New Bank of Ireland fees to hit more customers

Pablo Sanchez

Obliq wrote: »

Missing something! It costs them nothing (or so they told me yesterday) as it's all online transactions with no man-power, just automated. In other words, when you are with 365 online banking, they are going to charge you for the facility (administration) that you're not using! Clear now?!

Surly there is more admin work on an account that makes 100 transactions per month than one that makes 0. It might be handled online but somone is still behind the scenes overseeing it.

Obliq

Pablo Sanchez wrote: »

Surly there is more admin work on an account that makes 100 transactions per month than one that makes 0. It might be handled online but somone is still behind the scenes overseeing it.

Yeah, you would think so....when I suggested that this therefore should have been a scheme to get everyone onto online banking if it's so much cheaper to run and surely it would have been better PR to charge everyone in the same way, regardless of the size of their account, customer complaints had no answer and no apology either. It doesn't make sense at all, and they're going to lose many, many customers this way.....

nomdeboardie

I really don’t get the strategy of the Bank of Ireland re pushing these Banking365 online/phone payments. For most people, if there are circumstances that call for a payment or money transfer that can be made online or by phone, as opposed to going into a bricks and mortar bank, they will chose the former. But in my experience there simply are not that many relevant transactions for this process, at least yet. So the bank ends up encouraging anyone outside the “protected groups” to do multiple small pointless transactions online or by phone, moving money between accounts or into a credit card account (which may already have a direct debit set up for payment) or between friends or whatever. Besides being at best an irritating waste of time for the account holder, these extra transactions, even though automated, must surely make things less efficient for the bank, even if it were only the extra ink on your statement.

(I had a long whine at a bank rep/manager or two previously about this, when the transaction requirements were first brought in. If I recall, the only reasons I was given were the desire to encourage online banking, and the limits of that were obvious when the somewhat apologetic rep began advising me to make pointless payments to my credit card etc. I did, of course, threaten to go elsewhere, but I think the waivers for balance minimum or salary deposit came in soon after, or something like that.)

Red Alert

This, together with their IT snafu a couple of weeks ago, is the limit. The criteria seem to have been made as complicated as possible to figure out. So I think it's time for me to up sticks and take my business elsewhere.

Toboldlygo

It's about time we faced up to it guys. There is no such thing as a free lunch - or a free bank account.

Would you expect to get a free six pack in Tescos? But I will hear the usual cry - we taxpayers bailed out the banks so we should get something in return! The last time I thought rationally about any of the big multinationals (including Tesco), I came to the conclusion that I have contributed so much to their profits (especially the off licence) that I must own at least part of many of them; but I don't see them giving much for free in return!

Back to banking; someone will pay for fee free banking somewhere along the line and if it isn't current account customers its someone else! How do you think bankers in branches and call centres around the country are paid?

Santa's little elfs only work on Christmas Eve!

And think about the cost of trundling all the paper euros around the country to ATMs and even bank branches! How rational is this? The banks fill ATMs on most days but especially on Fridays, we take the cash out; give it to shops and mainly pubs during the weekend and then the shops and pubs give it back to the banks on Monday. How stupid is all of that!

The cash is trundled around the country - we have security guards getting paid God knows how much (but its a dangerous job and at least its keeping someone employed!); the Guards providing additional security at God know what cost; and the little cashiers in the banks counting it out and counting it in (to paraphrase Brian Hanrahan).

Who pays for all of this? We do of course. Rip off Ireland - we all play our part!

Obliq

There is indeed free banking - for those who can well afford to pay if they were made to. It's not the charges per se I disagree with, it's the discriminatory factor. I remain insulted by the fact that my (lack of) money isn't good enough for them and I couldn't even hope to meet the criteria without jumping through hoops (9 stupid little online transactions) where people on more money won't be required to do that. I'm not going to take kindly to discrimination, and while they won't miss me, they'll miss my loyal family who also don't like how they're treating the less well-off. Correct me if I'm wrong here......

