Wow! A student calls for personal responsibility
February 25, 2010 | alternatives, customers, industry | Comments (1)Says overdraft fees are “fair” and “purposeful.” From the column in the University of South Carolina’s The Daily Gamecock:
I was once the victim of an overdraft fee. My bank charged me $30 for dipping $13 too deep into my checking account. Was it annoying? Absolutely. Was it my fault? You bet. I signed a piece of paper promising to pay a penalty if I failed to stay within the limits of my account. I failed, and the bank made sure that I kept my promise. Fair enough.
Comments»
I agree with the fact that we should take personal accountability for our mistakes….
That being said, I will argue that even though we “agree” to these outrageous overdraft terms when we start our bank account, we are essentially being “bullied” into agreeing to these terms. After all, in America you basically NEED a bank account to function as an adult (not to say there aren’t ways to survive without one, but it is difficult and limits many of your options). So our only option is to “agree” to ridiculous fees (heck, I’ve been overdrafted for NOTHING!! $300 gone and they couldn’t ever prove I had a negative balance!!) that are completely un-warranted. My $0.13 overdraft in NO WAY costs the bank $33!! If it did, I would shut my mouth and pay up. But when I am obviously being taken advantage of because of the monopoly of banking in our country (not to mention their lobbying for protective legislation!) and forced to pay sometimes 10x the amount overdrafted (for 3 days or less), I see it as “legal” theft. Personal responsibility is one thing, but when you beat a man into a corner and take away ANY other options (including payday loans!), and spin it to look like “consumer protection”, that is un-american.