Odd financial letter: Part 2
Last week, I shared with you a statement in an insurance renewal policy that explained my credit score was based on the fact that my credit card was 215 months, rather than more than 216 months old.
This week, I’ll share a sentence from a letter regarding a checking account that has to be far older than 216 months. The account has outlived four transfers of bank ownership. Somewhere along the line a Cash Reserve Line Account, also known as overdraft protection, was added. I may or may not have signed up for this, but I don’t use it and don’t pay any particular attention to it.
According to the letter, “under the terms of your Account agreement, your Account is subject to a $3 monthly fee. We have been waiving this fee and, as detailed below, will be replacing it with a $36 annual fee.” As detailed below, the fee will be collected monthly. Math is not my strong suit, but even I can do this one in my head: $3 a month.
The next sentence, though, is what is throwing me: “Please note: Nothwithstanding the addition of an annual fee to your Account, because of your other account relationship(s) with [name of bank omitted], we are waiving this fee.”
English is my strong suit, but try as I might to diagram this sentence, I’m puzzled over whether they plan to charge me. I think not, but …
Later this week, I’ll call the bank to find out – and cancel this account. In the meantime, you go ahead and guess which way it’ll turn out. Then, for those of you quick to blame unsophisticated consumers for getting into difficult financial messes, think about whether dealing with financial institutions is all that clear and transparent.
May 8, 2012 - 1:37 PM
Probably not charging it, but what weirdness.
Stuff like that is why I’m a member of two credit unions, and no banks…and why we’re paying off the last shreds of stuff owed to the big banks from years ago.
I like credit unions better too, in fact we got a HANDWRITTEN ‘thank you for being a customer’ note in the mail this week from our CU and I was impressed. They have been responsive, responsible and helpful when I needed it. BUT, the legalese and “double speak” is simply the language of finance. Have you seen some purchase orders lately? 6-7 pages long, just to buy something. The CYA to stay out of court, and yes, confuse people who will just accept it rather than admit they do not understand it, and the obvious competition just makes the whole thing crazy IMO. Such is the nature of a litigious society.
Banks also need that wiggle language for when they treat customers differently. If you call and complain, they will often waive the fee, if not, they just keep collecting it. I understand they have to make money and I do not balk easily but I also know that just like society, there are “different” rules for some and that always bothers me.
My son is a musician and we always joke that when he gets rich and famous they will give him their guitars to play. But it is true, people who are rich and/or famous get things given to them that they can easily afford, the rest of us…not a prayer. I suppose there are “two Americas” in every country.
5 times for CAPTCHA!
Yeah Sandi…the Captcha thing has just about driven me from the RT blogs entirely. Dozens of lost comments, and sometimes a half-dozen attempts just to get a single comment through. If the RT reboot doesn’t fix that, I’ll be sorely disappointed.
But as to your comments, we’ve had the same kind of service and treatment from our CU. I used to get that from FNB before they became Stellar One, but when they made the switch, I left. But, you are right about calling and getting fees removed. I’ve done that a few times, and also complained about proposed interest rate hikes…and gotten most of them limited or removed entirely. For banks that refused to cooperate, I closed accounts and never went back. Most of those banks are now out of business, or have been bought and gobbled up by a larger one.