Red Alert

Don't they usually try to get a reason for closing your account? I'm going to say it's the charges, the repeated IT disasters and the fact that Richard Bouchier was appointed and continues in his position despite his presence during the reckless period.

Toboldlygo

Obliq wrote: »

There is indeed free banking - for those who can well afford to pay if they were made to. It's not the charges per se I disagree with, it's the discriminatory factor. I remain insulted by the fact that my (lack of) money isn't good enough for them and I couldn't even hope to meet the criteria without jumping through hoops (9 stupid little online transactions) where people on more money won't be required to do that. I'm not going to take kindly to discrimination, and while they won't miss me, they'll miss my loyal family who also don't like how they're treating the less well-off. Correct me if I'm wrong here......

The difference between 'those with lack of money'; and 'those with money' is the latter will have have higher credit balances in their accounts. If you don't want to be 'discriminated against' get more money and keep it in one Bank. If you can't 'GET REAL' and pay up!

Obliq

Toboldlygo wrote: »

The difference between 'those with lack of money'; and 'those with money' is the latter will have have higher credit balances in their accounts. If you don't want to be 'discriminated against' get more money and keep it in one Bank. If you can't 'GET REAL' and pay up!

Nice. Real nice. Your 'get more money' is pretty revealing of your character. Have an equivalent suggestion for you....get back under your rock.:mad:

BuffyBot

Keep it civil folks..

Obliq

BuffyBot wrote: »

Keep it civil folks..

Fair enough. Got me back up though.....sorry folks :cool:

TheBigLebowski

Toboldlygo wrote: »

It's about time we faced up to it guys. There is no such thing as a free lunch - or a free bank account.

Would you expect to get a free six pack in Tescos? But I will hear the usual cry - we taxpayers bailed out the banks so we should get something in return! The last time I thought rationally about any of the big multinationals (including Tesco), I came to the conclusion that I have contributed so much to their profits (especially the off licence) that I must own at least part of many of them; but I don't see them giving much for free in return!

Back to banking; someone will pay for fee free banking somewhere along the line and if it isn't current account customers its someone else! How do you think bankers in branches and call centres around the country are paid?

Santa's little elfs only work on Christmas Eve!

And think about the cost of trundling all the paper euros around the country to ATMs and even bank branches! How rational is this? The banks fill ATMs on most days but especially on Fridays, we take the cash out; give it to shops and mainly pubs during the weekend and then the shops and pubs give it back to the banks on Monday. How stupid is all of that!

The cash is trundled around the country - we have security guards getting paid God knows how much (but its a dangerous job and at least its keeping someone employed!); the Guards providing additional security at God know what cost; and the little cashiers in the banks counting it out and counting it in (to paraphrase Brian Hanrahan).

Who pays for all of this? We do of course. Rip off Ireland - we all play our part!

Ha! You seriously have no idea how banks make their money. You make it sound like they have been doing a charitable service for all the years they were providing free banking. How much cash would say is on deposit in Irish banks. What do you think they do with all those billions of our money? Maybe by using it to make millions through investing our money (unless they blow it through reckless investments :rolleyes:)?

Charging people to mind money is ridiculous considering what can be done with said money. If anyone wants to deposit a few billion in TheBigLebowski bank, I promise not to charge for giving some back every now and again...

Toboldlygo

Well TheBigLebowsk time to think!

Just consider the BIG picture for a little while. Banks occupy a strange position in our society and like it or not the past two years have demonstrated that we need strong 'profitable' banks.

We need banks to keep the economy going. Banks to lend money to businesses; which will create employment; pay wages; give us the lifestyle to which we aspire. But a little dilemma we also expect that we can have their services for free - after all we have our money in the bank.

The banks need to:
- keep OUR money safe and give us access whenever and wherever we want; from ATMs, in shops, on the internet etc, etc. But of course they can do that at no cost (not).
- provide financial inclusion for the less well off including keeping cashiers sitting in branches in every Godforsaken little hole in the wall across the whole island.
- provide euros anywhere in the country - never mind the cost of security to take it wherever it needs to be.
- provide credit for businesses and for our cars; houses etc.
- as businesses themselves they need to pay taxes.

