The most profitable source of income for banks? Overdraft fees • Hacker News Board

Re: The most profitable source of income for banks? Overdraft fees

#121

Post by jkestner » Tue, Aug 25, 2015, 2:07 AM UTC

Karunamon wrote: post #63

fredkbloggs wrote: post #23

We could read 100 sob stories, or we could recognize that every single overdraft (other than errors and fraud, which do happen but are rare and these days invariably corrected) is voluntary . Yes, banks will make money any way that they can. Yes, they will happily take your last dollar, or even dollars you don't have and never will. No, they do not give one flying fucking rat's ass about you, your sister, or the home…

And the best part is, you're being downvoted for this.. I dunno, apparently a lot of HN thinks that it's impossible to believe that banks are generally run by bastards while simultaneously believing that 99% of these instances are completely voluntary and completely avoidable? If you keep track of what you're spending your money on, it's not a problem you're gonna have to ever deal with - and I say this as someone th…

Don't forget to read all your EULAs!

Not everyone can afford to educate themselves on every consequence of every interaction with a corporation that is actively trying to obscure those consequences. I'm generally not ignorant, and I naively thought last week that if I transferred some money into a checking account on the same day that a payment was taking the balance below zero, I'd end up positive when the transactions were run at the end of the day. I got dinged $35.

Re: The most profitable source of income for banks? Overdraft fees

#122

Post by morgante » Tue, Aug 25, 2015, 2:09 AM UTC

This title should be changed, as it is not the title of the article and even more importantly seems to be pure clickbait.

No source is cited for $37 billion in overdraft revenue and even if that number is accurate I'n highly skeptical that it's the most profitable line-item in a $1.26 trillion dollar industry.

Re: The most profitable source of income for banks? Overdraft fees

#123

Post by kefka » Tue, Aug 25, 2015, 2:09 AM UTC

fredkbloggs wrote: post #44

noonespecial wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most egregious example that has happened to me: I had a checking account with a hidden $5 fee if the balance went below $5000 in a given month. I made a big purchase, left the account with about $3 in it and scheduled a transfer from savings for the next day... you know how it played out: $5 fee on the low balance, $50 charge to "borrow" the $2 all taken from the transfer the next day. They call that a "service".…

Couldn't wait until the next day to make the purchase? Couldn't use cash or a credit card instead? You're an adult. You're obviously literate or you couldn't be posting here. Unless these fees were not disclosed to you (a MAJOR breach of the law if true), you had every opportunity to know that this would occur and to prevent it. Try taking responsibility for your own actions.

Ah, so if every bank gives a 1000 page boilerplate "contract", and they all entail usurious fees, it's just the person's problem because they should have known?

Well, fuck that logic. All the banks are acting in a cartel with these. And banking is effectively required. Many workplaces require direct deposit, which guess what..... require a bank account.

Banking should be boring, simple, and hassle free. Contracts should be simple and readable, and not filled with dense legalese and caveats that say "tl;dr: we can change anything we like whenever we like. oh and we post it underneath a rock".

Re: The most profitable source of income for banks? Overdraft fees

#124

Post by thrownaway2424 » Tue, Aug 25, 2015, 2:11 AM UTC

tlrobinson wrote: post #109

ssimpson wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

USAA also batches their debts and payments differently than other banks, to help their members minimizes any fees incurred. Their customer service saying is "assume positive intent" and they have amazing service. I will probably be a customer for life.

For awhile Bank of America did the exact opposite, ordering transactions each day from largest to smallest to maximize the number of overdraft fees. Fortunately that truly evil practice was put to an end when they lost a $410 million class action lawsuit.

I worked at a company that developed hardware (check scanning) and software for banks. _Every_ bank wanted the feature that batches transactions on accounts from largest to smallest, to maximize the overdraft fees. That was in 1994 so it has been going on for a long time.

Re: The most profitable source of income for banks? Overdraft fees

#125

Post by themartorana » Tue, Aug 25, 2015, 2:12 AM UTC

fredkbloggs wrote: post #111

mbrameld wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't imagine a scenario where a responsible adult has had a checking account with a balance over $5000 for many years and has never run in to the charge for dropping below that level, eventually forgetting about that $5 fee? Now if you managed to picture that and believe it's possible for a responsible adult to forget about an obscure fee his bank has never charged him before, try to imagine your home's AC goes…

I'm trying to provide something other than Progressivist claptrap, in the desperate hope that some young people will read this and understand that there's more than one viewpoint in the world, and that some of them actually treat people like human beings rather than victims. As for the substance of your complaint, I do not agree. Yes, I can certainly imagine various excuses. I can also imagine accepting that mistakes…

Sounds like what I assume bankers tell themselves to sleep at night. Ya know - they're adults that should have known better. $50 is a modest fee to charge for teaching them a lesson. They should thank me. If they just got a job and stopped being poor, they wouldn't be in this situation to begin with. Takers.

