Quote:
Originally Posted by tkflames
2.You will have a hard time convincing me that the bank loses money on any accounts with more than $5000 in them.
|
I agree with this for sure. I believe the financial institution should be addressing a potential client problem and asking them how happy they are about earning nothing on their chequing account, and seeing if they can move that money into something that can earn them something.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tkflames
4. See item 1 above, but I think changing the terms of the contract on a one sided basis is the immoral part. Honestly, if it was the middle of a recession and the bank was losing money ( and therefore needed to increase the fees to stay alive--i.e. what I would consider the spirit of the "increase clause" in the contract), I would pay the fees, knowing that when times are better, they would reward me with loyalty advantage interest rates or something. However, during a time of record profits, this is an opportunity to gouge clients that are limited in their choices and require a huge inconvenience to change banks.
|
You'll forgive me because I've never worked for a Bank before, but I can offer you some insight from a Credit Union point of view.
It's difficult for most Credit Unions not to adjust their fees occasionally because often times we have to rely on a provincial provider of items such as clearing cheques or generating statements. Once they adjust their fees we don't have much choice in the matter due to economies of scale. We have to accept the new rate, and unfortunately, we do have to pass the cost onto the member owner. If we adjusted our loan rates up to obtain more income that way, people would shop elsewhere and we would have to close the doors. So we look at adjusting fees up to recoup some of the costs and try and keep account fees as competitive as possible.
