High risk at some of these banks/trust companies? | General comparisons | Discussion forum

kanaka:

I did click on that. And I learned nothing more. So I phoned and asked them to to e-mail me their complete Terms of Service. Which they did. So the 100% Online Banking Guarantee is bullshit. It's a guarantee in name only, like so many other things these days.

Is there somewhere else I can get a better return than 1% on my cash without tying it up?
I've asked BMO Nesbitt Burns, and if my househould brings the minimum requirements to them, they say they'll give us 2% on GICs, but I forgot to ask for what terms.

Is anyone other than kanaka and I thinking about this, or just ignore it?

kanaka:

To be honest, it's not really hackers that I'm worried about. It's members of a company that has Terms of Service like the ones I've described.

Do any of the financial institutions with decent HISAs have more reasonable Terms of Service?

The other thing that worries me is what if these companies don't even have any policy for contingencies like hackings, security problems. With no legal regulations, they may just decide to screw the customer. I guess what I'm trying to say it comes across to me like there just isn't any goodwill towards customers.

I generally avoid dealing with CIBC. My Mom banks there, and they nickel and dime her to death and did the same with me when I was there. But OTOH, PC Financial has reasonable Terms of Service if you read them.

Loonie:

Thanks for the encouragement. By the way, Tangerine's Terms of Service were basicallly the same. They relinquish all responsibility for anything that goes wrong, including with your records. I don't have the excerpt handy, but it basically states that if you download your records and something is incorrect about them, you still accept them as correct. Holy ***t.
That takes serious gall. I doubt it would even hold up in court.

Let's look at Tangerine's TOS (Terms of Service), shall we:

Accuracy and Changes
.
.
.
Tangerine shall not be liable regardless of the cause or duration, for any errors, inaccuracies, omissions or other defect in, the information contained within this website, or for any delay or interruption in the transmission thereof to the user, or for any claims or losses arising therefrom or occasioned thereby. Tangerine shall not be liable for any third-party claims or losses of any nature, including, but not limited to, lost profits, punitive or consequential damages. Tangerine does not warrant or guarantee the timeliness, sequence, accuracy or completeness of the information contained herein.
.
.
.
Your Liability

You agree that the use of the Electronic Identification is the legal equivalent to your written, signed instructions to Tangerine.

Tangerine will be under no obligation to confirm the actual identity or authority of any user of the Electronic Identification or any component thereof.

You will not be responsible for unauthorized use of Electronic Identification occurring after notifying Tangerine in accordance with the notice provisions set out below.

NOW HERE IS MY FAVOURITE TERM: I'VE NEVER SEEN THIS BEFORE ANYWHERE
Tangerine Records

You accept any records or documents stored or produced by Tangerine through electronic means or device as sufficient evidence for all purposes to establish such documents and the contents as correct, authentic, and binding on you.

This suggests that you accept the records as correct, even if they are not. This would presumably mean that you nave no recourse to correct errors or banking issues, regardless, cause if you accept the records as correct, then it would logically follow you'd also be accepting the actual transactions as correct, whether or not they are.

Again, I have to wonder about the legality of all this.

Does this not make anyone else nervous?

Norman1:

Uh, I think you missed the second part of that sentence. It doesn't just say that. It says "and the contents as correct, authentic, and binding on you." That's okay with you, Norman1? So if the statements if off by a few thousand dollars, that doesn't bother you? Where is the clause about your recourse in such situations? There isn't one. Think that's coincidence?

I'm not a lawyer, and have minimal legal knowledge. But I'm helping a friend of mine with a civil suit right now. And there's one thing I'll tell you from working on that suit and reading thousands of brokerage and bank statements. Lawyers don't just use words that are more or less appropriate. They practice and agonize over word choices. They have dictionaries full of the exact precise words they want.

