Really still like People’s Trust after years! | Peoples Trust | Discussion forum

@Wanderer
I am a post breach customer. I agree somewhat with what you say. Maturity instructions would be better if you could turn on OR off to auto renew. I too am close to CDIC limit and this only allows me and spouse to have a max of $48,000 each princ. + int. Two things would be helpful on the limits….CDIC could increase the archaic limit to $150,000 and/or People’s Bank could offer TFSA as well.
Also they could at least offer email reminders for upcoming maturities along with one for monthly statements being ready. And as well every GIC should show both names on listed joint non registered GICS and successor should show on each listed TFSA. Non registered can show on your statement I believe and if same GIC shows on both logins = joint. The only thing I can find to prove successor for TFSA is on your original application, that is, if you kept it on file.

@Dean
I briefly read the string you showed.

I have had a couple very poor CSRs that seem to have no respect for a request or the customer. I would expect that People’s being self serve and a customer at CDIC limits deserves respect as do all other levels of investment dollars. I have their names written down and have the option to let the call drop and call back. The second guy…I asked to speak to a manager…..he said that couldn’t be done. Somehow I got a call the next day and spoke to Steve…..good guy and good conversation and he does listen to the call before he calls you. I have never had either of them answer the phone since. And if you have an uncooperative CSR..you can email them to call you.

I am not clear of their POA policy.

I remain happy with the Peoples Group.

Edit: I sometimes wonder if the CSRs are paid at competitive rates. Am thinking not and that can cause turnover and bad actors.

It might be but I wouldn't assume a GIC qualifies, better check details (even though it looks like he's not going to win anyways!). To me a GIC is not an investment, there's no chance of gain or loss on capital, it's a savings vehicle to me, but you've got lots of time to find out.

Been with Peoples since day one, very happy with them, I don't use them for frequent transactions, occasional GICs is it.

I've been very happy with them. Rates depend on their need for money; I still have some 5% and even 5.65% and 5.7% with a few years to run.

Phone service isn't that bad except during RRSP season.

There's the trick of calling from an earlier (westerly) time zone to beat the local rush. Here in BC I can call as early as 5am.

Wanderer: CDIC is not intended to protect extreme wealth, but ordinary people who might be wiped out in a collapse. Oligarchs and the like can set up their own protections.

But the CDIC did increase protection limits by allowing separate $100K bins for standard, registered and joint accounts. Peoples Trust thus allows up to $300K; Peoples Bank does not have registered products, so they only have another $200K there. Still plenty for most of us.

GIC-Fanatic said
I would assume a TFSA GIC at a Canadian bank is eligible?

A running politician said that, if he becomes prime minister, he’ll allow Canadians to put in an additional $5,000 into their TFSAs each year, currently capped at $7,000, on the condition they invest the top-up into a basket of government-approved “Canadian investments.”  

That reminds me of those high tax deductible investment "vehicle" that govt runs but also with a even higher failure rate. lol
Can't remember the names of those or if they are still available.

RetirEd said
Wanderer: CDIC is not intended to protect extreme wealth, but ordinary people who might be wiped out in a collapse. Oligarchs and the like can set up their own protections.
  

CDIC is intended to protect banks. Banks have an inherently risky business model which is vulnerable to “runs on a bank” and bankruptcy which could undermine financial system and cause hardship across the board.

I would argue that $100K is inadequate given that:

1. Median net worth of Canadian families is >$500K.
2. During “hard economic times” people tend to move money into HISA accounts.
3. That would also be the time when banks become more risky.
4. Bank runs in the era of internet can happen much faster and it only takes a rumour.

Its true that one can easily have $5M net worth without being challenged by the $100K HISA/account threshold. But the question is how many people and businesses are unprotected by CDIC, leaving banks and the whole system exposed. Its clearly a much bigger risk than 20 years ago. Likely to grow fast if/when the trade war starts in anger.

The CDIC aggressively advertises the nature of their insurance to help people understand where they are protected and where they are not. Mutual fund sellers often portray them as "safe," but they aren't protected in the way CDIC does things. Yes, ETFs are very unlikely to go to zero, but they can lose ground to fees, inflation or market drops.

I agree that some Canadians have much more in assets than $500k. They are free to open as many CDIC-insured (or provincially insured) accounts as they can find. Or use other wealth-protecting strategies.

CDIC is intended to protect banks BECAUSE "ordinary Canadians" have few options to protect themselves. The low-risk nature of retail savings is the why banks avoid accepting high-risk investments to cover deposits; there's no reason for those counting on their banks' security to accept risk from people seeking increased wealth.

Real estate is a risk investment, despite the aphorism, "safe as houses." Those who chase higher, riskier returns are not intended clients for CDIC insurance. They can buy home insurance for that. (Home ownership, IMHO, is an overly favoured investment, and those advantages keep housing unaffordable. REITs suck the profit out of home ownership much as auto brokers leech the used-car market.)

The TFSA and RRSP systems are a very small bit of balance for those who do not own property and lose money to taxes and inflation, while home owners benefit on both sides! That's why proposals to greatly increase eligibility room for those plans favour the wealthy, who can contribute a lot more than the majority of Canadians - most of whom are nowhere near to maxing out their contribution room, CRA regularly reports.

Real estate pimps always lobby for "ways to get more people into the market." That inevitably drives prices up if there are not enough homes to go around. Post-war availability of housing to wage-earners (even on single incomes) came about because money wasn't handed to buyers to compete with each other, but because the government backed and supplied money to BUILD homes, not compete for them.

I regularly hear from entrepreneurs complaining that banks will not offer them unsecured loans. That is the nature of low-risk retail savings, whose savers would get no benefit from such a boon to risky businesses.

Oh, dear... we've wandered a long way from the Peoples Trust topic. Maybe time to fork the thread?