Town Square

Post a New Topic

Banks get OK to take unpaid fees out of depositors' Social Security, other government funds

Original post made on Jun 2, 2009

The California Supreme court ruled in San Francisco Monday that banks can take overdraft fees out of Social Security and other government funds deposited directly into the accounts of elderly and disabled customers.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Tuesday, June 2, 2009, 5:54 AM

Comments (5)

Posted by Roy, a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Jun 2, 2009 at 8:49 am

Each week your local Bank Manager loses more of their authority. Managers who would normally credit questionable bank service charges are now unable to provide that service due to micromanaging by their district offices or a corporate mandate. Service charges are no longer just to cover a bank's expenses, but for a long time have morphed into a revenue producing portion of their business. When you overdraw your account by $5 and you incur a $35 charge for them to RETURN the check, something is wrong. The days of loyalty by large banks to their customers is fast disappearing. Now is the time to do your homework and try to find a bank or credit union that is customer oriented, and then make the switch. Most likely you will NOT wind up with any of the large institutions you have most often heard about in recent broadcasts. Only when the offending banks feel the loss of customers will they start to pay attention and ask, "why are we losing market share?"


Posted by Pat, a resident of Canyon Oaks
on Jun 2, 2009 at 9:37 am

So much for bank customer service!
Banks use to nickel and dime you and now its dollar and multidollar you now!
Sad!


Posted by Bye Bye Fees, a resident of Old Towne
on Jun 2, 2009 at 10:09 am

I closed my BofA account last week. I'd had it for 20 years & finally got tired of all the fees. I moved our accounts to Patelco Credit Union. The interest rates are better. And, the fees are reasonable. It turns out the customer service with my credit union is much better too.


Posted by MoneyChangers in the temple?, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 2, 2009 at 10:10 am

Are these the same banks who got a huge bailout at taxpayers expense?

Sounds like they spent lots of money on lawyers so they can take money from the poor.

If anyone has specific recommendations for honest* bankers, please post!

*Or at least less greedy.


Posted by Me too, a resident of Canyon Creek
on Jun 2, 2009 at 9:14 pm

Banks are ridiculous! While this ruling has some validity - the banks are the ones causing the huge problems. Why did we bail them out????? Oh, I know, so they could keep the top people that ran them into bankruptcy because of their brillance.

Credit unions are the only way to go. The couple that I've dealt with seem to actually care and the fees are reasonable, so if you do screw up it doesn't ruin your entire life.

Big banks are jsut large vacuums - trying to suck up everyone's money.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Tough new rules on water are necessary
By Tim Hunt | 11 comments | 1,132 views

Circumstances without Pomp
By Roz Rogoff | 3 comments | 987 views

‘Much Ado’ or is it Adios for ObamaCare?
By Tom Cushing | 5 comments | 331 views