And with respect to section 5 (Liability), read:

You will not be responsible for losses which occur after you advise us that, due to circumstances beyond your control, someone else knows or may know your User ID, Password or your Personal Verification Questions. You acknowledge that the amount of losses for which you may be held liable may not be limited to the balance in the Account.

What does that imply? The logical corollary to that is that it suggests that you will be held liable for losses which occur before you advise us that...blah blah blah.

Well, if someone steals my credentials and uses them, what are the odds that I will find out and advise Oaken before that person does something unathorized? If I get mugged maybe, but otherwise, crooks don't have a tendency to inform you of the theft, or to wait cause maybe they might be discovered. If you look at some (but not all) of the big banks T.O.S, they don't read like that. They are more reasonable.

Look, maybe I'm not communicating my point clearly here. I'm not saying all the banks are out to get us; that would be tinfoil hat talk. I'm saying that the deck is stacked so that when a bank employee makes an honest mistake, the bank doesn't have to legally take any responsibility for that mistake. There's a difference. One is paranoia, the other..not so much.

Let's take a look at Accelerate's current Terms of Service.

3. Use of Electronic Services.

To access these services, AcceleRate Financial will issue each Member a credit union electronic transaction card...and/or a separate security code for each service delivery channel. As a Member of AcceleRate Financial and a potential user of some or all of these services, the Member(s) authorize(s) AcceleRate Financial to accept without any further verification, and agree(s) to be responsible for, all instructions of the types AcceleRate Financial accepts via the above services, when accompanied by their Member Card and/or security codes and the Member further agrees that AcceleRate Financial shall not be liable for any unauthorized use thereof.

Now this is interesting, because here it sounds like they disclaim any liability for unathorized transactions.

But under the subhead Liability, they disclaim and then later qualify:

First this:

Once the Member(s) has/have requested and first used the Debit Card service, the Member(s) will be liable for all authorized and unauthorized uses of the Debit Card by any person, prior to the expiry or cancellation of the Debit Card.

.
.
Then this:

The Credit Union will have the discretion to relieve the Member(s) from liability for unauthorized use of the Debit Card either through no fault of the Member(s) or in a case where the Member(s) inadvertently contributed to the unauthorized use of the Debit Card, and the Member(s) will cooperate in an investigation.

What's interesting here is, there is mention of the company relieving you of your liability if there is unathorized use. However, there is no mention of the company's potential liability. So...are they accepting any (even partial) responsibility or not? Again, I'm not trying to insist they aren't, but is this clear to all of you? It's not clear to me at all.

Notice in the Lost or Stolen Card section, you are also informed that:

If the Member(s) suspects or becomes aware that the Debit Card is lost or stolen, or that the PIN has been made accessible to another person, they will notify AcceleRate Financial or its agent immediately, whereupon AcceleRate Financial will cancel the Debit Card. The instant such notice is actually received, the liability for further use of the Debit Card will terminate, and the Member(s) will be entitled to recover from AcceleRate Financial any further losses suffered by them through the use of the Debit Card.

This clearly suggests that you are liable for all losses until you report a stolen card. So if a thief wants to have a party, until you discover the card is gone, you pay the bill for that party.

I'm not saying this is wrong (IMO, it is, cause it shows little to no goodwill) but I am saying people should know what it is they're committing to.

And finally, Accelerate has this term under
4. Debit Card Agreement
which I think is just ridiculous.

The member(s) will not keep a written record of the PIN, unless the written record is not carried next to the Debit Card and is in a form indecipherable to others.

The first part seems resaonable. The second part is not, I think.
So, we are all supposed to be using encryption for our pins and passwords? Come on. If I put a private password in my filing cabinet at home, I have a reasonable belief that it is not going to be breached unless I share accommodation with strangers, no? Ironically, I encrypt all my passwords anyways. But for most people how reasonable is this?

Oh, and I'm not a shill for any big bank, trust company, or any other financial company. I actually work for myself as an IT consultant. That's where I learned the obsession with detail.