Edit Your Comment

  1. HomerSimpson says:


  2. ThinkingBrian says:

    I live in Massachusetts and I think the state and local government offices should pull their money from Bank Of America. But there aren’t too banks in Massachusetts that offer free checking in the state, however Unibank does because I have it. A state pulling their money might just get Bank Of America’s attention, they charge for just about everything including using a teller.

    • Ed says:

      So you are saying if you left Unibank, they would no longer offer free accounts?

      • ThinkingBrian says:

        Ed, what on earth are saying?

        I joined Unibank because it has free basic checking and its a local bank. But the bigger thing here is why doesn’t more banks offer free basic checking too. And why does Massachusetts continue to deal with Bank of America when there are so many better options. BOfA just don’t get it, they charge for just about everything and they still want more. The best way to deal with the fees is to find a new bank.

    • Lauren-XX says:

      I live in MA, I have no clue what you’re talking about, not a lot of banks offer free checking… I can only speak for Eastern MA/Metro Boston area: Eastern Bank, Century Bank, East Boston Savings Bank, Blue Hills Bank, the Cooperative Bank, and for the Consumerist-favored credit union option: DCU, Metro Credit Union, City of Boston Credit Union (if you actually live IN Boston)

      Those are the ones off the top of my head (I’m in the process of switching my checking FROM B of A) but a google search brings up more results based on where you are.

  3. Vulpine says:

    People seem to forget that at one time, everyone had to pay for their checking accounts–no matter how much or how little they carried in those accounts. Those fees ranged from about $7.50 to $15.00 per month for every! Single! Customer! Business or individual. Free accounts were used as a teaser to entice people to switch banks and later they became more prevalent if you kept a certain minimum monthly balance. For a while, you could even get an interest-bearing account. This was before the big banking meltdown of the mid-80s where all of a sudden people started thinking they were entitled to free checking and Republicans began wiping away all the old regulations that kept banks under control.

    So. If you ask me, put those regulations back in place. Force the users to pay for the privilege of having a central depository for their finances where actually using your money is far easier than it ever was before. Let those deposits help earn real interest again in the 4%-6% range instead of this less-than-1% range we’ve been seeing for over a decade now. Let’s go back to the days were people were responsible for their own mistakes, whether the error is the institutions’ or the individuals’.

    • crispyduck13 says:

      Let me tell you something. My credit union charges 10% interest on my loans with them, that is their standard rate for unsecured loans. That comes out to around $200 a month (I know, I know). So yes I believe I deserve my free checking account since I’m making them so much goddamn money every month.

      This isn’t the 80’s. People don’t pay with cash/checks nearly as much as they do with debit cards, which earn the banks a tidy fee. Why shouldn’t they encourage people to use their “free” checking account so the customer can pull in some nice profit for them every month?

      Where is this 1% interest bullshit you are talking about?? I think you’ve confused the interest banks are loaning at with the interest banks are willing to pay on savings accounts and CDs. Christ, what a joke those are these days.

      • Vulpine says:

        Where is a bank paying you more than 1-2% for your standard savings account? Where is a bank paying more than 2% for a Certificate of Deposit? These accounts used to pay you anywhere from 4%-10%–now they’re practically worthless and that’s simply due to de-regulation which, if you really bother to do the research was written and sponsored by corporate-backed politicians after more than 50 years of fair and reasonable banking due to regulations put in place during the Great Depression. This de-regulation simply set up the factors that caused this most recent recession that still wasn’t as bad as the Depression of the ’30s but was still bad enough.

        Do some research before you toss opinions off the top of your head. Businesses need to be controlled to prevent abuse by cartels (groups of similar businesses working together for mutual profit.) The laws of supply and demand are valid, but when the supply can be controlled across ‘brands’, there is no real competition or balance. I’m not accusing any bank of being part of a cartel this time, but it seems strange that nearly every one was effectively guilty of abusing their customers in the same manners. Competition is good–collaboration not necessarily so.

    • leprofie says:

      I’ve never paid for a checking account, and I’m 55.

      • Vulpine says:

        I’m 57 and I didn’t start using a bank until I got my first job at 16. Free checking wasn’t even available from credit unions or banks until the late-’70s early-’80s at least in the places I lived. I didn’t like it, but I also couldn’t afford to keep a $1000 balance in any of my accounts even after free checking came available. Interest bearing checking? When that finally did come, I received maybe 5 cents a month–hardly worth the effort though it sounded nice on paper.

    • Skyhawk says:

      This is an example of a comment that definitely demonstrates how this country is fucked beyond repair.
      It was all the Republicans fault, right?
      The Republicans held a fillibuster-proof majority in both houses and a Republican President, for every poor policy ever drafted, right?

      BOTH parties accept bribes, er, campaign contributions in exchange for favorable tax code and legislation.

      There is NO difference between the two parties, and until the ignorant masses realize this, we will continue to be fucked by corporations and politicians.

      Stop falling for the ‘divide and conquer’ ruse.

    • Blueskylaw says:

      If I have to pay for a checking account (service fee) then I would expect them NOT to use my money but to keep it in a vault untouched by them and safe. They can’t have the double benefit of charging me for the priviledge of BORROWING MY MONEY, though they have somehow managed to brainwash the American public at large that they are entitled to have their cake and eat it too.

      F U Bunk of America, I hope during the next market crash you circle the drain before going bankrupt.

  4. crispyduck13 says:

    You know what else would be nice? States not allowing tax refunds or public assistance to be issued on bank branded credit cards. That is some serious bullshit right there.

    • CubeRat says:

      The STATE are the ones that want this. By having the funds direct deposited, they save a lot of money.

      When my niece was on unemployment, she couldn’t get the state (CA) to direct deposit the unemployment checks. Then they switched to the BofA card and she was stuck with having to draw all the money out in cash and deposit to her bank account. Or she could have opened a BofA account and transfered the money from the debit card to an account, but who in their right mind wants to do that….give BofA two new (low balance) accounts to ^&%^ up.

  5. az123 says:

    The stupid thing is they really are not changing the fees, they just renamed them and tossed in a couple additional options. Evidently banks just need to give all their money away or nobody will be happy

  6. Laita says:

    I live in Massachusetts. I bank with Rockland Federal Credit Union and not only do I not pay a single fee, I don’t need to maintain a minimum balance, RFCU reimburses me if another bank charges me to use their ATM, and they pay me interest on my free checking account. It’s not much – at all – but it’s a couple of bucks I didn’t have before.

    They have online banking and bill payment options and I’m easily able to transfer money between internal and external accounts.

    They also gave me a preferred rate on my auto loan – which was less than or comparable to all of their competitors’ rates (AAA uses them to offer discount auto loans). So I was happy to give them the business.

    Why anyone would put up with a bank charging them to use their own money is beyond me. But the world is full of foolish people…

  7. frank64 says:

    There is nothing inherently evil with banks charging for checking accounts. I would look elsewhere if my banks started charging, but that is just competition at work.

  8. Hartwig says:

    Why not put the money in a bank which is owned in the state? That way you are supporting your citizens. Pull the money out of BofA, even if they decide to not do the fees for checking accounts they will find a new fee to add to peoples account soon enough.

    • Vulpine says:

      You should read Robert A. Heinlein. He strongly believed that all banking should be State (meaning Federally in the US) operated. Even in his day he felt that independent banks effectively counterfeited by making money out of thin air for loans where only the Federally-operated Mint could legally print money. There’s a lot more to his viewpoint which I highly recommend looking up.

  9. pythonspam says:

    Spontaneous page-centering?