NDP vs. ATM

The NDP has taken aim at ATM fees charged by Canadian banks. At issue is whether or not it is fair for Canadians to have to pay additional fees for accessing an ATM. In the case of using an ATM associated with their home bank there is no question that consumers should be exempt. The problem of whether banks should charge non-clients is more contentious, however a blanket no-charge policy would create a level playing field because all bank card users would benefit equally.

A majority of Canadians pay some form of service fees for the privilege of doing business with their bank, those service fees should include unlimited ATM access for all. Wealthier Canadians already enjoy immunity to many of the charges associated with ATM and debit card use by virtue of minimum balance accounts and other strategies that allow them to avoid user fees. It is only fair that banks extend some of these same privileges to all of their customers, regardless of income.

The banks contend that it costs money to maintain the machinery and network used to provide the instant teller system. Interestingly though, private ATM providers—which now control over 70% of the instant cash machine market in Canada—often charge the same $1.50 “convenience fee” as the banks and yet manage to make a handsome profit in the process.

The banks continue to cling to this justification however, insisting that the charges protect the interests of their own clients who would otherwise bare the costs for outsiders to use their bank’s machines. This argument is clever but misleading; if there were no charges then the customer of one particular bank would be free to use any other bank’s machine at will and therefore the costs and benefits would more-or-less offset.

The banks have also cited the unprecedented growth of the private ATM industry to demonstrate that Canadians are willing to pay additional fees to access cash. This may be so, but it is also possible that the explosion of private ATMs is a response the shutting down of so many local bank branches across Canada. Just as instant loan shops have flourished in places where traditional banking is no longer available, so too do private ATMs fill a service gap for people who’s communities are effected by closures.

It is no longer possible to exist in this country without somewhere to at least deposit and access money. Employers don’t often pay in cash, and the coffee can is just not a safe enough place to store one’s life-blood. However, as we are all aware, banks are businesses first, and their primary directive is to improve the bottom line.

The affordability and fairness of service fees is not a consideration for most banks, other than with respect to how these features translate into their ability to compete with other institutions. This open-market struggle can be a good thing for the ordinary consumer, but if all the banks agree that a fee should be imposed universally there is no evading it.

The NDP’s proposed policies on service fees may well smack of populist political posturing, but at the same time they do address the frustration and entrapment many Canadians feel toward banking fees in general, and ATM “convenience fees” in particular. These small measures will have no effect on the systematic complexities imposed by the public necessity for banking vs. the banks’ desire to remain preposterously profitable in perpetuity, but they do at least tackle a noteworthy consumer issue that can be amended through legislation.

Can Paranoia Save the World?

For the second year in a row, President Bush’s State of the Union address proposed a highly rational reason to reduce America’s dependency on oil without acknowledging the global warming argument. While Bush’s continuing denial with respect to climate change may be seen as ignorant or downright idiotic to a growing number of citizens world-wide who see the environment as the key issue of our century, one need not chide Bush too harshly for his stance.

According to the president the best reason to treat America’s addiction to oil is to stem it’s reliance on foreign sources, primarily in the Middle East, which pose a grave security and economic threat. Xenophobic as this argument appears it is nonetheless a useable one. Any guiding principle that will lead to a reduction of reliance on fossil fuels must be embraced.

The oil industry and rogue environmental scientists (many who probably receive “research grants” from these giants) have done a world class job of marketing the idea that perhaps this global warming thing is not happening at all. Conservative economists too have done their part to ensure that the public is aware that a massive change in our energy policies—as proposed for example by the Kyoto accord—would devastate our economy and send millions to the poorhouse.

While it is true that Canada’s New Government has had to seriously rethink it’s policy of “we’ll tackle the environment problem with a 50-year reduction scheme,” and in the process replaced a lapdog minister with one of the government’s biggest stars, it is equally true that many politicians, industry leaders and citizens continue to take a wait and see approach.

For example: how many fewer cars are we seeing on the streets of Winnipeg these days? Did the mayor and council who killed rapid transit pay for it at the polls? Are there any new houses being built in this city that weigh in at less than 2000 square feet? Has the provincial government any intention of encouraging the abandonment of livestock production? Are there plans to institute an environmental levy on domestic and international flights?

On paper the issue of climate change appears to be the most serious challenge of our young century. And yet, despite the posturing of many Western governments and individuals there has been little in the way of making the kind of monumental sacrifices that are required to curtail the problem.

Bush’s reasoning may seem specious to many outside of the United States, and the fact that it comes from someone who is so broadly abhorred probably doesn’t help the situation. But the major point is that Bush has found a marketable justification on which to pin the need to reduce fossil fuel consumption. True, it plays on the terrornoia and isolationism that seem to be taking over twenty-first century America, but we do tend to live in a Machiavellian world where calculated deception is a far more powerful and fast acting tool than international accord.

