Fighting ATM Fees

All this talk about ATMs and fees has me shaking my head.
There was Jack Layton, standing on a frigid Toronto street corner last week, condemning the nation's banks for charging customers for using their ATMs.
Layton was damning the banks for charging customers who didn't have accounts with them – the competition's clientele – for using their ATMs. During his demonstration, he was using his Scotiabank Interac card to get funds out of a CIBC ATM.
Now, I'm no fan of the big banks. And I hate being ripped off. But even frugal old me can see why banks charge "outsiders" to use their ATMs.
If you take more than two minutes to think about it, it's obvious. It is in the banks’ best interest to make sure their customers are the ones who use their services. When a financial institution installs an ATM, it costs money – and every month they spend more to maintain that machine and rent the space it occupies.
Banks do not go through the trouble an expense of operating an ATM in order to serve the competition's customers. They do it for the convenience of their own clients (who finance the ATM by paying monthly banking fees, taking out loans, etc.).
This is big business, people. I have no idea how much it cost CIBC to grease their way into 7-11 stores (and a lot of gas stations, too!) but I know this much: it wasn't cheap. But it was all in the name of marketing.
Banks scatter ATMs throughout the urban areas in effort to get Canadians to bank with them. If there were 20 Caisse ATMs compared to 3 RBC ATMs in my neighbourhood, I would likely want to bank with Caisse. Why? Because as an active consumer, I know that if I'm a RBC customer and I keep on having to go to Caisse ATMs, those “convenience fees,” or 'non-resident service charges' as I prefer to call them, would soon add up.
When selecting a bank – and to a lesser extent, an ATM – we as consumers should take the time to weigh the options.
Many banks charge customers $20 or $25 a month just to have an account with them. Some charge nothing. And that's why it's important to shop around.
The bank I use doesn't charge me anything to have an account with them – and I have three accounts. I also get free cheques, unlimited use of their affiliated ATMs and can make as many debit card purchases as I want.
But in exchange, I do not get a lot of the premium services offered by other financial institutions.
I didn't read my service agreement thoroughly, and once deposited a U.S. cheque for a few thousand dollars into my account. As a result, I had the deposit, along with the equivalent amount that had already been in my account (ie: twice the deposited amount) frozen for 60 days. It was terrible, but I brought it on myself. Since my account had essentially been frozen, I borrowed money from a friend to pay my bills and learned my lesson.
If banks were forced into providing free ATM services to all customers, mark my words, we'd see a decrease in the number of bank machines.
And when the big banks move out, you know who'd move in? Those annoying privately owned and operated cash machines that charge everyone anywhere between $1.25 and up per transaction. You’ve surely seen them in bars and restaurants, or a shopping centre. The financial industry calls them “white label” machines, and apparently they already make up about three quarters of all ATMs in Canada, (bank-owned ATMs constitute 31 per cent of the
I don't think there's anything wrong with banks charging other banks' clientele to use their ATMs.
Instead of targeting these fees, we should be looking at banks who charge their customers to use their debit or Interac cards to make purchases.
When you pay by debit, the funds are transferred directly from your account to the store's account. If you don't have the cash, the machine says so and your transaction is declined. There's no credit involved; a debit transaction is essentially a cash transaction.
That's why it's silly for some banks to charge their customers for using their debit cards to make purchases. (Though is mildly effective at encouraging us to spend less or not make that impulse buy).
Depending on what sort of account you hold with what bank, all of your debit transactions might be free, or you might have a certain number of free transactions allowed per month, then be subject to a set fee for every transaction above that limit. Or, you might have to pay each and every time you use the card.
And that, my friends, is crap.
But is it up to Mr. Layton or Jim Flaherty to enforce? Perhaps... but before that, the onus is on us, the lazy public, to do our homework, and literally put our money where our mouths are.
If your bank charges you ridiculous fees, or doesn't have convenient ATM locations, take your business elsewhere.

Gone, but not forgotten

Our good friend Donny Rummy may have left the U.S. administration, but his linguistic legacy lives on, thanks to the BBC.
Here's a link to their audio library of quotations Donald has graced us with over the years.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/news/bh/rumsfeld.shtml

I can't help but see the parallels between his verbal mess concerning "knowns" and Chretien's explanation of "the proof" (how could we ever forget that?!):

Rummy: "As we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns - the ones we don't know we don't know."
(this quote won the "Foot in Mouth" award from the British Plain English Campaign in 2003)

JC: "No, a proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof, and when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven."

