage. My local branch is located in XXXX XXXX, CA, XXXX. The clerk states that the only purpose of the XXXX XXXX XXXX is to cover overdrafts on my checking account and that in order to have my purchases refused due to insufficient funds, I will have to close the XXXX XXXX XXXX. USBank uses XXXX different terms regarding overdrafts. Overdraft Coverage and Overdraft Protection. The automated phone system says my current account does NOT have Overdraft Coverage. However, my monthly statement has a small section, easily overlooked, that states my account has Overdraft Protection linked to my XXXX XXXX XXXX. I believe this is an intentional tactic to confuse customers into incurring unintended bank charges. The USBank representatives told me that I should not be confused by their different policies and terms even though both representatives had to consult with managers and other bank employees in order to explain the difference between the terms and policies. Lastly, the representatives claimed that the XXXX XXXX XXXX was part of my checking account and could therefore be used to cover a purchase not possible with the checking account. When I asked, " if they are linked, then why was the purchase considered an overdraft? ", they claimed that the XXXX XXXX XXXX was NOT linked for that purpose. 
