Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Email this1:03 pm
January 12, 2019
Offline
.
It doesn't look like they went far enough, but at least they made steps in the right direction. The new rules apply to Banks & Federal CUs, and come into effect on June 30th . . .
- Canadian Press link ➡ https://www.nelsonstar.com/news/new-bank-rules-come-into-force-this-month-but-critics-say-they-dont-go-far-enough/
.
GoC page link ➡ https://www.canada.ca/en/financial-consumer-agency/services/banking/rights-new-protections.html
.
What's your take ❓
- Dean
" Live Long, Healthy ... And Prosper! "
1:41 pm
March 15, 2019
Offline
"new rules limiting the liability on lost or stolen credit cards to $50 unless there’s gross negligence"
What happens if there is gross negligence?
3:50 pm
September 11, 2013
Offline
If there's gross negligence then liability is not limited to $50, I guess.
4:19 pm
March 15, 2019
Offline
Bill said
If there's gross negligence then liability is not limited to $50, I guess.
I'm not sure if it is gross negligence by the customer and/or by the bank.
BTW: One of my pet peeves is when I get charged $40 for an NSF cheque if I am 1cent over my bank limit but if the bank makes a mistake I can't charge them $40.
4:39 pm
October 21, 2013
Offline
It all seems pretty lame to me, not worth bothering with.
Just what I don't need - more emails from my various banks just to tell me that my account doesn't have much money in it - just as I intended. It would be much more useful to receive emails saying "you are now exceeding CDIC insured limits", but that's not likely to ever happen.
And as for high pressure tactics used to sell customer inappropriate products, I don't see any real change there. "No undue pressure", it says. So "ordinary", "due" pressure is apparently OK. What consumers would want would be no pressure at all, of course.
Undoubtedly these rules reflect how far the banks are willing to go, i.e. hardly anywhere. That's why CBA supports them. The other things that need to be done but haven't been done will be harder for the banks to swallow, and thus they haven't been done. If they ever do get done, I predict they will be watered down to please the banks.
The criticisms raised in the article in the Nelson Star seem valid to me.
6:04 pm
September 11, 2013
Offline
The gross negligence reference is to the card user, the "borrower". If there's gross negligence your liability is unlimited, presumably up to the amount of the loss in most cases. Note that gross negligence is a higher threshold than carelessness or simple negligence, in those cases you're again limited to $50 liability.
If you've notified the bank of a lost or stolen card there is no liability for subsequent misuse.
3:52 pm
January 12, 2019
Offline
.
Yes, I agree that some of these 'improvements' (due June 30th) are Wanting, to say the least. But they constitute definite steps in the right direction.
One of the better improvements is the 'More effective and timely complaints handling' requirements, that also includes reducing the 90 day limit to resolve complaints, down to a 56 day limit.
- More details ➡ https://www.canada.ca/en/financial-consumer-agency/services/banking/rights-new-protections/consumer-protection-framework.html#toc10
.
And I've also found that the 'New electronic alerts' requirements that includes a notice be sent out to the account holder if an account balance falls below $100, can be changed by the account holder to a Different amount. I've already done this on some of my accounts where this feature is already in place.
- More details ➡ https://www.canada.ca/en/financial-consumer-agency/services/banking/rights-new-protections/consumer-protection-framework.html#toc1
.
These improvements are Far from perfect, of course.
But they're better than 'A Kick In The Pants'. 
- Dean
" Live Long, Healthy ... And Prosper! "
Please write your comments in the forum.