Re: The most profitable source of income for banks? Overdraft fees

#126

Post by danharaj » Tue, Aug 25, 2015, 2:14 AM UTC

Karunamon wrote: post #117

danharaj wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's probably because people usually grow out of the stage of political awareness where one imagines human beings to be atoms that aren't connected to one another. If you think that 'personal responsibility' or whatever allows you to judge someone as stupid, inferior, or deserving of misery, then you will have a bias that makes you see people as individuals cut off from all social and economic context because it give…

You seem to know an awful lot about my worldview based on nothing more than a statement of the completely true fact that these wounds are almost entirely self-inflicted. "Minefield"? "Don't spend money you don't have available to spend, otherwise bad things will happen" is a principle that most people are taught as children. You seem to conflate the ideas of personal responsibility and the idea of deserving whatever…

Again, this sort of reasoning allows every institution to open the doors to maximize the chance that vulnerable people fail in order to capitalize on it. There are many, many, many more traps in the world than overdraft fees for vulnerable people to account for.

Governments, banks, employers, etc. are all hostile towards people.

Every detail you have to track in order to not get fucked is a liability The silence on your part on what responsibility our institutions have for the people they serve is deafening. What you don't say tells me as much about your worldview as what you did say. It's all boring as hell, trust me.

Re: The most profitable source of income for banks? Overdraft fees

#127

Post by fredkbloggs » Tue, Aug 25, 2015, 2:14 AM UTC

danharaj wrote: post #88

Karunamon wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the best part is, you're being downvoted for this.. I dunno, apparently a lot of HN thinks that it's impossible to believe that banks are generally run by bastards while simultaneously believing that 99% of these instances are completely voluntary and completely avoidable? If you keep track of what you're spending your money on, it's not a problem you're gonna have to ever deal with - and I say this as someone th…

It's probably because people usually grow out of the stage of political awareness where one imagines human beings to be atoms that aren't connected to one another. If you think that 'personal responsibility' or whatever allows you to judge someone as stupid, inferior, or deserving of misery, then you will have a bias that makes you see people as individuals cut off from all social and economic context because it give…

I don't feel that I'm a weaker counterparty. If I find myself feeling that way in a relationship, I am going to renegotiate its terms or end it.

The problem that you Progressivists have is that you cannot distinguish apparent power from real power. A bank may be evil, but its power over you is illusory. You are still free to terminate your relationship with it at any time. Real power comes only from the ability to use violence, which in the developed world is associated primarily with the government. That you cannot tell the difference between a tax assessed by the government and a fee charged by a commercial entity as part of a voluntary business relationship is the reason for your confusion and frustration. And mine as well.

Re: The most profitable source of income for banks? Overdraft fees

#128

Post by a3n » Tue, Aug 25, 2015, 2:14 AM UTC

ssimpson wrote: post #38

staunch wrote: post #6

The pain overdraft fees cause poor people is truly hard to comprehend unless you've been there. It's incredibly evil. You've got $16 left for food and then then the Flickr account you forgot to cancel gets charged to your account, putting your balance at -$9. Now you have to pay $35/day until you get enough money to cover the overdraft fees. You end up paying $100+ for a $9 forced loan. The bank could have just decli…

USAA also batches their debts and payments differently than other banks, to help their members minimizes any fees incurred. Their customer service saying is "assume positive intent" and they have amazing service. I will probably be a customer for life.

The other day I took a picture of a check that I received, with their phone app. They credited the check to my account immediately. Not "pending," it was in there with no unusual note. I assume it would have been on me in some way if the check bounced, but still.

If you're eligible, you should join USAA.

Re: The most profitable source of income for banks? Overdraft fees

#129

Post by Karunamon » Tue, Aug 25, 2015, 2:14 AM UTC

jkestner wrote: post #121

Karunamon wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the best part is, you're being downvoted for this.. I dunno, apparently a lot of HN thinks that it's impossible to believe that banks are generally run by bastards while simultaneously believing that 99% of these instances are completely voluntary and completely avoidable? If you keep track of what you're spending your money on, it's not a problem you're gonna have to ever deal with - and I say this as someone th…

Don't forget to read all your EULAs! Not everyone can afford to educate themselves on every consequence of every interaction with a corporation that is actively trying to obscure those consequences. I'm generally not ignorant, and I naively thought last week that if I transferred some money into a checking account on the same day that a payment was taking the balance below zero, I'd end up positive when the transacti…

See, this is an instance of the bank clearly being a dick, for lack of a better term. The money was there, you were being responsible, you still got dinged. This is wrong.

Now, how much do you want to bet that's not the case on some high-90s percentage of overdrafts?

The comparison to EULAs is specious at best. It's not like it's some legalese small print buried halfway through a lengthy document - they're disclosed separately and prominently, in part, because they're legally forced to.

Re: The most profitable source of income for banks? Overdraft fees

#130

Post by Karunamon » Tue, Aug 25, 2015, 2:15 AM UTC

danharaj wrote: post #126

Karunamon wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to know an awful lot about my worldview based on nothing more than a statement of the completely true fact that these wounds are almost entirely self-inflicted. "Minefield"? "Don't spend money you don't have available to spend, otherwise bad things will happen" is a principle that most people are taught as children. You seem to conflate the ideas of personal responsibility and the idea of deserving whatever…

Again, this sort of reasoning allows every institution to open the doors to maximize the chance that vulnerable people fail in order to capitalize on it. There are many, many , many more traps in the world than overdraft fees for vulnerable people to account for. Governments, banks, employers, etc. are all hostile towards people. Every detail you have to track in order to not get fucked is a liability The silence on…

A detail such as "don't spend money you don't have"? Violating that principle will get you into trouble in ways that go far beyond checking accounts.

Are gun manufacturers to blame as some part of power structure when you point it at your foot and pull the trigger? If not, why?