Bank systems

[rslade]

Our credit card, as many do, gave us points toward something.  But it was a) something we seldom use, and b) had recently been subject to some kind of breach which required that the (separate) company behind the points issue us new account numbers which their own support staff seemed to have great difficulty in handling.

But that's not the main issue: it's merely a prologue and the reason why we wanted to change credit cards.  We wanted the simplest credit card possible, charging us no fees, and not giving us any "points."  Well it turns out that, at this particular bank, all the cards give you something back.  The simplest is the one that gives you "cash" back.

Actually, apparently, there are two types of cards that give you cash back.  The one, that charges you no fee, and the other, that does charge you an annual fee, but also gives you a higher rate of cash back.  We wanted the former.  We made that clear.  Several times.

When we got our first bill for the new card, we were astonished to find that there were not one but two fees charged on what we thought was a no fee account.  Our banking "advisor" had opened the wrong account for us.

The bank states that this was an error.  Despite the fact that this "error" seems an awful lot like the "overselling" that many banks have recently been charged with promoting, I am will to apply Hanlon's Razor (never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity) and we are merely changing "advisors" and not banks.

But, given that absolutely everything done at banks today is done by computer, it doesn't inspire confidence.  What kind of application development and user interface design (and staff training) is going on in the bank if a "senior" advisor can make that kind of stupid mistake?

[CraginS]

---

@rslade wrote:

When we got our first bill for the new card, we were astonished to find that there were not one but two fees charged on what we thought was a no fee account.  Our banking "advisor" had opened the wrong account for us.

The bank states that this was an error.  Despite the fact that this "error" seems an awful lot like the "overselling" that many banks have recently been charged with promoting,

This is precisely what was happening at Wells Fargo bank a few years ago, in rampant levels all over the bank. It was absolutely intentional fraud, and the reason that financial advisers like Ric Edelman were advising consumers to close all WF accounts right away.

Not one person at WF hs been disciplined for this level of fraud.

Hmmm. interesting that most of the phishing mails I get claiming to be from a bank say they are from Wells Fargo.

Craig

[mgorman]

The Wells Fargo CEO was replaced last year, and while publicly stated for a number of reasons, one of the major ones was he couldn't pull out of the dive created by this scandal.  The CEO before him was pushed out for the scandal, the last one was, however, an insider, and couldn't shake the spectre.  Stumpf (The CEO at the time of the scandal) also lost $28M due a clawback clause in his contract.

Carrie Tolstedt, the retired head of retail banking, also had some earnings pulled back.

So, there was accountability at the highest levels of the company, which I, personally, am very glad of.  That it should have been much more is open for debate, as I think these folks got off very easy after perpetrating a massive fraud. 

In the end, people were held to account, so I would say it is incorrect to state that no one has been disciplined for the actions of the scandal. 

[DavidRiggs]

With the information provided, I would not state that it was the same as Wells Fargo. The issue with Wells was that it was institutional and being promoted down from the top of the house. They have since corrected that (after massive fines, the last being $1B). Unless there are more cases at this institution, this seems to be 1 person who either made a mistake or purposefully put you into a different account to make their numbers. Bad practice either way, but I agree with the initial poster, it is probably better to assume a mistake.

[Balldigy]

The tricky part about motives is proving them. To try and prove that there was malice intent or even stupidity, are two narrow fields of a laundry list of potential reasons. Believe me when I say that it is no fault of your own for what happened, but the underlying "how we got here" may be a little more complicated than the two versions suggested.

Many companies are forcing / have forced their employees in sales and acquisitions to do whatever possible in order to get more money. In this case, it completely benefits the company, not the consumer, to loan virtual currency in the form of credit cards because they can charge interest rates at whatever level to get consumers in the front door. The same goes with the "fees" that are charged.  The employee of the company is not always the one at fault but is the front-man when it comes down to explaining why a negative result was encountered by the consumer.

Let me iron out my point. It isn't necessarily the employee that may have been at fault here but the practices of the banking institution that force the requirements on their employees. In this case, i could see the stupidity action being a factor, or potentially the consultant wanting to make a quota, or potentially a programming glitch, or fraud, or.......xyz.

My best rule of thumb. The hassle of "free" cash-back or rewards != the return on investment. No credit card is the way to build wealth! I stick with my local bank that I can "choke in person" (figuratively speaking) if something doesn't look right or was done without my approval.

Additionally, to your computerized approach.....developing an email approval or customer provided response approval before the creation of the credit card is easy to do.......if chose to practice.