Re: Chase's overdraft fee scam
GL you get an invite. :laughing:
GL you get an invite. :laughing:
I'm not disagreeing that they won't try. We see what already happened when the credit laws were changed. The banks basically said since we won't be able to make as much money in the future we'll have to make up for it now, and then put through all kinds of interest rate increases prior to when the laws took effect.This will be offset by increases in fees/etc elsewhere. Banks/business ARE going to make their profit. Consumer pays for all. Net effect is negative as it costs time/$ to lower one fee and increase another. Likely better off staying put.
Class envy/warfare much?
This cracks me up, do you have any idea who the stock holders are these days? It's granny's IRA or juniors state employee pension fund or your 401k.
Oh I am familiar with getting by.I sincerely doubt that I have any reason to envy your income or your class. But I do remember what happened when I was young and barely getting by.
Besides, you missed the point. If you have never seen your grocery money for the month disappear due to arbitrary banking practices like these, then it's much easier to be uncaring about the problems and suffering it causes.
Again, class envy/warfare? FTR I am NOT for "too big to fail bail outs". Let them fall like all irresponsible fools but that will definitely harm more than the "big investors".The stock holders are a bit of everyone, including other businesses. But that does not matter. If granny gets slapped with hundreds of dollars in fees, she will not get that back from her IRA. The big investors are not hit with those fees, so that's where the money ends up.
Daniel
I agree wholeheartedly here. Unfortunately that era passed with the passing of the founders of these institutions, and also the changes on Wall Street. The standards for what Wall Street considers a profitable business have changed from 30 years ago. The banks and every other publicly traded company has had to adjust to the new standards. IMO, the standards are unrealistic and not conducive to long-term stability. Expecting year after year of growth, even from large companies with a large market share, makes for short-sighted management. End result is companies make money any way they can, even if it means taking advantage of someone's ignorance. I don't like it any more than you do. I think it diminishes us. Even from a business standpoint I think it's foolhardy. Extracting money from people who ultimately will go bankrupt is not a sustainable business plan. We saw it with the sub-prime loans. We'll see it with the credit card and overdraft business as well.Once upon a time, it was considered immoral and wrong to take advantage of a person's ignorance in a specialized field like loans and credit. There were Usury laws that at least gave a person a chance to keep from being shafted if a bank got greedy. Banks were not allowed to make loans that they knew would fail. They were not allowed to charge huge fees.
A while back (i believe it was during Regan's administration) those laws were weakened, and are now virtually gone.
It's still not right to take advantage of people, and a suggestion to "man up" sounds like it's in support of the right to rip off people. That just does not sound right on CPF.
So these poor ignorant fools are not responsible for their actions?End result is companies make money any way they can, even if it means taking advantage of someone's ignorance. I don't like it any more than you do. I think it diminishes us.
You're missing my point. I couldn't care less about protecting people from their own stupidity. I just don't think large institutions should enable it and even profit by it. If someone is hell bent on spending more than they have, and the banks or payday loan stores no longer oblige them, maybe they'll go to a loan shark. Eventually, they'll either miss a payment and end up in a dumpster, or decide this is not a good way to live. Problem solved either way.
I don't think GL is saying you should live beyond your means. Rather, when you're on the low end of the income scale things are very tight. Through error or even occasionally necessity you might end up trying to spend more than you have. Instead of the bank declining the purchase they let it go through, then reorder other transactions made prior to the transaction resulting in default so as to collect the most fees. End result is that a person who may have only been short $5 now has to contend with $175 in fees, putting them in the hole before they even get their next paycheck. In this day of instant electronics funds transfer and automated calling, why can't the bank give the customer an automated call if their account is in default, and give them until the close of the next business day to deposit the defaulted amount before charging fees? Perhaps charge a fee of a few dollars for this service to cover their expenses which also must be deposited along with the defaulted amount? At least this way the customer is given half a chance to fix things. If they choose not to, well, here come the fees.Don't live beyond your means.
Well, my answer is the bank never should have loaned money to these people to begin with. And if the government forced them to, then that same government should be willing to cover the bank's risks making loans to bad prospects.That is the exact reason some not all but some banks are being squeezed, you have a guvment bent on class warfare demanding ninja mortgages be issued then they freeze all foreclosures forcing said banks to carry dead assets while the poor ignorant fools live in houses without paying. WOW!
Thank you and I do see where you're coming from. Differences of opinion are why forums exist. Everyone here has kept it fairly respectable for the most part. I wrote the "can we please tone it down part" above prior to reading this but I thank you now for your above words. Let's use this thread as an example of how we can discuss controversial material while still remaining civil to each other.I just want to thank the the staff for allowing us this leeway and those who have been conducting a sensitive and impassioned debate with respect.
