Socialist Democrat Scum Protect YOU From Overdraft Fees!! OMGZORZ

ib1yysguy

ib1yysguy

Junior Member
"Flexing newfound muscle as consumer protector, the Federal Reserve on Thursday banned ATM and debit card overdraft fees unless customers have opted to pay to ensure that balance-busting transactions go through.

The new rules, which take effect July 1, mean that if you don't have overdraft protection, any debit card purchase or ATM cash withdrawal will be rejected if it exceeds the amount of money in your account.

And if you do want overdraft protection, your bank will have to give you a notice explaining the service and its fees before you can accept it."

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-bank-fees13-2009nov13,0,290841.story

I can't believe they'd do this. It's such a commie power grab that America won't stand for it! Rise up and rebel before your freedoms are gone forever!
 
ib1yysguy said:
"Flexing newfound muscle as consumer protector, the Federal Reserve on Thursday banned ATM and debit card overdraft fees unless customers have opted to pay to ensure that balance-busting transactions go through.

The new rules, which take effect July 1, mean that if you don't have overdraft protection, any debit card purchase or ATM cash withdrawal will be rejected if it exceeds the amount of money in your account.

And if you do want overdraft protection, your bank will have to give you a notice explaining the service and its fees before you can accept it."

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-bank-fees13-2009nov13,0,290841.story

I can't believe they'd do this. It's such a commie power grab that America won't stand for it! Rise up and rebel before your freedoms are gone forever!
Click to expand...

I think it's a great idea. With technology today the bank immediately knows if a transaction will result in an overdraft. They could have set it up so the ATM screen advises the consumer the withdrawal would result in an overdraft and ask the consumer if they agreed.

Why do you consider a business deliberately trying to take advantage of a customer is a form of freedom?
 
If they pay the overdraft, its an unapproved loan. And that loan is someone else's money being given to you to cover your mistake.

If its not paid, then you have stolen some item or service.




Overdraft fees are easy to avoid. Don't spend more than you make.
 
apple0154 said:
I think it's a great idea. With technology today the bank immediately knows if a transaction will result in an overdraft. They could have set it up so the ATM screen advises the consumer the withdrawal would result in an overdraft and ask the consumer if they agreed.

Why do you consider a business deliberately trying to take advantage of a customer is a form of freedom?
Click to expand...

The banks are raising customers interest rates before the new law takes affect in Feb.
 
WinterBorn said:
If they pay the overdraft, its an unapproved loan. And that loan is someone else's money being given to you to cover your mistake.

If its not paid, then you have stolen some item or service.




Overdraft fees are easy to avoid. Don't spend more than you make.
Click to expand...

There is no need for the mistake to happen. The bank (computer) knows if ones account will be overdrawn. It's deliberately withholding information so it can charge the consumer fees.

When using an ATM it frequently asks if one is willing to pay the $1.50 or $2.00 fee for the service. The bank could just as easily ask the consumer if they are willing to pay the $20.00 or $30.00 overdraft fee.

When businesses resort to practices that are nothing more than hustling the consumer the government should jump down their throat.
 
WinterBorn said:
If they pay the overdraft, its an unapproved loan. And that loan is someone else's money being given to you to cover your mistake.

If its not paid, then you have stolen some item or service.

Overdraft fees are easy to avoid. Don't spend more than you make.
Click to expand...


I don't think you get it. All this requires is for the ATM to say "hey, if I give you this money you will overdraw your account, do you want to proceed?" If you say yes, you get hit with the fee to cover the loan that you take from the bank. If you say no, you don't get hit with the fee. It's really just an information pushing regulation to make sure the parties to the transaction have the same knowledge.

Many years ago I banked with a bank that wouldn't let me overdraw my account and didn't hit me with the fee. They got bought out and the procedure changed. It is very easy for the banks to do this but it robs them of a big source of revenue.
 
Not only that but the banks charge those fees retroactively. Last year I changed my banks from one I had been using for years due to this procedure. I deposited a check in my account. I then wrote several checks to pay bills that day. When I recieved my statement I had several over draft fees. When I called up to find out why I was told it was because I had issued those checks before the check I had deposited had been cleared and therefore I had over drafted my account. I said "That's BS and I expect you to refund those over draft fees." They told me they wouldn't. I said I had been a customer since 1990 and if they didn't refund me I would close my account. The refused to refund me so I fired them and closed my account.

I think this is great form of consumer protection.
 
TuTu Monroe said:
The banks are raising customers interest rates before the new law takes affect in Feb.
Click to expand...

True. However, the people least able to afford the overdraft surcharges will benefit.

It's the idea the bank has to resort to less than straight forward practices that is the problem.

Did I tell you the time I applied for a mortgage in Quebec and the documents were in French? The bank wanted life insurance on the loan so I asked them about a certain clause and if they could translate it.

The employee went to talk with the bank manager and a few minutes later returned. The policy covered a "quite death" or a "peaceful death".

My response was, "Huh? What, exactly, is a quiet death or a peaceful death?"

The lady wasn't sure. Perhaps it meant it wouldn't cover a death by, say, being run over by a truck? Or an act of civil disobedience?

"I suppose if I died in bed that would be considered a quiet death", I queried with a twinkle in my eye. :)

"I....I don't really know", she hesitantly replied.

"All things considered I'll have to decline the insurance", I countered.

Again, she went to see the manager and returned saying they would offer the mortgage without insurance. Logical decision considering they didn't know what the insurance covered.
 
