Money & Investing Learn how to get rich on the housing bubble and the bull market…

Citibank's turn to raise fees

Thread Tools
 
Old 10-05-2011, 08:43 AM
  #1  
Team Owner
Thread Starter
 
doopstr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Jersey
Age: 52
Posts: 25,336
Received 2,051 Likes on 1,137 Posts
Citibank's turn to raise fees

Citi announces new fees on checking accounts
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Citi-a...&asset=&ccode=
The fees keep coming. Citi is the latest big bank to slap customers with a round of fee hikes. This time, on its checking accounts.

Starting in December, customers who hold its mid-level Citibank Account will be charged $20 a month if they fail to maintain a minimum balance of $15,000 in their combined accounts. Previously, account holders had to carry a minimum balance of $6,000.

At the same time, customers who have the bank's EZ Checking account will start being charged $15 a month if they don't carry a minimum balance of $6,000. Citi (C) says it is phasing out the EZ Checking package, which currently carries no monthly fee, and is instead offering customers either the Citibank Account or its Basic Banking account, which also carries a fee.

Last month, Citi said it is hiking the fee on its Basic Banking account from $8 to $10. Customers will be able to avoid paying the $10 fee by either maintaining a minimum balance of $1,500 or by making one direct deposit and one automatic online payment through their checking account each month, said Citi.

Currently, account holders must make five online transactions per month in order to avoid paying the fee and there is no minimum balance requirement.

Citi's fee hikes come just days after Bank of America announced it would charge a $5 fee for debit card purchases. Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase, Sun Trust and Regions Financial have all also rolled out similar fees in select markets in recent weeks.

"The regulatory environment has changed a great deal -- particularly with the Durbin Amendment -- and we're seeing the results of that now," said Claes Bell, banking reporter with Bankrate.com. Going forward, "we're going to see more large national banks announce fees."

With the new regulation that caps how much revenue banks can get from the swipe fees they collect from merchants, banks must look for other ways to cover that lost income, explained Nessa Feddis, vice president and senior counsel of the American Bankers Association.

"We don't expect to pay nothing to ride the train, it's the same thing with a checking account," she said.

Citibank said it chose not to charge a debit card fee because its customers did not want it. "There's a reason why we structured it this way," said Catherine Pulley, spokeswoman for Citi. There are also no hidden fees, Pulley added, and customers will benefit from free online bill pay and free access to non-Citi ATM machines.

While the majority of checking accounts were free last year, less than half now come without a price tag, according to a recent study from bank-comparison site Bankrate, which looked at 243 interest and 238 non-interest accounts.

Like Citi's new offerings, 92% of checking accounts have fee waivers, meaning that if you can meet certain financially requirements, most checking accounts are -- or could become -- free.
Old 10-05-2011, 09:14 AM
  #2  
nnInn
 
jupitersolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,670
Received 1,084 Likes on 646 Posts
It sucks that fees are coming, but companies have to make money (whether you like how much is or not). This just shows that Govt regs, that are to (what the say) help the consumer, just screw them over in the end.
Old 10-05-2011, 09:16 AM
  #3  
Moderator
iTrader: (1)
 
justnspace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 86,295
Received 16,260 Likes on 11,971 Posts
Hope my credit union doesnt try to enforce fees.



also, coming from the middle class, who the fuck has 15k?
6k is do able, butt christ.......
Old 10-05-2011, 09:52 AM
  #4  
Safety Car
 
Anachostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,845
Received 145 Likes on 90 Posts
Originally Posted by jupitersolo
It sucks that fees are coming, but companies have to make money (whether you like how much is or not). This just shows that Govt regs, that are to (what the say) help the consumer, just screw them over in the end.
Not entirely true. Banks used to be able to make money on the deposits they held, so they were able to pay for their huge infrastructure. Since no one can make any money with interest rates so low, they have to resort to charging people to make up the difference.

The part that irks me is that instead of cutting costs and making themselves more profitable, they just pass on the difference to the customer. And ironically, they manage money and don't have any sense of frugality.
Old 10-05-2011, 10:41 AM
  #5  
nnInn
 
jupitersolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,670
Received 1,084 Likes on 646 Posts
I now they can't money off of interest, but that has been for many, many years. The cost cutting? That's cutting jobs which many banks have done and many have talked about doing so it the upcoming months. Customers have demanded longer hours for banks and more tellers, not just what used to be called "bankers hours", that has to be paid for.

The new Govt regulations have forced the banks to start charging for things that have been free for the last 20 years. I remember paying for a credit card, (not just American Express) and checking accounts. I've had a checking account since I was 12 yrs old.
Old 10-05-2011, 11:16 AM
  #6  
Registered but harmless
 
Will Y.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Age: 59
Posts: 14,842
Received 1,102 Likes on 763 Posts
Originally Posted by jupitersolo
The new Govt regulations have forced the banks to start charging for things that have been free for the last 20 years. I remember paying for a credit card, (not just American Express) and checking accounts. I've had a checking account since I was 12 yrs old.
IIRC, credit card and account fees were also charged, but often decreased and/or waived for better customers due to competition between banks back in the '70s and '80s.

The situation now is the same-- fees are assessed on accounts, but waived for more profitable customers, or those with more money in their accounts. The difference is that fees can be applied to more usages-- debits, on-line banking, etc.-- not available in the past to create/maintain bank revenue & profits.

The consumer will pay in the end-- whether to retailers, directly to the banks, or to both if retailers do not lower prices as a result of lower credit & debit charges to them.
Old 10-05-2011, 11:28 AM
  #7  
Drifting
 
Pete2010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Boston Metro
Age: 43
Posts: 2,761
Received 86 Likes on 66 Posts
Originally Posted by justnspace
Hope my credit union doesnt try to enforce fees.



also, coming from the middle class, who the fuck has 15k?
6k is do able, butt christ.......
Most if not all credit unions would rarely if ever bring fees like that. Credit unions are owned by the members (you), they are not answering to shareholders, they only answer to the members.

