Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Email this12:35 pm
October 21, 2013
Offline
Norman, you have clearly illustrated the problem with your hypothetical case. We don't know what has actually occurred. We do know that TD has the power to close accounts at will and is not accountable for its actions. I submit that consumers need better protection from arbitrary decisions in the form of due process.
Ethnicity of CEO is not relevant. CEO is accountable to shareholders, not to compatriots. That's how he got the job.
2:20 pm
October 27, 2013
Offline
Since we don't know the facts, I , as a shareholder of TD, will defer to their judgement on why they closed this account. I will assume they perceived more risk than value in maintaining the relationship. Truly no one should care if the family got dumped as long as they can secure alternative options.
Added: As I've mentioned previously, with relatives working in banks. banks don't take account closures lightly... especially with the negative public relations, factual or not, that result from such situations.
2:50 pm
June 9, 2018
Offline
will defer to their discriminatory judgement . as long as they make money slavery would be fine is that right ?
In the pursuit of profits is there anything that would be unacceptable for TD to do for you as a shareholder ?
6:10 pm
September 11, 2013
Offline
snoopy, slavery in Canada is illegal, so it's not fine. In the pursuit of profit anything's acceptable as long as it's legal (our laws comprise our society's definition of what's ok and what's not ok). If they want to be taken seriously those that have "moral", "ethical" or other reservations with a bank's actions need to live up to their principles and close their accounts - and it would be especially hypocritical to choose convenience over one's principles.
6:40 pm
April 6, 2013
Offline
Loonie said
Norman, you have clearly illustrated the problem with your hypothetical case. We don't know what has actually occurred. We do know that TD has the power to close accounts at will and is not accountable for its actions. I submit that consumers need better protection from arbitrary decisions in the form of due process.
…
TD is accountable for its actions. Just not through their ombudsman. But, through the courts.
I don't think such decisions are arbitrary. I agree with what AltaRed wrote and Saver-Mom wrote: The banks don't make such decisions lightly. The circumstances suggests these are non-routine decisions.
In the December Globe & Mail article, the terminated customer had a business account and a $767,000 mortgage with TD. Lots of fees from a business account. With a 2% to 3% rate on the mortgage, TD would likely be receiving around $15,000 to $23,000 each year of mortgage interest.
I think TD discovered something serious enough that it decided it was better to turn away over $15,000/year from the customer. It is not in any bank's interest to arbitrarily turn away such amounts of business.
In the family's case, at 0:51 into the CTV video, there is a shot of the April 25, 2018 termination letter. It was not from their branch manager. The letter was issued by a vice-president of the TD Bank Group. The decision was made quite high up the organization.
In my hypothetical example, what would be more probable in light of TD's "discovery"?
- It is just a "coincidence" that over 100 other TD customers and I were sending all that money (90+ times the average annual income in Pakistan) to the same Pakistani bank account for a poor relative's medical expenses.
- I was in cahoots with 100 others to finance terrorism and that 100 small $50 transfers would not be as conspicuous as single $5,000 transfers.
Once the balance of probability leans towards #2, that is enough to act.
Please write your comments in the forum.