Wells Fargo Hit with $1B in Fines • Hacker News Board

Re: Wells Fargo Hit with $1B in Fines

#431

Post by chiefalchemist » Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 12:04 PM UTC

ergothus wrote: post #415

chiefalchemist wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are three groups. - The Elites. In current parlance The 1%. - Their enablers. They're the next 14%. We really don't have an acknowledgement of the existence of this group. Examples would be politicians, the majoriry of the media, etc. - Everyone else. In 1984 this was The Proles. The 1% v 99% lens is __all wrong__. Any discussion via that lens is all but pointless. It puts the 14% on the wrong side of the line.

I really hate the use of "elites" in this context (you're using a common usage, I just don't like it). To be elite is something to aspire to, to admire. To be truly elite includes concepts like benevolence, compassion, a larger awareness, and a long-term perspective. Being rich and/or educated alone isn't enough to be elite. Having power is definitely not part of being elite. A malevolent dictator is not an elite, th…

Call it whatever you want. The key takeaway is the awareness of The 14% is nonexistent. The 14% is not part of the so called 99%, the 14% is on the wrong side of divide.

Re: Wells Fargo Hit with $1B in Fines

#432

Post by SnowingXIV » Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 2:06 PM UTC

Karunamon wrote: post #248

SnowingXIV wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I liked the idea of simple, but didn't like the fact they couldn't send me checks to use. They'll mail them on my behalf but not send me an actual checkbook to hold onto for one off situations. I rarely use them, but sometimes contractors or landlords prefer this method or charge exorbitant fees to use a credit card. Also if I come into a decent size amount of a cash payment, I can't walk into a bank to deposit it. M…

Workaround for both of these things are postal money orders. PMO's are basically checks in every way that matter, to the point where I've yet to find anyone who won't let me use one if they accept checks. $1.95 per $1000 is pretty reasonable as far as fees go. If you want to deposit cash, you just get a money order for the amount, make it out to yourself, and use their photo check deposit. Funds available next busine…

Huh, this is something I've never had to deal with or even knew existed. But yeah that makes sense. Appreciate the response for future reference I ever need to do this. I also agree that's not much of a fee and this would be a super rare scenario.

Re: Wells Fargo Hit with $1B in Fines

#433

Post by bradstewart » Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 2:06 PM UTC

lobster_johnson wrote: post #280

bradstewart wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do almost exactly what you described with Charles Schwab. I have multiple "full" accounts, but there's no maintenence fees or anything. Their online tools are great. You can open a new checking account with the click of a button.

As I understand it, you need a brokerage account to get this; it's called the "High Yield Investor checking and savings account". It's not intended for most people, though apparently they don't care if you get the brokerage account and don't use it. On the other hand, Schwab has effectively zero physical branches, and apparently don't accept most ways of depositing money to your account, which makes it awkward to dea…

All accurate. It is definitely marketed at investors, but I've used it as my checking account (er, accounts) for years now.

Although there are a handful of branches where I live, I never physically go there. I handle all check deposits via their mobile app. I never receive cash for anything though. You are correct, it would probably be a bad choice for someone dealing with a lot of cash.

And as a sibling comment said, no ATM fees anywhere in the world, ever.

Re: Wells Fargo Hit with $1B in Fines

#434

Post by SnowingXIV » Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 2:08 PM UTC

Terretta wrote: post #234

SnowingXIV wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I liked the idea of simple, but didn't like the fact they couldn't send me checks to use. They'll mail them on my behalf but not send me an actual checkbook to hold onto for one off situations. I rarely use them, but sometimes contractors or landlords prefer this method or charge exorbitant fees to use a credit card. Also if I come into a decent size amount of a cash payment, I can't walk into a bank to deposit it. M…

Downstream of you handwriting a check is a hundred million dollar quagmire of process and tech to deal with the aftermath of your dead tree scribbles. Just let them mail it... Simple!

Hey I'm with you. I would love for those to go away and everything work off of digital transactions but some property managers (even in new complexes!) pay for some poor saas solutions that use a mix of dated tech and charge ridiculous fees that almost force people to not use it.

Re: Wells Fargo Hit with $1B in Fines

#435

Post by SnowingXIV » Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 2:09 PM UTC

nickmooney wrote: post #338

SnowingXIV wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I liked the idea of simple, but didn't like the fact they couldn't send me checks to use. They'll mail them on my behalf but not send me an actual checkbook to hold onto for one off situations. I rarely use them, but sometimes contractors or landlords prefer this method or charge exorbitant fees to use a credit card. Also if I come into a decent size amount of a cash payment, I can't walk into a bank to deposit it. M…

FYI, they just started offering paper checks. It's in beta I believe. I received my first Simple checkbook and wrote a check just a couple weeks ago.

Cool. Now they just need to give better interest rates compared to Schwab and Ally. :)

Re: Wells Fargo Hit with $1B in Fines

#436

Post by lsiebert » Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 4:11 PM UTC

exolymph wrote: post #381

lsiebert wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. I already had an account with Charles Schwab (based in San Francisco), and I set up a roth IRA for this year in about 5 minutes by myself, online. So it's not that financial institutions can't be good at this, it's that the big banks fundamentally don't care about customers who aren't wealthy or institutional in nature. But there are definitely alternatives like credit unions, online banks, and brokerage firms…

Schwab is huge, so I'm skeptical that your good experience with them supports the thesis that you stated.

It's a brokerage firm with some banking features. Brokerage firms understand that investors have options on where to take their money, whereas banks like Wells Fargo often seem to forget that.

Re: Wells Fargo Hit with $1B in Fines

#437

Post by godgod » Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 6:57 PM UTC

Not enough.

Re: Wells Fargo Hit with $1B in Fines

#438

Post by samstave » Fri, Apr 27, 2018, 6:44 PM UTC

FireBeyond wrote: post #302

samstave wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once took out $25,000 from my WF account and asked for it in a cashiers check. I paid the $5 fee for the check (even though they had stated that it would be free) - then I took my money.... I came back ~1month later to re-deposit the check into SAME WF acct. They stated that they had to put a hold on the check for 14 days until they could verify the funds. For a WF issued cashiers check. From the SAME act the funds…

Leaving aside that it's your money and yours to do with as you wish... Out of curiosity, if you care to disclose, what was your reasoning behind this? If I'm a bank, I can see a couple of red flags with this (maybe some obscure kiting, or similar), "take five digit sum from account, in a check made out to self - then one month later deposit same uncashed check into originating account"... and "verifying the funds" is…

I was going through a divorce and needed the funds secured until I could deal with legal issues to ensure that they would be available

Re: Wells Fargo Hit with $1B in Fines

#439

Post by GyYZTfWBfQw » Fri, Apr 27, 2018, 10:56 PM UTC

andrepd wrote: post #392

chiefalchemist wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Will fines dissuade future dishonesty? Not likely. But jail time of the guilty decision makers would. Steal a candy bar? Go to jail. Knowingly ruin someone's life? No problem. The shareholders pay for it.

That will never happen because the lawmakers (i.e. wealthy elite, not democratically elected representatives) will never write laws to punish themselves. As long we live in a plutocracy we have zero hope of personal accountability for these sort of criminals. They will however pass brutal laws sentencing poor people to 35 years to life for possession, an other disgusting shit like that, but that's another story.

That's essentially the same problem I've had with what you had a problem. I'm confused.