He's making this up, right?

[Leonidas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnDoe That is typical for a front line rep not to be aware of something like that

Actually I think I was talking with the receptionist. The background noise didn't sound like the normal call center chatter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnDoe The disclosure is probably in the paperwork you received when you opened your account.

Not in my case, I opened my account a year before the regulation's print date according to the federal register. That doesn't mean that it might not have come in the mail at a later date.

There is a simplified version of the account agreement online that doesn't mention any transaction limitations. I may find an excuse to visit the CU in the near future just so I can ask for a copy.

[fritz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leonidas Actually I think I was talking with the receptionist. The background noise didn't sound like the normal call center chatter. Not in my case, I opened my account a year before the regulation's print date according to the federal register. That doesn't mean that it might not have come in the mail at a later date. There is a simplified version of the account agreement online that doesn't mention any transaction limitations. I may find an excuse to visit the CU in the near future just so I can ask for a copy.

This information is in writing and is to be given to you when you open an account. It's usually buried in the gibberish regulations information. You have to look for it, but it's there (and a lot of Bank/CU employees aren't aware of it). A lot of Banks/CUs will not hit you with the fees, but in hard times - they are all looking for ways to raise revenue......

[Leonidas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fritz This information is in writing and is to be given to you when you open an account. It's usually buried in the gibberish regulations information.

I'm sure you're right about all that, except, as I said above, in my case, because I opened the account a year before the particular aspect of the banking regulations actually became law.

[Texas Proud]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leonidas I'm sure you're right about all that, except, as I said above, in my case, because I opened the account a year before the particular aspect of the banking regulations actually became law.

Have not read the whole thread again to get up to date..... but is your account a savings account or a money market account?

I do not think this applies to 'savings accounts' like you had mentioned, but only to money market accounts....

[Nords]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leonidas Sounds like another good reason to have your accounts at a credit union.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyounge1956 I called a credit union. They also said they had a six-transaction limit, although they did not say it was due to Federal regulations.

Leo's probably more tactful than I am, but I'd suggest that it's time to move your money to a credit union that cares about your business, not about how much crap they can fee out of you.

[Leonidas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Texas Proud Have not read the whole thread again to get up to date..... but is your account a savings account or a money market account? I do not think this applies to 'savings accounts' like you had mentioned, but only to money market accounts....

It is a savings account, or as it is called at most credit unions, a "share account". From what I've read on other CU and bank websites, the limitation on transfers commonly applies to both MM and savings. Looking at info on Reg D on some websites like NCUA and similar, where the target audience are bankers, the specific reference is to what are called "non-transaction" accounts.

Regulation D created the difference between transaction and non-transaction accounts to regulate a financial institution's required reserves. The reserves are based on the amount they have in unlimited transaction accounts (checking) so the checks will be covered if the institution wakes up dead tomorrow morning. If they allowed unlimited transactions out of other accounts (savings, etc), then the theory is that they would have to cover those in their reserves also. There's more money in savings accounts, MMA, CD's, etc than there is in checking, so the bank would have to radically increase how much they have sitting around down at the fed (not earning interest).

Non-transaction accounts, which I think should be called "limited numbers of certain kinds of transaction accounts" are mostly everything other than checking. So, savings, MMA, CD's, savings clubs and the like are all limited in the number of certain type of transactions you can do each month. The limited transactions are internet based banking, telephone based transfers, automated transfers, etc. Those that aren't limited are ATM based, in-person at the bank, cashier's checks payable to you, to pay loans at the same institution, overdrafts to checking, and other electronic transfers like ACH and ETFs.

Interest bearing checking had its own set of rules that I didn't bother to read.

I'm not sure I agree with the reasoning behind this. Not given how quickly money moves today and with real-time computer databases it would seem banks would be in a better spot to know exactly how much they have "at risk" in outstanding, and potentially outstanding, transactions floating around in the ether.

[Leonidas]

I think I made an error on that last post. Overdraft withdrawals from savings to cover checking is a limited transaction rather than unlimited.

[Steve O]

WOW I thought I was a cheap Bastid, were bitching about being charged $1.00 here

How about BOFA getting $$$ for nothing and raising the rate on my credit card to 28% from 10

Their never gonna see any of it because I pay it off every month

But it still pisses me off

[Leonidas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve O WOW I thought I was a cheap Bastid, were bitching about being charged $1.00 here

The amount of the fine doesn't bother me as much as the possibility of having checks and other transfer start bouncing all over the place because the bank voided any further transfers, or my savings account closed against my will. I'm not sure if the banks have to charge a fee each time a customer goes over the limit of transactions in a non-transaction account, but they are supposed to prevent it. I've seen stories from people who got their accounts closed because they went over the limit one time too many.

OT: Was there a sale on smilies?

[Steve O]

Just messing with ya, sorry

I love these smiley things

[Texas Proud]

Leonidas... I think our credit union lists the share account as a transaction account... you can get checks on ours IIRC... I don't use the credit union account at all, just let a small amount of money sit there... so I could be wrong on this..

[Leonidas]

Made it down to the CU for something that involved talking to a bank officer. When she hit me with the "anything else we can do for you?" I asked her if she was familiar with banking regulation D. She had the darn thing memorized and started explaining it so I stopped her and asked if it applied to savings/share accounts there.

She wasn't sure so she called her boss, who had her boss in the office and they put her on hold for a minute until they could get to her question. While waiting she cruised the CU's website and didn't find anything about Reg D. She commented that she had worked at another CU and that Reg D had limited transactions from savings accounts there, but she wasn't sure about the situation at this CU.

Anyway, the answer came back, "No, Reg D does not limit transactions on your savings account here." She did not get the explanation of the why for its non-applicability.

That's good enough for me.