It is often quoted in financial papers that the cost of maintaining services for current accounts is, on average, 170 euros. This cost does not relate to lending, interest or bad debt. To cover this cost would require a constant credit balance (with no interest paid) of about 4,000 euros.

Of course with most of our banks now in Government hands the cost of the banks services can come from the public purse and be spread evenly amongst all society - not just those with bank accounts. We tax payers will pick up the cost and since the banks will be run by Government we will all see a return on our investment - won't we?

parsi

with electronic systems it takes many days for funds to transfer between banks.

Paypal can do it within minutes so why can't the banks ?

Is it a union issue - Jimmy the Bank Managers Nephew must aprove each transaction ?
Is it an incompetence issue - baks still batch transactions ?
Is is a greed issue - banks get the use of the money ?

I look forward to the day when our banks lose their privileged position which enables the to screw our economy . I look forward to the day when their staff are treated as the deserve.

noworries

parsi wrote: »

I look forward to the day when our banks lose their privileged position which enables the to screw our economy . I look forward to the day when their staff are treated as the deserve.

1. OK then, I would love to hear your ideas about a bank free society -
no cheating by assuming there is a payment network without them..

2. How should their staff be treated??

Red Alert

Their staff in many cases gave bad advice to pump up their bonuses - I don't buy this IBOA spin that the mid-rankers were oblivious to the impending crisis at all.

noworries

Red Alert wrote: »

Their staff in many cases gave bad advice to pump up their bonuses - I don't buy this IBOA spin that the mid-rankers were oblivious to the impending crisis at all.

An outrageous allegation.

Sorry this has gone off topic.

Bank charges have, and will, never be acceptable to the public yet I know of no other service that is free.

parsi

noworries wrote: »

1. OK then, I would love to hear your ideas about a bank free society -
no cheating by assuming there is a payment network without them..

2. How should their staff be treated??

Banking was one of the societal pillars in Ireland.

Just like the Church it's time to treat it as just another organisation with no special status.

Cookie_Monster

noworries wrote: »

An outrageous allegation.

not really. Approving 100%/ 110% mortgages for property overvalued by 500%+ just to sell a mortgage was very common

noworries

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

not really. Approving 100%/ 110% mortgages for property overvalued by 500%+ just to sell a mortgage was very common

If you can offer me a shred of evidence that a 100% mortgage was offered on a property that was documented to be overvalued by 500% then I will eat whatever item of millinary appereil you consider appropriate.

Remember, for every 'average Joe or Jane Soap' mortgage granted there is a mortgage application that will show that Joe or Jane Soap had the neccessary income to repay the mortgage and more. Joe or Jane got themselves into this mess - the banks were the facilitators but at the
end of the day;

Caveat Emptor

dotsman

parsi wrote: »

with electronic systems it takes many days for funds to transfer between banks.

Paypal can do it within minutes so why can't the banks ?

But you are not comparing like with like. I can transfer money from one paypal account to another instantly, just like I can transfer money from one AIB account to another instantly. The delay is in the transferring of said funds between banks/institutes, not accounts within the same bank/institute.

Dodge

noworries wrote: »

Bank charges have, and will, never be acceptable to the public yet I know of no other service that is free.

I bet you can't name another service that uses their custom to make massive profits by speculating either

There are plenty of services/industries that allow a part of their overall package to be free, knowing that a satisfied customer will come back with more profitable ventures. In this case, free banking for those with low income (as this is the only bit being removed) may lead those same customers to taking loans, taking credit cards, taking mortgages with the same bank etc etc

NWPat

noworries wrote: »

An outrageous allegation.

Sorry this has gone off topic.

Bank charges have, and will, never be acceptable to the public yet I know of no other service that is free.

Its not free! when in credit all acounts make interest for the bank.

noworries

Dodge wrote: »

I bet you can't name another service that uses their custom to make massive profits by speculating either

There are plenty of services/industries that allow a part of their overall package to be free, knowing that a satisfied customer will come back with more profitable ventures. In this case, free banking for those with low income (as this is the only bit being removed) may lead those same customers to taking loans, taking credit cards, taking mortgages with the same bank etc etc

Why should I try to name a service.... did you read my post??