NigelTufnel said:
I don't think you get it. All this requires is for the ATM to say "hey, if I give you this money you will overdraw your account, do you want to proceed?" If you say yes, you get hit with the fee to cover the loan that you take from the bank. If you say no, you don't get hit with the fee. It's really just an information pushing regulation to make sure the parties to the transaction have the same knowledge.

Many years ago I banked with a bank that wouldn't let me overdraw my account and didn't hit me with the fee. They got bought out and the procedure changed. It is very easy for the banks to do this but it robs them of a big source of revenue.
Click to expand...

When I use my bank's ATM, I am asked if I want to see a balance. I get this same option on most ATMs. The fact that I decide not to do so is my fault, not theirs.

What people forget is that when they spend more money than they have in the bank, its not the bank's money they are spending. Its not their money they are spending. Its some other person's money that they deposited that you are spending.

Is it really so hard to keep track of how much money you have in your checking acct? Maybe a little less instant gratification and a little more care in handling your money would solve this without gov't interference.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Not only that but the banks charge those fees retroactively. Last year I changed my banks from one I had been using for years due to this procedure. I deposited a check in my account. I then wrote several checks to pay bills that day. When I recieved my statement I had several over draft fees. When I called up to find out why I was told it was because I had issued those checks before the check I had deposited had been cleared and therefore I had over drafted my account. I said "That's BS and I expect you to refund those over draft fees." They told me they wouldn't. I said I had been a customer since 1990 and if they didn't refund me I would close my account. The refused to refund me so I fired them and closed my account.

I think this is great form of consumer protection.
Click to expand...

Mott, what happened to you is different from what is being discussed here, I think. In your case I would have been pissed too.
 
Protect your self, read your contracts and know what's in your accounts. O yeah, we don't take responsibility for ourselves anymore lets have the Federal Reserve and Government do it for us. I hope they remind me to take a bath tonight.
 
This administration can save us from overdraft fees but can't protect us from terrorist, how bout that..
 
CaptBillyTheKid said:
I don't understand. Why can the government spend money it doesn't have but I can't?
Click to expand...

They can print more money to add to the debt.

Your money is spent through Appropriations Bills passed by The U. S. Senate and signed by the President. The Government does not have any money, it takes your money from you and, and borrows more, then spends that! The bailouts of 2008 and 2009 are purely deficit spending. Expect to see enormous deficits in the forseeable future, leading to much more debt; and interest payments on that debt will become the largest item in the federal budget. On C-SPAN, President Obama boldly told Americans: "We are out of money."
[SIZE=+2]Bulletin (24 March 2009): Warning![/SIZE] This report from Washington Post: "The Obama administration will ask Congress to give the Treasury secretary unprecedented powers to initiate the seizure of non-bank financial companies, such as large insurers, investment firms and hedge funds, whose collapse would damage the broader economy, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said this morning." Visit the Government's new "Recovery" web site; see if you can figure it out.
://www.federalbudget.com/
 
TuTu Monroe said:
They can print more money to add to the debt.

Your money is spent through Appropriations Bills passed by The U. S. Senate and signed by the President. The Government does not have any money, it takes your money from you and, and borrows more, then spends that! The bailouts of 2008 and 2009 are purely deficit spending. Expect to see enormous deficits in the forseeable future, leading to much more debt; and interest payments on that debt will become the largest item in the federal budget. On C-SPAN, President Obama boldly told Americans: "We are out of money."
[SIZE=+2]Bulletin (24 March 2009): Warning![/SIZE] This report from Washington Post: "The Obama administration will ask Congress to give the Treasury secretary unprecedented powers to initiate the seizure of non-bank financial companies, such as large insurers, investment firms and hedge funds, whose collapse would damage the broader economy, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said this morning." Visit the Government's new "Recovery" web site; see if you can figure it out.
://www.federalbudget.com/
Click to expand...

yeah but, they will save us from overdraft fees..:clink:
 
Obfuscate said:
Protect your self, read your contracts and know what's in your accounts. O yeah, we don't take responsibility for ourselves anymore lets have the Federal Reserve and Government do it for us. I hope they remind me to take a bath tonight.
Click to expand...

LOL. This is unsurprising.

NeoCon parrots and RonBots chime in with the vague and nebulous “Get Government Out of the Way!” nonsense. It’s an emotional reaction, based on an ideology that relies on slogans and vague generalities.

Yo dude, virtually every minute of every day of your life you are dependent on infrastructure, rules, and regulations that are part of the public commons, paid for by tax dollars, and administered by public authorities.

Did you really think you pulled yourself up by your bootstraps all by yourself? Laughable. Every time you get in your car, turn on your electricity, or take a drink of water, you are depending on an infrastructure and a system of rules that regulate its function and viability. I’d really like to know if you’ve switched to a bank or financial institution that doesn’t insure your deposit through FDIC, because I’m sure you hate government insurance.

Parroting some slogan about getting government out of the way is the ridiculous weak link of the RonBots. The proper role and function of government and duly elected public officials is to set up a system of rules and regulations so you don’t have to live in a law-of-the-jungle Libertarian hell hole like Somalia. This new rule totally makes sense, it's totally benign and modest, and it’s not some communistic plot to rob you of freedom.
 
Yawn, Cypress is such a hack, you're the Liberal Dixie or Hannity. Your Strawmen are boring. Classical economist and Libertarians are for limited Government not Anarchy hack. I support FDIC and supported the increase during the credit crunch, I stated that in the last hack post you made towards me, yet you use the same tired BS I already called you on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top