I think you probably meant to say ''objectively''. But your slip is, in fact, accurate. We all look at things subjectively.
Class action suit against banks
- Thread starter Amadio
- Start date
I think you probably meant to say ''objectively''. But your slip is, in fact, accurate. We all look at things subjectively.
Agree that there is not a level playing field. But the point I was trying to make was that if a convenience store buys a coke for, say, $0.50, and charge $2.50 that's their choice! They charge what the market will bear, while maximising their margin. No one is telling them that their "real cost" of supplying that product with rent, electricity, staff, etc, is $1 and they can't charge more than that. Which is what's happening to the banks.
As a consumer, I can choose NOT to buy the convenient, more expensive coke. Same with the bank. I can choose to go to my own bank's ATM and not pay a $2 foreign ATM fee; I can choose to pay my credit card on time and NOT pay the $35 late fee plus interest; I can choose to spend less than the amount that's in my account to ensure it's not overdrawn.
Just a bit too much common sense and responsibility for your own actions in that statement Rob. Better cut it out.
I'm curious to know if those who think the banks are justified in these rediculously higher than necessary charges would be happy if one of their tenants or customers paid with a cheque and didn't cover the cheque.
Of course the $35 fee (or whatever it is) that you, through no fault of your own, incur would be okay, wouldn't it?
Anyway, the banks are not thinking of the billions the are raking in, but only thinking of helping their customers better manage their banking.
Of course the $35 fee (or whatever it is) that you, through no fault of your own, incur would be okay, wouldn't it?
Anyway, the banks are not thinking of the billions the are raking in, but only thinking of helping their customers better manage their banking
.
Saw this thread and thought oh no another whinge whinge moan moan thread about bank fees, luckily we have some financially sensible types here and steveadl has already put up the same argument I would have.
Just like speeding fines these fees are a stupid tax, easily avoided by doing the right thing.
Just like speeding fines these fees are a stupid tax, easily avoided by doing the right thing.
I'm curious to know if those who think the banks are justified in these rediculously higher than necessary charges would be happy if one of their tenants or customers paid with a cheque and didn't cover the cheque.
Of course the $35 fee (or whatever it is) that you, through no fault of your own, incur would be okay, wouldn't it?
This is one I have had on more than one occassion and not happy Jan.
One question though. You need to register to be part of the class action. What if the class action fails, can the judge order the claimants pay the banks legal fees?
Cheque? What's cheque?
Do you mean?
Of course the $35 fee (or whatever it is) that you, through no fault of your own, incur would be okay, wouldn't it?
Anyway, the banks are not thinking of the billions the are raking in, but only thinking of helping their customers better manage their banking
There's this new thing-y called "online banking" which allows one to transfer money... anyway you get the picture!
But point taken, also.I actually was stung once by someone paying me by cheque which bounced and for which I was hit with a substantial fee.
Personally, I have not had a cheque account for probably ten years, but there are still lots of folk who do, and even more who will not use internet banking.
We have one tenant who doesn't trust internet banking and who still pays rent by cheque.
My sister-in-law, in her mid 50s, still has a passbook. She is a very nice, sensible, modern woman, but likes to see how much money she has. I just don't understand it. (I'm not sure if she still has that bank book but she certainly had it until a few years ago.)
I worked for a bank for 20 years..... believe me, they ain't charging those fees because they care about the financial welfare of their customers
Personally, I have not had a cheque account for probably ten years, but there are still lots of folk who do, and even more who will not use internet banking.
We have one tenant who doesn't trust internet banking and who still pays rent by cheque.
My sister-in-law, in her mid 50s, still has a passbook
. She is a very nice, sensible, modern woman, but likes to see how much money she has. I just don't understand it. (I'm not sure if she still has that bank book but she certainly had it until a few years ago.)I worked for a bank for 20 years..... believe me, they ain't charging those fees because they care about the financial welfare of their customers
Not the bank customers, no.
In a class action suit the lawyers take all the risk but will also be up for some massive fees if they lose.
I suspect that a settlement of some kind will occur, reducing the costs for everybody, but also any pay-out.
I was stung once for $35.
I had bought something for I think around $70 when the lines were down for using ATM cards and the shop used a manual swipe machine.
At the time I had thousands in that account and it wasnt a problem.
The business then took something like 6 weeks to put in the slip during which time that account was down low on $ and I was something like $5 short of the amount.
This was an account that was used constantly by both myself and the hubbie so was impossible to keep track of weather the $70 charge had been taken out. It was the day before a monthly wage was put into the account and charges for several other things had been processed against my account that day.
I did go into the bank and was refunded the money.
The bank has gotten PLENTY out of me for the last 25 or so years....PLENTY.
I had bought something for I think around $70 when the lines were down for using ATM cards and the shop used a manual swipe machine.
At the time I had thousands in that account and it wasnt a problem.
The business then took something like 6 weeks to put in the slip during which time that account was down low on $ and I was something like $5 short of the amount.
This was an account that was used constantly by both myself and the hubbie so was impossible to keep track of weather the $70 charge had been taken out. It was the day before a monthly wage was put into the account and charges for several other things had been processed against my account that day.
I did go into the bank and was refunded the money.
The bank has gotten PLENTY out of me for the last 25 or so years....PLENTY.
Similar threads
