Canada's TD Bank backs down on "Inactivity fee"
The Highlander
introduce a $35 inactivity fee for customers who don't use their lines
of credit and is also promising not to introduce any new fees or fee
hikes this year.
The bank announced in a press release Friday that the fee on inactive
unsecured lines of credit, that was to go into effect at the end of
April and had many customers upset, has been cancelled.
"The bottom line is we heard from customers and we heard from
employees who work closely with customers that this was a fee that
concerned them and the timing of it was also a concern," TD
spokeswoman Kelly Hechler said in an interview. "We heard their
concerns and we acted on them."
Public pressure works.
Jeffrey Hamilton
An incredibly stupid idea, even for bankers. Someone needs to be fired ! He
just doesn't get it !
cheers....Jeff
Mary
news:1ee3942e-ece4-4b4b...@i18g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Public pressure works.
Sometimes, but not always. The banks only back down when they have to as in
cases of losing customers. The banks do ok, though have complained for years
that they don't make enough money so have to introduce new customer fees
such as this stupid idea of $35.00. Why would the bank care if people used
their line of credit. It doesn't cost the bank anything to let lines of
credit stay inactive. Some banks tried to charge $20.00 for "inactive"
accounts, but I don't know if they still try to do that.
Mary
The Fifeshire Bimbo
> Sometimes, but not always. The banks only back down when they
> have complained for years that they don't make enough money so
> have to introduce new customer fees such as this stupid idea of
> $35.00. Why would the bank care if people used their line of
> credit. It doesn't cost the bank anything to let lines of credit
> stay
> inactive. Some banks tried to charge $20.00 for "inactive"
> accounts, but I don't know if they still try to do that.
They always have Mary. I found it interesting that Scotiabank and the
Royal charge *every* year whereas TD and BMO and CIBC do 2 and 5 year
notices.
From TD's web site...
Dormant, inactive and unclaimed account fees
a.. 2-year dormant fee $20.00
(no charge if acknowledged within 60 days)
a.. 5-year dormant fee $30.00
a.. 9-year dormant fee $35.00
CIBC ...
Dormant (inactive) for 2 years $20.00 or account balance
(whichever is less)
Dormant (inactive) for 5 years $30.00 or account balance
(whichever is less)
Dormant (inactive) for 9 years $35.00 or account balance
(whichever is less)
From BMO's (Bank of Montreal) site ...
Dormant account notice
If notice is acknowledged within 60 days
No charge
2 year notice of dormant account
$20.00
5 year notice of dormant account
$30.00
10 year transfer to Bank of Canada
$40.00
After 2 years, Scotiabank and the Royal charge EVERY year !
From Scotiabank's site...
Inactive Accounts/Account Closing
Account closed within 90 days of opening. $20.00
After two year notice of inactivity. $20.00
After three years of inactivity. $20.00
After four years of inactivity. $20.00
After five year notice of inactivity. $30.
After six years of inactivity. $30.
After seven years of inactivity. $30.
After eight years of inactivity. $30
Nine year notice of transfer to Bank of Canada. The nine year
notice of transfer to the Bank of Canada does not apply to U.S.
dollar and Euro accounts.
Royal Bank
An inactive account notice is sent when the customer has not performed
any transactions between January 01 and December 31 for two
consecutive years. An inactive account fee is charged each year the
account is inactive, but notices are only sent after the 2nd and 5th
year the account has been dormant, if applicable. If the account
remains dormant for 9 years, the account is closed and the funds
balance is transferred to Bank of Canada. They charge $20. every year
until the year before it goes to Bank of Canada when it's $40.
Mary
news:6up34nF...@mid.individual.net...
I think one time the B of M sent me a notice a few years ago, about
inactivity to my US account, but when I went to the bank and mentioned it,
they told me I wouldn't have to pay an inactivity fee, presumably becuase of
the part you quoted below about B of M, that there is no charge if you
acknowledge within 60 days. I guess they want to get rid of accounts, mostly
with small balances I guess, which go on and on for years.
I never had any accounts that were inactive for 10 years. I had enough
trouble keeping money in the bank, espeically when I was younger. I've never
heard of "transfer to Bank of Canada". I didn't know the "inactivity" money
went there. Well, the banks have their own ways of doing things I suppose.
Mary
Adam Whyte-Settlar
"Jeffrey Hamilton" <bbere...@cogeco.ca> wrote in message
news:EYEhl.16425$D9....@read2.cgocable.net...
> The Highlander wrote:
>> OTTAWA - TD Canada Trust bank has backed down from its plan to
The Halifax tried to CLOSE my UK credit card because I hadn't used it for
months.
*******!
I now have an automated small monthly payment going out so the computer
isn't alerted.
You should see the profits the Ozzie banks are turning in just now too -
screwing cash-strapped businesses left right and centre and then adding
'fees' on top. CBA just reported today - profits up 20% on the already
obscene profits last year. Problem is that there's hardly any cash about and
they've got it all. They can charge what they like basically.
They avoid public outrage by keeping domestic mortgage rates down while
ripping off business.
Adam Whyte-Settlar
"Mary" <n...@invalid.ddd> wrote in message news:gm7937$5st$1...@aioe.org...
Well it kind of does eckshully. If you don't use the 'line of credit' they
can't 'create' the money that you 'borrow' which means they don't get the
interest on what you 'borrow' and also they can't lever the amount you have
agreed to 'pay back' against the next 'loan' and so on.
The only money the banks have is the imaginary money that you agree in
writing to 'pay back' to them. But of course you don't really 'pay it back'
because the banks don't actually 'have' the money until you 'borrow' it. The
ony tangible thing of any value in all this is the piece of paper that you
have signed agreeing to pay the bank $$$$ per month for the next X years in
'repayment' of the 'loan'. The rest is all smoke and mirrors. So if you
don't pay the bank $$$$ per month for the next X years because you have
decided not to 'borrow' it after all - they lose.
Like a nuclear power station, this system is pefectly safe until something
goes wrong - as we have now discovered.
Mary
news:qdKdndOzm4guShrU...@westnet.com.au...
Yes, I understand this. I was talking from a customers point of view. The
banks have a completely different view of course - making money :)
Mary
The Highlander
> "The Fifeshire Bimbo" <h...@awa.an.bile.yer.heid.com> wrote in messagenews:6up34nF...@mid.individual.net...
( snipped for space reasons).
When I was a reporter, I did a story on "rounding error".
Rounding error is the fractional amounts left over on longterm
payments like mortgages.
Canadian banking law allows banks to keep those fractions of a penny
and more importantly, do so without paying tax on those fractional
amounts.
In the year I wrote this story, the Royal Bank of Canada made
something like four 48 million dollars in rounding error profit, all
tax free. Nice cosy little deal, eh?
Mary
Yes, but the big five all complain about low profits, while frequently
charging more for "service fees" - are we supposed to believe that :)
Mary
Ian Smith
finger in the stour:
Sounds like an opportunity for someone to start a new bank.