this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2024
99 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10179 readers
422 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] explodicle@local106.com 19 points 9 months ago

I would love it even more if they gave me a receipt when I opt out of overdrafts, and then charge the bank an enormous fine when they turn overdrafts back on without my consent. This happened to me repeatedly.

(And every time I mention it, some bootlicker tells me I must have opted out wrong repeatedly. They need to believe the system works and everyone poor deserves it.)

[–] MayonnaiseArch@beehaw.org 18 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If I try to spend more than I have it just doesn't work. Nobody charges me for it. But then I can just transfer funds from my account to another, no need for apps and shit, and it costs zero money to do it. You can probably guess I'm not from Murica (where Jesus lives)

[–] Cqrd@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Some banks in the US don't do overdraft, some do, my bank doesn't charge for overdraft. It really just depends on how scummy your bank is.

[–] northendtrooper@lemmy.ca 17 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Should be expanded to identify any and all predatory fees and burn them at the stake. Feels like the FTC or Bureau of Consumer Protection should take this up as their top priority.

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 6 points 9 months ago

You can't just tell banks not to abuse their customers! That's crazy talk!

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

True, but before we go making a wishlist, let's remember that it's not even a possibility if Trump wins in November.

If anyone likes these systemic changes, mundane as they may be, remember that at the voting booth.

[–] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Just like all the unfulfilled AND unattempted promises from before the last election, it's always just another election away!

[–] Radiant_sir_radiant@beehaw.org 1 points 9 months ago

Almost makes populist Argentine president Javier Milei's "pack 300 of your ideas into a mega-decree that effectively becomes law with immediate effect until/unless parliament gets around to repealing parts of it with a 2/3 majority" strategy look like the more sensible approach.

There's a lot of shit the FTC has been slipping on.

[–] doolijb@beehaw.org 12 points 9 months ago

But then how will Bank of America make any money?

[–] BorgDrone@lemmy.one 9 points 9 months ago (2 children)

As a European. WTF are overdraft fees?

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 10 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Money the bank changes people for not having any money.

[–] HalJor@beehaw.org 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Second sentence in the article: "Under the proposal, banks could continue to charge fees when a customer’s account falls below zero..." -- that's what it is. Back in the day, if you wrote a check for more than you have in your account, the bank would not only bounce the check (refuse to pay so the check holder wouldn't get your money at all), they'd charge a fee on top of that so your balance would go even lower (sometimes below zero).

[–] BorgDrone@lemmy.one 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Here they just let your balance go below zero (or below the maximum negative balance if you have that enabled on your account), and you get a notification to please make sure your balance is above the limit within X days or they will block any pending payments. The only charge is whatever the interest rate is you pay for a negative balance, so depending on the amount it could be a few cents or so.

Cheques haven’t been a thing in Europe for over 20 years or so, but back when we had them they were guaranteed up to a certain amount. Basically, they would never bounce as long as the amount was under the limit. This also meant that no one would accept a cheque over that limit, in which case you just wrote multiple cheques (the bank would only give you a limited number of them at a time, IIRC it was 10 for a standard account).

[–] meteorswarm@beehaw.org 4 points 9 months ago

A lot of us in the US still pay rent in checks. I get them from my bank in books of a hundred, and there's no upper limit on how big they can be.

Anything that risks bouncing requires getting a fancy check (certified) where they take the money out before issuing the check.

[–] Empathy@beehaw.org 9 points 9 months ago (1 children)

My Canadian bank just charged me $45 CAD twice and only noticed me a day after the second charge. I didn't notice because I no longer use it. I wish the limit was $3...

[–] jarfil@beehaw.org 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Something like 10 years ago, a Spanish bank charged me 25€ after I didn't notice a 0.10€ overdraft... but it just happened that I had stopped using that bank, my cards expired, lost online access, so when I finally went to ask about closing the account in person like 5 years later, it had ballooned to over 400€ in the red. The cashier went all aggro on me, even got from behind the counter to shove the statement directly into my face, looked like was going to punch me or something.

I just left and didn't feel like returning, had no reason to deal with them, so kind of YOLOed it. Then some regulations changed, the bank got "rebranded" (went under and got bought under a similar name)... until last year when I decided to check on things just in case... and it turned out that I'm not a client anymore. Suits me 🤷

[–] bloup@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 9 months ago

If it’s exploitation make them give all of it back that they already took.