Entity Doesn’t Exist | Neo Financial | Discussion forum

On its site it says it's a technology company. It says it has partnered with some financial institutions to help us save and spend. It has similar partnerships with other retailers. I agree it's not a brand name of Concentra, it's a separate corporation with various activities.

So, even if Neo is not exclusively partnered with Concentra, the labelling still fits under Brand/FI if listed as Neo Savings/Concentra. I would expect that some seeing that listed as such should easily conclude that at the very least Neo Savings is being offered via Concentra and that Concentra is implicated in the insurance coverage.

And should Neo end up with another product with another bank, then it would get listed as Neo Savings /Bank X, connoting the same information with Bank X now being the implicated bank from an insurance coverage.

IMO this format would work to cover all bases without being overly complicated, cumbersome or confusing.

.

Read the Profile ➡ https://www.highinterestsavings.ca/profile/neo-financial/
.

Dean

smayer97 said
And should Neo end up with another product with another bank, then it would get listed as Neo Savings /Bank X, connoting the same information with Bank X now being the implicated bank from an insurance coverage.
 

I respectfully disagree. If Neo ends up with partnering with another bank, it will still be as a tech provider (Neo Financial Technologies, Inc.). My view is that this would only change if Neo actually became a regulated bank or credit union, and not just a tech company. Further, in relation to any other account where Neo is providing tech access, the account would still be provided by the applicable bank or credit union, under an applicable account name, regardless of what company is providing the tech back-end.

Oaken Financial doesn't even exist (at least Neo does), it's just a trademark of Home Bank, and it's on the list. The profile even says it and Home Trust are "part" of Home Bank, which isn't true as Home Bank is a subsidiary of Home Trust (i.e. they are separate legal entities) and Oaken doesn't exist so it can't a part of anything.

At the top of the HISA chart list it indicates "Always be sure to check the specific banks’ / financial insitutions’ websites and do your research about a bank account!", so I guess that's kind of an indication to casual or new users to this site, though it might be a good idea to update the verbiage to more clearly cover the increasing Neo, etc type accounts that are likely to come to market as traditional ways of banking are augmented by technology, urban hipster marketing arrangements, etc.

My replies in relation to posts above.

Post #10: smayer97 - I agree very much with your post. One minor point. You state "After all, what is now clear is that Neo Savings is a brand and Concentra is the bank providing the means for this branded product to be delivered and through which insurance backing is being made available."

Neo Savings is not a brand, but the name of the account. (Brands and accounts are listed separately on the HISA chart.) This is why in a prior thread, I thought that the best option was BANK > BRAND > ACCOUNT, but that got a lot of thumbs-down votes from others, so above I mentioned the simpler option of BANK > ACCOUNT.

If the former then:
CONCENTRA > NEO FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGIES > NEO SAVINGS ACCOUNT (I think any references to Neo should state Neo Financial Technologies, not "Neo Financial" for the reasons Vatox mentions.)

If the latter then:
CONCENTRA > NEO SAVINGS ACCOUNT

Post #11: Bill - Like Vatox, I am of the view that Oaken and Neo are different. I've covered that in a prior thread, but to repeat here -- Oaken is a trade name wholly owned by Home Bank / Home Trust Company. Each of Home Bank and Home Trust Company are listed independently on CDIC, and the CDIC states that Oaken Financial is "a trade name used by Home Bank and Home Trust Company. Eligible deposits made under the Oaken Financial trade name would be held either at Home Bank and/or Home Trust Company, both CDIC Members, and therefore are eligible for deposit protection up to $100,000 per each Member Institution, per category." Neo is not listed on CDIC because it is just a technology company providing the interface.

Oaken is a "brand" of HB/HTC, whereas Neo Financial Technologies is not a "brand" of Concentra -- it is a technology service provider. The account name is really what is key here, not Neo.

Oaken exists as a tradename owned by HB/HTC, though not as a separate legal entity, correct. Basically, it is a division of HB, so it is the same legal entity as HB. It exists are part of the legal entity that is HB. That is not the case with Neo Financial Technologies. Neo is neither a division of Concentra (brand), nor a subsidiary of Concentra.

However, I see your point regarding the profile page, and the similarities in that regard re Oaken and Neo, in that they're both connected (in some way, differing ways) to the actual legal bank. Thus, if Neo continues to have a profile page on this site, I recommend that it be listed as "Neo Financial Technologies" to avoid the inference that it is a FI when it is not.

.
In the end, it's 'Much To-Do' about very little. I think some here (including myself) have too much time on their hands today.

Maybe it's time for All of us to 'Take A Hike In The Park' ... LOL

Dean

I agree, it's really not that complicated, and that as long as CDIC's criterion is that it be a trade name of the fi then Neo will not appear there. On my own summary spreadsheet I list such accounts as CIBC (Simplii), Home Bank (Oaken), Home Trust (Oaken), Cambrian CU (Achieva), etc, (it would be Concentra (Neo)), that works for me and keeps the CDIC, etc coverage clear to me. And (if I've read human nature right in my life) if I have any money left I'm pretty confident my executor/heirs will find the motivation to hunt down exactly where it's all at.