Beware Ridiculous Policy of Valley National Bank archived

Not for nothing, but it costs them at least that much per quarter to keep your money in their safe and provide you with no services.

Red_Barchetta said:

Not for nothing, but it costs them at least that much per quarter to keep your money in their safe and provide you with no services.

They usually waive fees like that for people under the age of 18. The account holder is 9 years old.

We have one for my dd and they told me the same but waived the single charge when I made a deposit but had forgotten about the one year thing

They taught your son that a bank is the very least safe place to put his money. This is what I said to BofA when they lost my duaghter's money in this way. I am under the impression that banks offer a fee-free type of account for children to teach them the value of banking. If they don't see the errors of this, they just lost a potential customer. You might want to report them to whatever regulatory agency oversees this, because you could cause at least one person some embarrassment. This really burns me up.

The regulatory agency is the OCC, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. Here's their consumer complaint webpage:

http://helpwithmybank.gov/

Bank accounts teach kids the wrong lessons. Try this: http://www.thesimpledollar.com/review-the-first-national-bank-of-dad/

It worked for both my kids.

VNB seems to have a problem with flexibility, especially with smaller-scale problems. I had a minor problem with the Maplewood branch and the asst. manager was being a PITA. I politely asked to use her phone. When she asked what for, I calmly told her that I needed to call the NJ Dept. of Banking & Insurance to report a violation of State banking regulations. She thought for a moment, then did an about-face, said she would grant my request purely out of the goodness of her heart, as she stopped to spit some venom in the nearest spittoon. I got my way purely because she was angry and too stupid to realize that no regulation was violated and that as a nationally chartered bank, Trenton had no jurisdiction over the matter in question, anyway.

The real point is that she had full discretion in the matter, but would rather lose a customer. That's clear in your case, as well. True shortsightedness. Instead of solving your problem and possibly getting a customer for life in your son. It's a damn shame. I call it the tyranny of petty bureaucrats.

I am sorry to hear these comments. I can tell you that community banks have been stretched to the limit with various updated OCC regulations on reporting issues due to anti money laundering etc. The result is the bottom line has been squeezed and they are less flexible on waiving fees etc....
The branch managers boss is telling them that they cant waive fees... she will have to report up the chain.

Sadly, I've reviewed the big folder of account paperwork that we got when we opened our eldest's account.

No mention of the policy in the nice colorful kiddie account brochure, which simply says "no monthly fees". No mention of it in the kiddie account portion of the multi-page "schedule of fees". But on the last page, under "other service fees" it says "Dormancy Fee: Savings accounts with no deposit or withdrawl activity for a period of 24 months will be charged $6 per quarter on balances less than $1000" (obviously they've raised the fee since our account was initiated)

Of course, this account has not sent us a statement in a very long time, even after promising to do so a month or two ago. Honestly, part of the point of a kiddie account should be to use the statements as a teaching tool.

I'm not sure that my child will have an account there after tomorrow. Will depend on what answers I get today. May be time to teach my child about a different type of banking.

Red_Barchetta said:

Not for nothing, but it costs them at least that much per quarter to keep your money in their safe and provide you with no services.

I assume you're kidding. The incremental cost for maintaining a dormant account would round to zero cents.

ParticleMan said:

Red_Barchetta said:

Not for nothing, but it costs them at least that much per quarter to keep your money in their safe and provide you with no services.

I assume you're kidding. The incremental cost for maintaining a dormant account would round to zero cents.

Plus: wouldn't it cost the bank more if one made a few transactions rather than leaving the account dormant? I think they do it because they can.

Using a teller too often?
That is a fee.

Not using a teller?
That's a fee.

Spending your money?
Fee.

Trying to save?
Fee.

I used to really enjoy tagging along with my parents to the bank on a Saturday morning to have my passbook updated with the new (interest-adjusted) balance.

Of course, this was when people actually had to go into a bank.

And they had free donuts.

And actually paid interest.

Hmmmm, I guess my reply is off-topic, didn't seem that way at first.

susan1014 said:

Of course, this account has not sent us a statement in a very long time, even after promising to do so a month or two ago. Honestly, part of the point of a kiddie account should be to use the statements as a teaching tool.

Passbook accounts don't generate statements as far as I know. The book IS the statement.

ctrzaska said:

susan1014 said:

Of course, this account has not sent us a statement in a very long time, even after promising to do so a month or two ago. Honestly, part of the point of a kiddie account should be to use the statements as a teaching tool.

Passbook accounts don't generate statements as far as I know. The book IS the statement.

^^^ this.

And as far as dormancy fees go (whether on savings accts or on gift cards as another example), while one can debate the suitability of the amount charged, these are a real PIA for banks to maintain, monitor, and (if necessary) eventually dispose of. A consumer sees an acct doing nothing and costing nothing to do so, and a bank sees txn monitoring requirements, regular reporting, and an annual, state-mandated, inconsistent escheatment process.

Yesterday I went to a Chase branch near my office to buy two cashier's checks. I think this may have been the 2nd time I actually stepped inside a Chase branch, the first being when I opened the account. I was told there was an $8 fee for each, which I expected, and said 'OK' or 'that's fine' or something like that. What I didn't expect, after then being asked if I'd ever bought cashier's checks from Chase before, and me answering 'no', was being told that the fees would be waived. And this is from the teller, who was empowered to make this decision and made me a happy Chase customer.

With the interest you were probably getting in that account OP, you'd be better off burying the money in the backyard.

ctrzaska said:

And as far as dormancy fees go (whether on savings accts or on gift cards as another example), while one can debate the suitability of the amount charged, these are a real PIA for banks to maintain, monitor, and (if necessary) eventually dispose of. A consumer sees an acct doing nothing and costing nothing to do so, and a bank sees txn monitoring requirements, regular reporting, and an annual, state-mandated, inconsistent escheatment process.