Also - it does say 15k in their combined accounts (which obviously includes savings), while it may seem like an unattainable sum when you're in your early 20's (it did for me), over time, saving properly, you should be able to save up that amount by the time you're 30.

On a related note - this is *exactly* the reason I just left citibank for a local bank in my area, I just knew they were going to start doing sleezy stuff like this.
Old 10-05-2011, 11:31 AM
  #8  
nnInn
 
jupitersolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,670
Received 1,084 Likes on 646 Posts
Originally Posted by Will Y.
IIRC, credit card and account fees were also charged, but often decreased and/or waived for better customers due to competition between banks back in the '70s and '80s.

The situation now is the same-- fees are assessed on accounts, but waived for more profitable customers, or those with more money in their accounts. The difference is that fees can be applied to more usages-- debits, on-line banking, etc.-- not available in the past to create/maintain bank revenue & profits.

The consumer will pay in the end-- whether to retailers, directly to the banks, or to both if retailers do not lower prices as a result of lower credit & debit charges to them.
I doubt that you'll see retail prices come down, now that they are paying less to the banks for debit card transactions? So prices stay the same and now banks will start charging for using the bank again. Again Govt thinking they know what bests for us and getting involved.

I'm not defending banks, they have too much control, but when Geithner comes out and says "We will prevail over banks". I just see him being another rich person fighting a cause for the kids of rich people protesting on Wall Street. I just want to laugh.
Old 10-05-2011, 11:38 AM
  #9  
Drifting
 
Pete2010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Boston Metro
Age: 43
Posts: 2,761
Received 86 Likes on 66 Posts
Originally Posted by jupitersolo
I now they can't money off of interest, but that has been for many, many years. The cost cutting? That's cutting jobs which many banks have done and many have talked about doing so it the upcoming months. Customers have demanded longer hours for banks and more tellers, not just what used to be called "bankers hours", that has to be paid for.

The new Govt regulations have forced the banks to start charging for things that have been free for the last 20 years. I remember paying for a credit card, (not just American Express) and checking accounts. I've had a checking account since I was 12 yrs old.
I disagree with this - look at credit unions. Most if not all of them have the same hours and services as big banks (even sometimes better rates on savings and checking, and better loan rates). But most if not all of them don't bundle in all these fees and such. It's because they are owned by the members - not by shareholders that require high dividends and returns.

That's why i always laugh at the people railing against big banks... if you want to make a stand - pull your money out and put into a credit union.
Old 10-05-2011, 11:46 AM
  #10  
nnInn
 
jupitersolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,670
Received 1,084 Likes on 646 Posts
Originally Posted by Pete2010
I disagree with this - look at credit unions. Most if not all of them have the same hours and services as big banks (even sometimes better rates on savings and checking, and better loan rates). But most if not all of them don't bundle in all these fees and such. It's because they are owned by the members - not by shareholders that require high dividends and returns.

That's why i always laugh at the people railing against big banks... if you want to make a stand - pull your money out and put into a credit union.
Tell me something I don't know.


They have two different business models
Old 10-05-2011, 12:12 PM
  #11  
Team Owner
Thread Starter
 
doopstr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Jersey
Age: 52
Posts: 25,336
Received 2,051 Likes on 1,137 Posts
I wouldn't mind the fees so much if I didn't get to read about the huge bonuses the bank execs get every year. That's like a kick in the nads. The banks cry poor but yet somehow have millions to shell out in bonuses.
The following users liked this post:
jupitersolo (10-05-2011)
Old 10-05-2011, 01:11 PM
  #12  
_
 
AZuser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 18,692
Received 3,097 Likes on 1,867 Posts
Originally Posted by doopstr
I wouldn't mind the fees so much if I didn't get to read about the huge bonuses the bank execs get every year. That's like a kick in the nads. The banks cry poor but yet somehow have millions to shell out in bonuses.
Isn't that how it usually is?

Bonus for Mr. Top Exec for coming up with a way to cut costs (i.e. cut jobs), increase profits (i.e. come up with new fees), etc. even though they're pissing off/losing customers. I can't remember when they've said, "No bonus for me this year" due to their company's poor performance under their watch.

Last edited by AZuser; 10-05-2011 at 01:14 PM.
Old 10-05-2011, 02:27 PM
  #13  
Senior Moderator
iTrader: (5)
 
KaMLuNg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Age: 41
Posts: 15,510
Received 1,090 Likes on 767 Posts
first BoA and now Citi... Chase and Wells Fargo will be close behind them... but i recall reading that Wells Fargo is already testing this fee in some states already... time to switch to my HSBC account..
Old 10-05-2011, 02:34 PM
  #14  
Three Wheelin'
 
silver3.5's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: WISCONSIN
Age: 49
Posts: 1,299
Received 51 Likes on 41 Posts
I hope TCF and PNC don't follow. I hate all these fees and all these new requirements you have to meet to avoid all these fees.
Old 10-05-2011, 04:50 PM
  #15  
Senior Moderator
iTrader: (5)
 
KaMLuNg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Age: 41
Posts: 15,510
Received 1,090 Likes on 767 Posts
you may want to check some of your employer benefits... some companies have partnership with certain banks where you can even get preferred accounts without the minimums... worth looking into and asking HR...
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
acurajj
Car Parts for Sale
20
02-14-2016 02:28 PM
Yumcha
Automotive News
4
09-21-2015 08:44 AM



Quick Reply: Citibank's turn to raise fees



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:49 PM.