An unnecessary evil

Chase Bank recently became the second bank in the metroplex area to enact a policy of charging non-customers a fee for cashing a check written on accounts at their bank. This policy affects me directly because I have made the choice to not have a banking account with Chase Bank or any other place. When I complain about this action, I am continually told that the bank is doing me a service by cashing my check. Unfortunately, this argument contradicts a simple principle of economics we teach our children. It is also immoral because it is an attempt to take away the freedom to choose what to do with our money.

Because of numerous errors banks have made in the past, I have decided I cannot afford to keep an account. I’ve noticed that it actually costs me less to pay most of my bills in person and purchase money orders for those bills I have to put in the mail. Considering the costs that are accrued for maintaining a bank account, I noticed I spent more just for the privilege of convenience. Add the fees I’ve paid when someone at the bank has made a mistake the bank cannot admit to, and I consistently wonder why so many people use banks at all.

The principle of banking is so simple that we learn it early in this country and most of us remember it. Maybe. Perhaps those who make these policies are hoping we will forget. Banks make their money by loaning to people and charging interest. Where do they get that money? From people who keep their money in savings and checking accounts. Account holders have the privilege, so called, of being able to know their money is in a safe place. (Admittedly, a large building with vaults and armed security is safer than my wallet.) They also expect the convenience of being able to get to their money when they need it by taking out what they need when they need it or writing a check.

But that convenience comes at a price. Account holders pay fees for the maintenance of those accounts. Despite the presence of checks, ATM’s, and online banking, one’s money isn’t always as available as one thinks. Further, if you make a mistake with your account, you can’t expect the place that advertises itself as "friendly" to treat you like Uncle Charlie. If they make a mistake, don’t expect them to be very convenient about fixing it. If they do.

Considering what it costs to have an account with a bank, I’m surprised more people don’t take their money out and find another way to take care of their business. Large businesses can afford accountants to straighten things out for them. But I’m not a business.

What really bothers me is that after my employer pays to have an account with a bank, that same bank wants to charge me another fee. And not a cheap one. They take out one and a half percent. That is certainly much more than it costs them to go through the trouble of cashing the check.

Banks already routinely inconvenience those of us who choose to not bank with them. They force us to wait in a long, single line rather than let us stay in the same line with account holders. I’ve had to wait in these lines for forty-five minutes to an hour on a heavy banking day, while account holders are in and out in ten minutes. Banks will be the first to show you that time is money, but they don’t my time take mine away from me. I certainly can’t charge them a fee for the money I lose waiting for the surly and rude teller to check me out. And they want to charge me a fee, after I’ve now lost more time because of them?

Non-account holders are often expected to show more than one form of identification when cashing a check. We are also supposed to provide a thumbprint on the check itself. This is inconvenient, but makes some sense. The bank is trying to insure that the person cashing the check really is the person it is written out to. Fine. But I don’t know the teller from Adam or Eve. Just because the bank has run background checks on that person doesn’t mean I should trust him or her. Besides, my employer ran background checks on me too, and yet I have to provide more to cash a check because I might not be the guy in the photo on my driver’s license. Speaking of my employer, I wonder how many account holders have to wait until the teller receives a return fax from their employers that proves that the signature on the check is valid.

No. I cannot believe that the reason I have to pay a fee to cash my check is because the bank is providing me a service. They aren’t providing me that much of a service. This sort of policy is either an attempt to make more money from people who cannot afford to refuse or a tactic to coerce people to open accounts at their banks. And the people who run the banks know they can get away with this, because while many will complain for awhile, most will eventually just accept the charge as a necessary evil. But the policy is wrong, and it is not necessary.