I don't mean to sound harsh in my posts but truth be told I am harsh, but I want to say that I respect all who have taken part even if we don't see eye to eye.
Sorry if this comes across as heartless. It annoys me on many levels when someone's bad habits are enabled, whether by banks or Payday places or loan sharks or family. If I found a person this desperate who needed money, I might ask them what they needed the money for. If they said rent or food, then I might say, fine, I'll go and pay your rent for you, or go to the store and buy you food. But there's no way on Earth I'm handing that person a dime. They obviously can't be trusted to manage their money. I'm not helping them get deeper into the hole by giving them money to gamble away. Until they conquer their addiction someone else who can be trusted should handle all the money.Wow . . . That's a bit heartless.
Some folks have gambling addictions. Some as bad as alcohol addiction. If they have to turn to the local Loan Sharks for money because PayDay offices are shut down, then yes; they will indeed end up in a dumpster. Then some homicide detective has to go to the addict's home and tell his wife, mom, children, or other loved ones that they found him in a dumpster.
As bad as PayDay offices are, someone's loved one won't end up in a dumpster if they fall behind.
They wrote fannie and freddy a blank check on Christmas eve, they protect the quasi-guvment end while squeezing the truly private banks.Well, my answer is the bank never should have loaned money to these people to begin with. And if the government forced them to, then that same government should be willing to cover the bank's risks making loans to bad prospects.
In that spirit perhaps you should rename this thread, do you still feel you were scammed?And guys, can we please tone it down a bit? This class envy stuff has nothing at all to do with anything. Remember that this thread was initially about some issues with my mom's checking account. In the end I found out the bank hadn't charged the fees I thought it did, so if anything the experience actually improved the way I see banks. Nevertheless, I also realize after researching the subject that many don't have as positive an outcome.
Thank you and you are welcome.Thank you and I do see where you're coming from. Differences of opinion are why forums exist. Everyone here has kept it fairly respectable for the most part. I wrote the "can we please tone it down part" above prior to reading this but I thank you now for your above words. Let's use this thread as an example of how we can discuss controversial material while still remaining civil to each other.
I was thinking of doing this. The thread has taken two directions. The first was about the issues with my mom's checking account which have been resolved to my satisfaction, and I noted that I considered the fees reasonable. That part is known pretty early in the thread ( post 19 specifically ). I edited the first post to note the situation was resolved, and linked to post 19.In that spirit perhaps you should rename this thread, do you still feel you were scammed?
Sorry if this comes across as heartless. It annoys me on many levels when someone's bad habits are enabled, whether by banks or Payday places or loan sharks or family. If I found a person this desperate who needed money, I might ask them what they needed the money for. If they said rent or food, then I might say, fine, I'll go and pay your rent for you, or go to the store and buy you food. But there's no way on Earth I'm handing that person a dime. They obviously can't be trusted to manage their money. I'm not helping them get deeper into the hole by giving them money to gamble away. Until they conquer their addiction someone else who can be trusted should handle all the money.
Doesn't amaze me at all. With some exceptions, most of those people are simply bums working the sympathy angle. Homeless, maybe, but that is a symptom of being a bum and not the root problem as we are supposed to believe. I was once asked for gas money by a woman who said she ran out of gas a few blocks away. I produced a full gas can from the back of my truck and offered to help. She gave me a dirty look, said forget it, and walked away. At a nearby intersection I regularly see a man holding his cardboard sign. He has a bicycle too, but I now see he hides it in the bushes as he now sports a pair of crutches. I suspect he fished the crutches out of the dumpster from the hospital a block away. I remember a contractor who handed out his business cards and an offer of work. He said not one ever shows up. I'm not without sympathy for those who are struggling to get by and need a helping hand, I just wish passing motorists would stop being so naive and hand out money. Hand out food or hand out a list of shelters or places to get help, but don't ever hand out cash!I know of folks who'll hand gift cards to fast food places when the Homeless ask them for money to get something to eat. You'd be amazed how often they refuse to take the gift card, or even become angry at the person trying to give it to them.
My grandfather told me stories like that. A homeless person would ask him for money to buy coffee, so instead he would offer to buy the person coffee. They always flat out refused. No surprise I guess as most also reeked of alcohol.Agreed.
I know of folks who'll hand gift cards to fast food places when the Homeless ask them for money to get something to eat. You'd be amazed how often they refuse to take the gift card, or even become angry at the person trying to give it to them.
...
This cracks me up, do you have any idea who the stock holders are these days? It's granny's IRA or juniors state employee pension fund or your 401k.