Page 1 of 1 pages
Is it surprising that banks continue to add even more devious ways to make a buck if only 20 percent of the customers getting screwed leave them? After 23 years with my neighborhood bank they announced over the speaker, “We can’t accept this check.”
With no prior notice it seems our long standing agreement for my one person business to have a single integrated personal/business account had been modified. First I was told by an officer it was “the law”
Posted by whattheheck on Dec 18, 2007 at 6:53 AM
re: Foreclosure Fraud, FREDDIE MAC, Well Fargo, Judicial Corruption
Any representation to Wall Street Investors by FREDDIE MAC or by WELLS FARGO that its reported $$$ billion dollar losses are due to people defaulting on their mortgages should be weighed against the fact that (in states such as Louisiana), Freddie Mac and Wells Fargo needlessly pays DEBT COLLECTION firms outrageous legal fees for corporate lawyers to outmaneuver
Posted by BarbaraAnnJackson on Dec 18, 2007 at 3:03 PM
“A PNC spokesperson says such a policy ‘helps our customers avoid embarrassment.’ “
Is that some kind of a joke? Is their business supposed to be comically corrupt? The swindled should merely accept this tongue in cheek, wink and nod to the obvious swindle?
Think of a world where the consumer has power. A world of consumers that reacts to a $217 overdraft scheme by pulling all of their accounts with that bank. No shortage of banks in Pittsburg, I’m guessing.
Unfortunately, in these times, the consumer is broken from the power of their consumption. There is no consumers union; it’s bad for business.
Posted by CornChip on Dec 18, 2007 at 6:47 PM
This article doesn’t explain why the normal processes of capitalism do not commodify bank services, that is, tend to drive down prices and drive up the quality of the product. Nor does it explain why people cannot obtain better terms for themselves by forming their own banks (credit unions) cooperatively. Instead, it seems to call for more regulation. As we already have a great deal of government regulation of the banking industry, I suspect the answers to these questions have something to do with that very regulation. And that as usual, begging the rich who own and operate the government to be nicer to us isn’t going to accomplish very much.
Posted by anarcissie on Dec 21, 2007 at 6:58 AM
Anarcissie,
I believe you hit it with the idea that the regulations have much to do with the examples given in the article.
People do have choices
Posted by whattheheck on Dec 23, 2007 at 6:52 AM
I will agree that the banks are predatory and usurious in their lending practices. However, for one to be able to charge $230, without knowing that they didn’t have that much in their account, is not the fault of the bank, but the individual. I made a miscalculation once, to the tune of $5, and the bank charged me $25 for a bounced check, and they charged my daughter, to whom the check was written, $25 as well! That is usury! Unfortunately, our government is now owned by Corporate America! We can, however, let our “representatives” know that we’re not pleased, and demand action. Write or call your representatives!
Posted by oldmanheinz on Dec 25, 2007 at 6:20 PM
Oldmanheinz.
I certainly agree big business and especially big financial interests have the greatest influence on our government I’m afraid I can’t share your optimism about the effects of individuals writing to our representatives.
For decades I have written to both state and federal representatives and have seen a marked decline in relevant replies. There was a time when, even though I doubted that they actually read their mail, I think an occasional assistant brought one to the attention of an actual elected person.
I have received stock answers and form letters several times for the wrong topic.
With the increase in population, the 24/7 news, and the lack of meaningful action on important problems, I doubt even the most diligent individual could handle the flood of correspondence anymore.
The NRA and other huge, single-issue groups get attention due to the actual weight of mail when legislation is called to the attention of those concerned.
On the subprime, SIV, CDO, etc. scam, I emailed my rep. demanding someone be held accountable. His reply was the usual “Thank you for your interest” BS which assured me he will propose legislation “...to make it more difficult for this to happen ever again.”
This is like saying, “Thank you for your concern about the serial killer in your neighborhood, my upcoming bill will make it more difficult to kill quite as many people it such a short time.
If I called him in the email all the things I think fit best as a description of our do—nothing Congress, I’m sure I would have received an equally warm thank you note.
The Fed, Treasury Secretary, S&P and other rating agencies and big financial institutions have circled the wagons to protect each other on what is the most serious economic misconduct since the 1929 Depression.
Enron was bad, the Long Term Capital Management was big, but this is the first global destruction of financial trust in my lifetime. We will all be affected by this for years and the big gainers will keep all their loot.
Posted by whattheheck on Dec 26, 2007 at 8:08 AM
Punish people for spending more than they have? Making people pay back what they owe? Outrageous! I agree with CornChip that the problem is rooted in overconsumption. Therefore, it would be crass to suggest the solution would be to start rewarding that behavior. I fact, the tightening of the foreclosure rules will help in the long term to keep people within their budgets. How many people have taken risks thinking “if this doesn’t work out, I can always forclose/declare bankruptcy”? It may be relatively few, but it hurts those of us who pay our bills enormously.
For those of you who think a bank is there to take care of customers, I have news for you: Corporations are there to make money, and for no other reason. A bank may wish to take care of customers in order to keep them (and therefore make more money), but you are the only one who cares about your money. If you don’t, there are many people and corporations willing to take it off of your hands for you.
People are free to choose banks as well as other companies to do business with. If you get screwed, you chalk it up to experience and move on to the next. And, like whattheheck, to tell anyone who will listen about your bad experience.