A word on the current Best Buy television ad campaign:

(originally posted Dec. 12, 2006)

Yes, the ads are really annoying - that goes without saying. But just in case you men out there haven't clued in to the fact that advertising doesn't always tell the truth, listen up. This just might save your relationship

One of Best Buy's holiday commercials shows a husband shopping for his wife. He asks the male sales rep for suggestions, and they go from big, to bigger, to biggest tv. The last one, the rep assures the man, would prompt the man's wife to repeatedly exclaim "I love you," do a happy dance, and give her husband a big bear hug.

Gents, do not be fooled. Instead of the good books, I can pretty much guarantee buying your wife a big screen tv will secure your gullible self a place in the dog house.

Unless you're far more financially secure than the rest of us, chances are you don't have $5000+ floating around your bank account, patiently waiting to be spent on something.

Let's face the facts: when you live together, your money is "our" money. So that $5000 tv you just bought her was really the kitchen renovation she was hoping for. Or vacation to the tropics.

And we lassies aren't stupid; she'll know the tv isn't for her. Remember that episode of the Simpsons when Homer buys Marge a bowling ball, complete with "Homer" engraved in it? Yeah, that's what you'd be doing here. (Another thing worth remembering: the bowling ball prompted Marge to take bowling lessons, and she nearly had an affair with her bowling instructor...).

The bottom line: If you give your wife a gigantic tv for Christmas, you might as well pick up some divorce papers, too. You just might need 'em.

Political conventions are funny things…

(originally posted Dec 6, 2006)

The Liberal leadership race took place this past weekend in Montreal. Now, as a self-confessed political junkie, I can’t help but comment on the shenanigans.
First off, it all sounded like a lot of fun. I wish I could’ve been there – not as a card-carrying, ballot-voting Liberal, but just as a fly on the wall. Why? Well, the Liberals, it seems, know how to party. At least at their convention, where all the ingredients for a scandal-ridden, cocktail-driven few days of insanity were present: long hours with little sleep= irrational decisions; skipping meals but sipping drinks= lowered inhibitions; “I’m Liberal” thongs and red “liberal” condoms a plenty; and, of course, Belinda Stronach. It was a potentially toxic combination.

+ + = trouble!
(I tried to find a pic of the famed Liberal thong, but failed. Sorry, folks).

I wish I was there to see it all, but I wasn’t. But maybe if I was there, I’d understand how it all happened. Ok, Iggy was on top, Rae was #2 and Kennedy and Dion were virtually tied for 3rd place. But how did thousands of apparently educated, politically savvy people end up choosing Dion? Quebecers don’t like him, and he can hardly speak English. I’d like to see him go door to door in Alberta. Rick Mercer should accompany him; now THAT would be award-winning comedy (well, at least good enough for a Gemeni)
I feel bad for Dion, really. He looks like a rodent and political cartoonists have been portraying him as such for years already. Sadly, nobody likes a rat. He’s got some great ideas, especially about the environment – if he can deliver them is a different story altogether, but I digress – but I would’ve liked to see Kennedy win. Canada having a PM named Kennedy would do a lot for American relations (Plus, he’s from the West, is relatively popular in Quebec, and would’ve been the most voter-friendly across the board). I’m glad Ignatieff (aka Ignoramus) didn’t win. He’s too inexperienced and isn’t ready. And Rae, man, where to start? The guy won’t even say if he’ll stick around since he didn‘t win the party leadership. What kind of “leader” is that, if he wants to be #1 or nothing at all? Come on.
I’m comforted knowing Kennedy, or GK as some call him, will play a large role in Dion’s government – regardless of whether it is a minority or majority government. And I think considering all options, Dion isn’t too bad. He was my #2 choice, when I think about it, and it could’ve been worse.
But did anyone listen to the speeches on Friday night? I did, but I’m not sure if the commentators on CBC radio were. I only tuned in as Dion was getting cut off my the music at the end, so I’m not sure what, exactly, he had said. But I head GK, Rae, and Iggy speak, and the former blew the latter two out of the water. I think it was obvious Rae’s speechwriter stayed up all night partying and forgot to write his address until moments before he took the stage. It wouldn’t surprise me if his speech notes were scribbled on cocktail napkins. It was so general, so politically vague, and just went on and on without saying a word. The way Rae continuously repeated himself was annoying beyond belief, and by the end I wasn’t sure if it was an overused literary device or if he actually has some sort of stutter. In short, it was ridiculous. Ignatieff followed, and it was the first time I’ve ever really heard him speak. Turns out he sounds like Dr. Evil from Austin Powers. His slow, robotic delivery was creepy and condescending. He as if he was addressing a room full of three year olds. He was a Harvard professor, they say, and his speech made me wonder what his university lectures must’ve been like – and made me want to talk to his former students and ask how many of them managed to stay awake. I gave him an A for Awful.
But the next day Dion was crowned the winner, so really, who cares? They also sold out of size medium Liberal thongs. The party is over, my friends.