The fee is waived if your outstanding mortgage is > $2,500,000. So, basically, if you live in Silicon Valley, you are good.
Deze collectie tonen
Wells Fargo charges $15 for an incoming wire transfer because, as everyone knows, that is how much a database transaction costs if you use Oracle with more than 2 cores.
-
-
Bedankt, Twitter gebruikt dit om je tijdlijn te verbeteren. Ongedaan makenOngedaan maken
-
-
-
Is it possible that incoming wire transfers still get human verification and consent? There are some complex rules that are not always automated about money movement, especially if international.
-
No. Also this was domestic. In Europe you can make instant, free wire transfers between all bank accounts and everyone does it all the time since the 90s. The state of affairs in the US is just a choice to generate maximum revenue until the point of certain disruption.
-
I talked with
@matthewsinclair a while back about this; seems like it wasn’t quite so simple? Matt maybe you have thoughts? -
The only reasons for this are inertia and ignorance. Get into
@RevolutApp@TransferWise or any of the challenger banks. Uplift fees are the retail banks dirty little secret. -
Those are for international transfers, which were really bad in Europe and US. Wells Fargo is charging $10 for incoming *domestic* wire. That's truly unconscionable.
-
Oh wow. That is insane. What about
@dwolla ? -
Dwolla uses ACH transactions going to a business. ACH was built on checks, with all the same issues. ACH can be returned for non-sufficient funds after it's entered. ACH can be reversed later for fraud.
-
BTW: are you saying that fraud reversal and NSF are *bad* things? Or did I miss something? Recourse (in all its flavours) is a tricky problem for immediate payments.
- Nog 2 antwoorden
Nieuw gesprek -
-
-
They charge you $15 to pass on the financial risk of fraud from an instant transaction. When someone steals your grandmas life savings via wire transfer, those fees help reverse the mistake.
-
The solution to that is 2 factor authentication not $15.
-
As a programmer I agree with you on some level and yet also understand that the reality and legacy of the financial system makes things a lot more complicated than that. I think a lot of times devs think “I could build that in a weekend” but don’t understand all the complications
-
Passing on the cost of their technical debt to captive consumers is parasitic and hostile, not something rational people should accept on face value.
-
All of Europe (much more complicated ecosystem) was able to do it in the 90s. So
@omarqazi’s argument is fine. Just in the wrong decade. -
Well even US banks have Zelle now for free instant bank to bank transfers. So yes, there’s clearly a technical solution to the problem. I just like to play devils advocate when is see people complaining on Twitter
- Nog 4 antwoorden
Nieuw gesprek -
-
-
I would be happy to look into your fee concern further for you. When you have a chance, please DM us your full name, address, and best phone number (no account numbers). Thanks. ^TL
-
Happy to have the conversation in the open: Why do you charge $15 for something that costs roughly $0.0001? And why, when I complain, do you give back the money right away and promise to stop doing it?
-
To be fair, pretty much every bank I've dealt with charges 15 for wore transfers. In fact I have seen it be 15 on both ends for the sender and receiver. But yea it's bs as is the ach system.
Einde van gesprek
Nieuw gesprek -
Het laden lijkt wat langer te duren.
Twitter is mogelijk overbelast of ondervindt een tijdelijke onderbreking. Probeer het opnieuw of bekijk de Twitter-status voor meer informatie.