One more point to consider: If you own mutual funds or some other market-based investment, you are probably invested in the very companines you are complaining about. You profit from thier methods of business, “predatory” or otherwise. Many, many more people gain in the capitalist system than lose.
Posted by LeeJ on Dec 26, 2007 at 9:39 AM
Page 1 of 1 pages
SAVE 53% OFFTHE NEWSSTAND PRICE!
Reader Comments
Is it surprising that banks continue to add even more devious ways to make a buck if only 20 percent of the customers getting screwed leave them? After 23 years with my neighborhood bank they announced over the speaker, “We can’t accept this check.”
With no prior notice it seems our long standing agreement for my one person business to have a single integrated personal/business account had been modified. First I was told by an officer it was “the law”
re: Foreclosure Fraud, FREDDIE MAC, Well Fargo, Judicial Corruption
Any representation to Wall Street Investors by FREDDIE MAC or by WELLS FARGO that its reported $$$ billion dollar losses are due to people defaulting on their mortgages should be weighed against the fact that (in states such as Louisiana), Freddie Mac and Wells Fargo needlessly pays DEBT COLLECTION firms outrageous legal fees for corporate lawyers to outmaneuver
“A PNC spokesperson says such a policy ‘helps our customers avoid embarrassment.’ “
Is that some kind of a joke? Is their business supposed to be comically corrupt? The swindled should merely accept this tongue in cheek, wink and nod to the obvious swindle?
Think of a world where the consumer has power. A world of consumers that reacts to a $217 overdraft scheme by pulling all of their accounts with that bank. No shortage of banks in Pittsburg, I’m guessing.
Unfortunately, in these times, the consumer is broken from the power of their consumption. There is no consumers union; it’s bad for business.
This article doesn’t explain why the normal processes of capitalism do not commodify bank services, that is, tend to drive down prices and drive up the quality of the product. Nor does it explain why people cannot obtain better terms for themselves by forming their own banks (credit unions) cooperatively. Instead, it seems to call for more regulation. As we already have a great deal of government regulation of the banking industry, I suspect the answers to these questions have something to do with that very regulation. And that as usual, begging the rich who own and operate the government to be nicer to us isn’t going to accomplish very much.
Anarcissie,
I believe you hit it with the idea that the regulations have much to do with the examples given in the article.
People do have choices
I will agree that the banks are predatory and usurious in their lending practices. However, for one to be able to charge $230, without knowing that they didn’t have that much in their account, is not the fault of the bank, but the individual. I made a miscalculation once, to the tune of $5, and the bank charged me $25 for a bounced check, and they charged my daughter, to whom the check was written, $25 as well! That is usury! Unfortunately, our government is now owned by Corporate America! We can, however, let our “representatives” know that we’re not pleased, and demand action. Write or call your representatives!
Oldmanheinz.
I certainly agree big business and especially big financial interests have the greatest influence on our government I’m afraid I can’t share your optimism about the effects of individuals writing to our representatives.
For decades I have written to both state and federal representatives and have seen a marked decline in relevant replies. There was a time when, even though I doubted that they actually read their mail, I think an occasional assistant brought one to the attention of an actual elected person.
I have received stock answers and form letters several times for the wrong topic.
With the increase in population, the 24/7 news, and the lack of meaningful action on important problems, I doubt even the most diligent individual could handle the flood of correspondence anymore.
The NRA and other huge, single-issue groups get attention due to the actual weight of mail when legislation is called to the attention of those concerned.
On the subprime, SIV, CDO, etc. scam, I emailed my rep. demanding someone be held accountable. His reply was the usual “Thank you for your interest” BS which assured me he will propose legislation “...to make it more difficult for this to happen ever again.”
This is like saying, “Thank you for your concern about the serial killer in your neighborhood, my upcoming bill will make it more difficult to kill quite as many people it such a short time.
If I called him in the email all the things I think fit best as a description of our do—nothing Congress, I’m sure I would have received an equally warm thank you note.
The Fed, Treasury Secretary, S&P and other rating agencies and big financial institutions have circled the wagons to protect each other on what is the most serious economic misconduct since the 1929 Depression.
Enron was bad, the Long Term Capital Management was big, but this is the first global destruction of financial trust in my lifetime. We will all be affected by this for years and the big gainers will keep all their loot.
Punish people for spending more than they have? Making people pay back what they owe? Outrageous! I agree with CornChip that the problem is rooted in overconsumption. Therefore, it would be crass to suggest the solution would be to start rewarding that behavior. I fact, the tightening of the foreclosure rules will help in the long term to keep people within their budgets. How many people have taken risks thinking “if this doesn’t work out, I can always forclose/declare bankruptcy”? It may be relatively few, but it hurts those of us who pay our bills enormously.
For those of you who think a bank is there to take care of customers, I have news for you: Corporations are there to make money, and for no other reason. A bank may wish to take care of customers in order to keep them (and therefore make more money), but you are the only one who cares about your money. If you don’t, there are many people and corporations willing to take it off of your hands for you.
People are free to choose banks as well as other companies to do business with. If you get screwed, you chalk it up to experience and move on to the next. And, like whattheheck, to tell anyone who will listen about your bad experience.
One more point to consider: If you own mutual funds or some other market-based investment, you are probably invested in the very companines you are complaining about. You profit from thier methods of business, “predatory” or otherwise. Many, many more people gain in the capitalist system than lose.
register a new account »Posting Security