The cynical, self-serving policies of a Bush have a far better chance of seeing the light of day than consensus driven, morally based initiatives such as Kyoto. Much as we admire activists like David Suzuki everyday people respond to men like Bush. Weighing the arguments and making decisive moral sacrifices is too much to ask of ordinary people today. What is needed is a man of action with pragmatic and concrete answers that bear little or no scrutiny. While the prospects of climate change may still be debated, and what to do about it may be harder still to comprehend, the idea that foreign oil is a threat to America is a relatively easy sell.

So while Bush’s legacy is in serious jeopardy it has much more to do with some bad choices, or what his sympathetic biographer might label as over-ambitious schemes, than his style. I think it is almost commendable that Bush has found a way to address one of the world’s major concerns without admitting being wrong about anything, a gesture he—like his equally unpopular predecessor Nixon—would be utterly incapable of in any event.

Dr. Nehu Responds

Here is what my African con artist friends had to say in response to my email (posted yesterday):

Dear R. W. McWilliams

A very happy and prosperious 2007 to you.

I want to make it very clear to you that you are dealing with a responsible man who has the fear of God,therefore you should not see my involvement in this transaction as an evil act rather it is a perfect act of God.

Infact I am very glad for your response and also many thanks for your concern towards the actualisation of this transaction I encourage you not to relent your effort in this business because this is not something that took me unaware, rather it is what I have studied properly, I will direct you in every proceedures till you confirm the fund in your position.

I found my self in a society that has no value for any individual that is the Government of my country after rendering them your sincere service for many years on your retirement there will be no adequate compensation, rather they will frustrate you to an extent that you will almost be a nuisance in the same society which you previously served sincerely.

Please my dear, I do not want to take you so far but I want you to know that a strong force compelled me to take this decision to execute this deal because I have seen that the situation of things in my society is not conducive enough for me to stay further and watch my good talent wasted.

These are the reasons when I discovered this opportunity during my auditing I saw it as a gift/compensation from our merciful God and I quickly went into fasting and prayers for many weeks seeking for the support of Almighty God and a sincere fellow who will assist me honestly to realise this goal.

So all I need from you now for the actulization of this transaction is for you to fill the below text of application and submit it immediately to the department e-mail address to enable them start the process of approving the fund.I promise that all this process will take us about 10 working days depending when you submitted the application.

May the ALMIGHTY God continue to guide and protect us in all our doings, I
demand that, truth, honesty,sincererity and confidentiality should be our CODE WORD in this transaction as you can see that I confined much in you as my confident/the reciepiant of this fund till I arrive in your country.

I will not want you to seat on the fund when it is finally in your position. I am Looking forward for your urgent response and make sure you give me your international passport or national/working identity card . Do your best to call me on my direct line when you send the application,to enable me monitor things right here in the bank and be given you feed back,I need your private phone number for easy communication and emergency.

My First Nigerian Scam

The Nigerian Scam is an infamous con that has been running around the Internet pretty much since day one. I'm actually surprised that it is still effective, because it's a bit of a pop culture phenomenon you'd think everyone would be onto. Nonetheless, I suppose it's always worth it for a criminal mastermind to throw out the bait. You never know what will come back. Here is the letter I received:

BANK OF AFRICA (BOA)
OUAGADOUGOU BURKINA-FASO,
WEST AFRICA.
BANK WEB SITE:www.bkofafrica.net

Dear friend,
I am Dr.Samailla Nuhu. the Director in charge of Auditing section Bank OF AFRICA(BOA Ouagadougou Burkina-Faso in West Africa. Forgive My indignation if this message comes to you as a
surprise.As it may interest you to know,I got your contacts through burkina online internet research.

I have decided to contact you on a project that will be very beneficial to both of us.During our auditing in this Bank,I came across some amount of money belonging to a deceased foreigner Mr.Sheu Yuan-dong who died with his wife and their only daughter on February16,1998 in a plane
crash.The fund has been dormant in his account with this Bank without any claim of the fund in our custody from his relation before my discovery to this development.

He was the Governor of Taiwan Central(Reserve)Bank.The said amount is U.S$25.600,000.00 dollars(twenty five Million, Six Hundred Thousand US Dollars).I want you to know that I never master minded the death of the deceased fellow.

Their death was occured Naturally.Please View thiswebsite: http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9802/16/taiwan.crash.update2/

For your information,your nationality will not pose any problem for the sucessful transafer of this fund
to you as bonafide next of kin.

I look forward to receive your urgent reply,more details will be given to you immediately you indicate
your willingness to assist me in this transaction.Urgent respond needed.

Yours truely,
Dr.Samuel Nuhu.

Obviously this is too good an opportunity to pass up. So I've created an email alias and sent a response. It reads:

Hello Dr. Nuhu,

I was very interested in the email you sent today, this is just the kind of opportunity I
have been waiting for. I am very excited at the possibility of making a lot of money! I
would prefer it if you send the information you promised to this email from now on since
my wife is very nosy about the email accounts she knows about.