The bank's fees aren't related to their actual costs. They're related to how much the bank can charge for things without losing too many customers.

In any case, kids' accounts are really are a marketing tool for the bank. If they had any sense, they'd treat them as loss leaders, not as another way they can suck money out of unsuspecting customers.

ctrzaska said:

And as far as dormancy fees go (whether on savings accts or on gift cards as another example), while one can debate the suitability of the amount charged, these are a real PIA for banks to maintain, monitor, and (if necessary) eventually dispose of. A consumer sees an acct doing nothing and costing nothing to do so, and a bank sees txn monitoring requirements, regular reporting, and an annual, state-mandated, inconsistent escheatment process.

But what's the incremental cost of an account? They have to do these things anyway for every account. Most of those are reports out of a database for large groups of accounts, not one-offs.

mammabear said:

ctrzaska said:

susan1014 said:

Of course, this account has not sent us a statement in a very long time, even after promising to do so a month or two ago. Honestly, part of the point of a kiddie account should be to use the statements as a teaching tool.

Passbook accounts don't generate statements as far as I know. The book IS the statement.

^^^ this.

Yes...went to the bank today and verified this. But they used to at least send an interest statement once a year, so there was some paper trail beyond the passbook. Valley has literally not sent us a piece of paper related to this account in three years or more, even after we made a four digit deposit without the passbook. When I asked a couple of months ago, they said sure, and then failed to send the statement.

I think at some point they must have changed policy and stopped sending interest statements for accounts with interest below some legal level.

But, the good news is that they were not charging us dormancy fees back in 2011, when account inactivity and lower balance would have potentially allowed them to do so...perhaps they've gotten more aggressive more recently.

So, let me be blunt...I've now had a nostalgia trip to my childhood, which included trips to the bank with Grandma to deposit money and put the passbook in the stamper machine. But, for lack of one confirming statement a year, we will probably close an account with thousands of dollars in it, and leave their bank.

This just isn't modern banking, and I think I want to teach my child how to manage something other than a passbook. We could shift it to a "statement" account at Valley, but I just don't see any point in dealing with this bank for one account, especially since they didn't send the promised statement.

I remember my daughter getting a free account from the News Record for her birthday. we totally forgot about the account for a year and when we did go to the bank to deposit some money the account was closed and the little money that was put into it was gone...so have never been a client of that bank...and I'm talking over 20 years ago. times are tough and banks need to help their follow clients! but sorry I can't remember the name of the bank but it was on the corner of Prospect and springfield.

dave said:

Using a teller too often?
That is a fee.

Not using a teller?
That's a fee.

Spending your money?
Fee.

Trying to save?
Fee.

Good summary. And I remember reading that the poor banks have to charge fees more than before because they have fewer opportunities to make money than before. I don't follow this. Aren't bank profits higher than ever?

I don't know if the law was on my side (or really my daughter's) or if my rant won over the guy at the bank, but I got them to refund all fees. I was absolutely livid. I had to tell the guy to apologize. He apologized to me, and I said no, to my daughter! It didn't occur to speak to her, I guess because she was a child. I made the point that like other businesses, banks are speculative and betting that a low-profit customer will one day become a profitable customer is the best business practice. The account had gone dormant for so long that it was entirely removed from their records. I had to make them initiate a long investigation into their archives to find record of it. Too bad. They messed up, they fix it.

Yikes need to close daughter's account there. We switched her to teen checking at USAA which is more convenient. Valley was good for the coin counter.

So these "prestigious" institutions have become like sleazy Inn Keepers, "Masters of the House":

Charge 'em for the lice, extra for the mice
Two percent for looking in the mirror twice
Here a little slice, there a little cut
Three percent for sleeping with the window shut
When it comes to fixing prices
There are a lot of tricks I knows
How it all increases, all them bits and pieces
Jesus! It's amazing how it grows!

Oy vey, gotta look into this. Really liked Valley for the kids' accounts that can become direct deposit for when they have summer and p/t jobs. So silly that it should be so complicated to have a bank account.

Thanks. Just checked and it had been 23 months. I just dumped the change jar in so I'm good for a while.

ctrzaska said:

And as far as dormancy fees go (whether on savings accts or on gift cards as another example), while one can debate the suitability of the amount charged, these are a real PIA for banks to maintain, monitor, and (if necessary) eventually dispose of. A consumer sees an acct doing nothing and costing nothing to do so, and a bank sees txn monitoring requirements, regular reporting, and an annual, state-mandated, inconsistent escheatment process.

Are you using the term PIA as a euphemism for expense? I imagine most of this is automated and most of that which is not automated is done in bulk. Am I wrong?

ParticleMan said:

ctrzaska said:

And as far as dormancy fees go (whether on savings accts or on gift cards as another example), while one can debate the suitability of the amount charged, these are a real PIA for banks to maintain, monitor, and (if necessary) eventually dispose of. A consumer sees an acct doing nothing and costing nothing to do so, and a bank sees txn monitoring requirements, regular reporting, and an annual, state-mandated, inconsistent escheatment process.

But what's the incremental cost of an account? They have to do these things anyway for every account. Most of those are reports out of a database for large groups of accounts, not one-offs.

Depends. Thus why one could debate the suitability of a given charge. But what's done for dormant accts is not what's done for every acct. I could bore you to tears over the costs and machinations involved (KPMG fees, needed fraud controls over a ripe population to exploit, weeks spent back and forth with state auditors, sending checks for 0.03 to someone in Peoria, and on and on). It's a PIA and it costs money.

Tom_Reingold said:

Are you using the term PIA as a euphemism for expense? I imagine most of this is automated and most of that which is not automated is done in bulk. Am I wrong?

See above.