Every business in the world tries to maximise their profits by speculating - it's called capitalism. i.e You price your offering by what the market can bear but you may not be able to sell your offering.

Low turnover accounts are a cost to banks. If the punters don't like it
they can move their accounts but I suspect that all the banks will be in the
same boat eventually. If you want an account you pay for it, what's the problem with that?

amacachi

Hopefully everyone giving out about this and who'll be affected will move their account, for once I sure as hell am going to.

William Powell

Just thought I'd check how much this change will cost me. I'm always in credit and my balance varies between 100euro min and maybe 1000euro before I pay the bills at the end of a month, the account is only really used for paying bills and the credit card. Through online banking I searched for all of last years transaction and had 110 of them so 110 x 28p charge is just under 31euro a year for banking. tbh if thats the limit of charges I'm not that bothered, I probably can and will reduce the number of transactions by 40 as I pay money in weekly and could easily reduce that to monthly then I'll pay for stuff only by credit card so technically I could get the number of transactions with my bank down to about 50, thats less than 15euro a year charges. I know that probably wouldn't be an average account but it seemed a sencible thing to be checking on what the charges would amount to before shouting at BoI and moving to another Bank.

snaps

can you transfer 3000e from your savings once a quarter and then transfer it back again?

TheBigLebowski

Toboldlygo wrote: »

Well TheBigLebowsk time to think!

Just consider the BIG picture for a little while. Banks occupy a strange position in our society and like it or not the past two years have demonstrated that we need strong 'profitable' banks.

We need banks to keep the economy going. Banks to lend money to businesses; which will create employment; pay wages; give us the lifestyle to which we aspire. But a little dilemma we also expect that we can have their services for free - after all we have our money in the bank.

The banks need to:
- keep OUR money safe and give us access whenever and wherever we want; from ATMs, in shops, on the internet etc, etc. But of course they can do that at no cost (not).
- provide financial inclusion for the less well off including keeping cashiers sitting in branches in every Godforsaken little hole in the wall across the whole island.
- provide euros anywhere in the country - never mind the cost of security to take it wherever it needs to be.
- provide credit for businesses and for our cars; houses etc.
- as businesses themselves they need to pay taxes.

It is often quoted in financial papers that the cost of maintaining services for current accounts is, on average, 170 euros. This cost does not relate to lending, interest or bad debt. To cover this cost would require a constant credit balance (with no interest paid) of about 4,000 euros.

Of course with most of our banks now in Government hands the cost of the banks services can come from the public purse and be spread evenly amongst all society - not just those with bank accounts. We tax payers will pick up the cost and since the banks will be run by Government we will all see a return on our investment - won't we?

Garbage. How do you explain the massive profits made off the back of our deposits for the last two decades? Maybe if they had been a bit more sensible with the deposits they wouldn't be in the state they're in now. Banks shouldn't need people to pay for transactions. There's more than enough money to be made from deposits if they use them correctly. Time for you to think a little Toboldlygo and consider the even bigger picture...

TheBigLebowski

Toboldlygo wrote: »

It is often quoted in financial papers that the cost of maintaining services for current accounts is, on average, 170 euros. This cost does not relate to lending, interest or bad debt. To cover this cost would require a constant credit balance (with no interest paid) of about 4,000 euros.

Well it's a good thing the average amount on deposit across all savers is 30,000 euros. Penny starting to drop yet?

Source

"A new survey from financial services company, Standard Life shows the average Irish saver – across all age groups – has around €30,000 on deposit"

William Powell

TheBigLebowski wrote: »

Well it's a good thing the average amount on deposit across all savers is 30,000 euros. Penny starting to drop yet?

Source

"A new survey from financial services company, Standard Life shows the average Irish saver – across all age groups – has around €30,000 on deposit"

Doesn't say that the average saver with BoI has 30k in their account.