Bank of America to End Most Overdraft Fees

[DaShi]

Oh good. You can then give an example.

[snrjefe]

Seems kinda like usury to me. A $3 purchase that becomes a $38 purchase which is likely paid within a week when the next paycheck comes in...I'm no math wiz, but that's gotta be over 29.9% interest for what amounts to a short-term, semi-secured loan.

One of my banks requires these conditions as part of the account agreement. I don't make use of it and I guess it's nice to know that if I did need it there would be a fall-back, but I don't like that I can be charged an outrageous fee without my direct consent at the time of purchase. Even something as simple as 'the purchase amount must be equal to the fee amount to qualify' for bank-funded overdraft seems more fair than what they do now.

That some people incur these fees isn't surprising, you offer people the perception of free money and they'll take it. To those with the 'screw the stupid person who doesn't manage their finances' attitude, you should be pissed off that it's your money that's going to cover these overdrafts made by others. Granted, it helps the bank make more money, but when's the last time they raised the rates on your saving account?

Sure there are smaller regional banks and credit unions that don't screw you over, but if you need to use a large national or multinational bank, they'll bend you right over. Since I travel a lot for work, I naturally need access to funds wherever I end up, so being able to find a branch in many cities and countries is quite helpful and less expensive. (Don't forget about the lovely $2-$7 transaction fee and non-branch ATMs.)

[Alexander's Horse]

wow sarah parker is here - hi sarah

[Alexander's Horse]

oh no, payday loans...

[Robert]

oh no, payday loans...

I'm sorry, but if you have any more questions towards Sarah, please contact her by PM. 8)

[Alexander's Horse]

One of yours Cyber?

[kentonio]

The banks in the UK recently won a case justifying the charges (well that's not what the Court said, but that's how people read it).

The banks lost in two levels of court proceedings and were told they couldn't appeal further. Then the supreme court chose to take the case anyway. Then they miraculously decided that the case was being brought under the wrong terms and would have to be started all over again (which the office of fair trading didn't have the funding to do). If anyone believes there wasn't political interference in that case, they need mental help.

[Jon Miller]

I have bank of america.

What I love is the number of times that my incoming wire is cleared (not listed on the account, which happens before) right after (sometimes listed as the same day...) my automatic debit dropped me down to -0.69 cents or something.

I also love the 3$ to send money to other accounts in the US and ~40$ to send money to large banks in europe.

JM

[Jon Miller]

I have bank of america.

What I love is the number of times that my incoming wire is cleared (not listed on the account, which happens before) right after (sometimes listed as the same day...) my automatic debit dropped me down to -0.69 cents or something.

I also love the 3$ to send money to other accounts in the US and ~40$ to send money to large banks in europe.

JM

[Dinner]

JM, try a local credit union. I bank at a local credit union and I find both the fees to be lower and the number of financial services offered without charge to be superior to the national banks. I've previously banked at both Wells Fargo and Wachovia but found both nickled and dimed me for what are charge free routine services at credit unions.

[Dinner]

Personally, I don't understand why they would let you take out more then you have. Makes no sense to me.

Mostly because they deliberately make it so people go into over draft as much as possible just so they can ring up as many fees as possible. For instance, you take out money it is instantly removed from your account but if you deposit money it can take up to three days before they credit your account despite the fact that with modern electronic transactions they know instantaneously that the money is there. They'll also fiddle with the order of transactions so that they processes them from largest to smallest even if you charge them from smallest to largest. Why? Simple because they want to take the big transactions out of your account first so that each of the small transactions each add an additional $40 over draft fee which goes to them.

It's excessive and a great reason to switch to local credit union as they don't use so many dirty tricks to try to screw their customers over.

[Sava]

why resurrect dead thraed?
WHY

[MichaeltheGreat]

Bot selling payday loans bumped it.

[Sava]

that dick

[kentonio]

I've never come close to having an overdraft, so I can't really understand people falling foul of these charges from a practical point of view, nor do I have much sympathy. I thought most bank accounts gave you a nominal $100 overdraft precisely to avoid this kind of thing. Guess not - or maybe they do and it's that limit that people are going over.

The banks in the UK recently won a case justifying the charges (well that's not what the Court said, but that's how people read it).

It's also worth noting that the UK banks slashed their charges after that case. I suspect they were trying to head off any potential follow up case, which would have almost certainly led to them having to pay back billions.