Sincerely,
R. W. McWilliams

Successful conclusion to the parking lot escapade

Today I received a bank draft from the TD Canada Trust in Osborne Village for $61. Justice was served in the case of my unwarranted tow (see the previous "Missing Sign" posts below), reminding me once again what a powerful tool a well written letter/e-mail can be. I had no notion going into this little dust-up that I would be successful in getting anything other than another classic Disclaimer blog episode out of the whole affair, but as it turns out words can be worth small amounts of cash sometimes.

The Missing Sign, Part II

Legalities prevent me from publishing the response of the bank manager at TD Osborne Village (to the letter posted in "The Missing Sign" below). I will summarize his letter by saying he was fairly sympathetic in his tone but inferred that these spots were meant for ATM use and over-night deposits. He mentions that the signs do say "appointments only." He was conciliatory enough to offer to pay for half the tow, but upon advice from The Disclaimer's un-official legal department I opted to send another letter politely, but firmly, requesting the towing fee be paid in full. It reads as follows:

Dear Mr. Young,

Thank you for taking the time to address my concerns. I appreciate your taking interest in this matter as well as your willingness to compensate me for my trouble. I do believe however, given the circumstances, that a full reimbursement for the towing would be in order.

As you mentioned, the five signs in your portion of the lot do indicate that the stalls are reserved for "appointments only," but logically speaking appointments within the bank can only be made during banking hours. The use of ATM's and night deposit boxes, while valid reasons in themselves for maintaining 24-hour parking spaces, are not generally understood, at least in my vocabulary, to be an appointment. Had the sign said "for appointments, ATM users and after-hours deposits" it would have spelled out the restriction more clearly.

I hope you do not take me to be disrespectful. I am simply pointing out that when I parked my car in one of your stalls your bank had been closed for several hours, and it was my assumption that all appointments would have been done for the day. (Just as other merchants who reserve customer parking in that lot do so only up until the end of the business day.) Perhaps the missing towing signs indicate "no parking anytime," but again sir, it is within the responsibilities of yourself and/or your leasers to maintain these signs. It is unfair that I should have to bear any cost for the negligence of your landlords.

I am hopeful that you will see my side of things and offer me (perhaps in conjunction with the owners of the lot from whom you lease the spaces) a complete refund, at least for the towing portion of my misadventure.

I thank you for your reconsideration of this matter.

Sincerely,

Ryan C. Kinrade

My First YouTube Video

Actually someone else made this video with my camera, but it's from a party at my house, and I posted it, so technically it's mine.

The Missing Sign

Well my first post of 2007 is on a familiar theme, for any regular readers that I may have left (as my posts have been entirely sporadic for the last few months.) This post deals with having had my car towed from Osborne Village on Friday night. Being the vigilant, fine-hating soul that I am I would never willingly park in a spot that even modestly threatened a tow. I would rather park blocks away and walk. So when I had my car towed Friday it was a great shock to the system and sent a spasm of indignation through me. I decided to write the branch manager of the bank who's spot I parked on, to see if he would agree to refund the towing fee. Here is how the letter reads:

Dear Mr. Young,

I wanted to inform you of an unfortunate circumstance involving my vehicle and the parking in behind your branch. On Friday night I parked my car in the parking lot directly behind the Osborne Freehouse. Most of the spots in this lot are reserved only during business hours, and there was no signage present to indicate that the policy was different with regards to your particular area of the lot.

When I returned to my spot later that evening I noticed my car was no longer there. I was confused, because there was no sign to indicate if it had been towed or by whom--I even wondered if it had been stolen. I took a cab home and decided to investigate further the following day. When I returned the next morning I noticed the parking stalls you maintain against the back of your branch, which do have a sign indicating that they are patrolled by Tartan Towing. I called Tartan, and sure enough they had my car. It was then that I noticed that there was a sign post next to the spot where I had parked which probably would have stated (had it not been removed by vandals) that parking in these spaces is prohibited.

According to the City of Winnipeg Private Parking By-Law 6549/95 Section 3. (1):

Any owner, occupant, or person in charge or control of private property who wishes to take advantage of the provisions of this by-law for the purpose of keeping unauthorized persons from leaving vehicles on private property shall erect and maintain thereon signs indicating the identity and telephone number of the person or firm in charge or control of the private property who can be contacted in the event of impoundment...

In short it is your responsibility to maintain appropriate signage indicating that those spots are restricted, and that they are patrolled by Tartan Towing. Of course the towing fee, cab fare, brief moment of terror I felt when I thought my car had been stolen, along with the inconvenience of retrieving the vehicle are hardly worth a law suit, however I would encourage you to refund the small sum of 61 dollars (which is a significant amount to a person in my current financial situation) plus cab fare ($20) as a matter of principle and to act swiftly in the commissioning of a sign to replace the one that has been removed.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Ryan C. Kinrade