Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Finance, the economy & Economics Jobless Hit With Bank Fees on Benefits

So Bank of America is trying to boost its profits on the backs of the unemployed and the working man?

Classy. Let Bank of America fail!

Piece of crap bank anyway with their under $2.00 per share stocks.

How about let the idiot that can't read the contract he signed when he/she got the unemplyment card pay the damn fee?

...as I wrote, Bank of America trying to boost their profits on the backs of the unemployed and the everyday working guy.

That speaks for itself - and that speaks volumes.


Bank of America will be gone soon, anyway - thanks to their greedy CEOs acqusition of Merril Lynch.

I haven't liked them since they moved to North Carolina, from San Francisco, anyway.

So Bank of America gave a card to a person and a set of rules. The person doesn't obey the rules and cries when he is punished.

How is that good?

We have been customers of BofA since 1981(when Mr. Scoutgal and I were married). Their fees have gone up very little since then. But I did notice a decrease in customer service after BofA was acquired by Nation Bank, and even more so since buying Merrill Lynch.

Of course, we have to maintain a minimum balance, have a savings account in addition to our checking. We get free checks and don't pay any transaction fees, no matter how mant rimes we pull money out or put money in, and as long as I use a BofA versatel(ATM)macjine, I don't pay a fee there, either.

The term for what B of A is doing is called: Usery Fees

Bank of America is not alone, WaMu/Chase is now debiting transactions and then crediting the account after the debits (...in the past the other way around).

In doing so, a customer can go into the negative and can be charged $33.00 per negative balance - and never get ahead.

These banks are trying to squeeze every penny out of the little guy.

Karma will get them - Karma always does.

That's just the issue. If a customer doesn't have the funds to keep a minimum balance is one of the issues of this thread.

I think you have a valid point, rick. I don't think it's exactly "usury", but clearly the bank(s) is (are) making a profit off of the depositors who are least able to pay, and obviously to the benefit of those depositors who can afford to maintain a minimum balance and a second account - like Scoutgal.

So what's your solution, my friend? If the bank goes down, what happens to Scout's money?

I've been with Bank of America since 1996. I have never paid one fee with them. Either I can read the contract I signed with them or I'm extremely lucky. Since I'm not ultra rich I think it's not the second one.

Listen people. When you sign a contract you have to know what you're getting into. A mortgage is a contract. Opening a bank account is a contract. Read the damn rules and follow them. If you don't like the rules go to a competitor or a credit union. If they have the same rules then you better learn how to read.