[The Great Fumar]

Dear Sir:

I am writing to thank you for bouncing my check with which I endeavored to pay my plumber last month.

By my calculations, three nanoseconds must have elapsed between his presenting the check and the arrival in my account of the funds needed to honor it.

I refer, of course, to the automatic monthly deposit of my entire pension, an arrangement which, I admit, has been in place for only eight years.

You are to be commended for seizing that brief window of opportunity, and also for debiting my account $30 by way of penalty
for the inconvenience caused to your bank.

My thankfulness springs from the manner in which this incident has caused me to rethink my errant financial ways.

I noticed that whereas I personally answer your telephone calls and letters, --- when I try to contact you, I am confronted by the
impersonal, overcharging, pre-recorded, faceless entity which your bank has become.

>From now on, I, like you, choose only to deal with a flesh-and-blood person.

My mortgage and loan repayments will therefore and hereafter no longer be automatic, but will arrive at your bank, by check, addressed personally and confidentially to an employee at your bank
whom you must nominate.

Be aware that it is an offense under the Postal Act for any other person to open such an envelope. Please find attached an Application Contact which I require your chosen employee to complete.

I am sorry it runs to eight pages, but in order that I know as much about him or her as your bank knows about me, there is no alternative. Please note that all copies of his or her medical history must be countersigned by a Notary Public, and the mandatory details of his/her financial situation (income, debts, assets and liabilities) must be accompanied by documented proof.

In due course, at MY convenience, I will issue your employee with a PIN number which he/she must quote in dealings with me.

I regret that it cannot be shorter than 28 digits but, again, I have modeled it on the number of button presses required of me to access my account balance on your phone bank service. As they say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Let me level the
playing field even further.

When you call me, press buttons as follows:
IMMEDIATELY AFTER DIALING, PRESS THE STAR (*) BUTTON FOR ENGLI SH

#1. To make an appointment to see me
#2. To query a missing payment.
# 3. To transfer the call to my living room in case I am there.
# 4. To transfer the call to my bedroom in case I am sleeping
# 5. To transfer the call to my toilet in case I am attending to nature.
# 6. To transfer the call to my mobile phone if I am not at home
#7 is required. Password will be communicated to you at a later date to
that Authorized Contact mentioned earlier.
# 8. To return to the main menu and to listen to options 1 through 7.
# 9. To make a general complaint or inquiry. The contact will then be put on hold, pending the attention of my automated answering service.
# 10. This is a second reminder to press* for English. While this may, on occasion, involve a lengthy wait, uplifting music will play
for the duration of the call

Regrettably, but again following your example, I must also levy an establishment fee to cover the setting up of this new arrangement. May I wish you a happy, if ever so slightly less prosperous New Year?
Your Humble Client
Fumar

That's great!!!!!!!

[rshoffer]

Originally Posted by The Great Fumar

Dear Sir:

I am writing to thank you for bouncing my check with which I endeavored to pay my plumber last month.

By my calculations, three nanoseconds must have elapsed between his presenting the check and the arrival in my account of the funds needed to honor it.

I refer, of course, to the automatic monthly deposit of my entire pension, an arrangement which, I admit, has been in place for only eight years.

You are to be commended for seizing that brief window of opportunity, and also for debiting my account $30 by way of penalty
for the inconvenience caused to your bank.

My thankfulness springs from the manner in which this incident has caused me to rethink my errant financial ways.

I noticed that whereas I personally answer your telephone calls and letters, --- when I try to contact you, I am confronted by the
impersonal, overcharging, pre-recorded, faceless entity which your bank has become.

>From now on, I, like you, choose only to deal with a flesh-and-blood person.

My mortgage and loan repayments will therefore and hereafter no longer be automatic, but will arrive at your bank, by check, addressed personally and confidentially to an employee at your bank
whom you must nominate.

Be aware that it is an offense under the Postal Act for any other person to open such an envelope. Please find attached an Application Contact which I require your chosen employee to complete.

I am sorry it runs to eight pages, but in order that I know as much about him or her as your bank knows about me, there is no alternative. Please note that all copies of his or her medical history must be countersigned by a Notary Public, and the mandatory details of his/her financial situation (income, debts, assets and liabilities) must be accompanied by documented proof.

In due course, at MY convenience, I will issue your employee with a PIN number which he/she must quote in dealings with me.

I regret that it cannot be shorter than 28 digits but, again, I have modeled it on the number of button presses required of me to access my account balance on your phone bank service. As they say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Let me level the
playing field even further.

When you call me, press buttons as follows:
IMMEDIATELY AFTER DIALING, PRESS THE STAR (*) BUTTON FOR ENGLI SH

#1. To make an appointment to see me
#2. To query a missing payment.
# 3. To transfer the call to my living room in case I am there.
# 4. To transfer the call to my bedroom in case I am sleeping
# 5. To transfer the call to my toilet in case I am attending to nature.
# 6. To transfer the call to my mobile phone if I am not at home
#7 is required. Password will be communicated to you at a later date to
that Authorized Contact mentioned earlier.
# 8. To return to the main menu and to listen to options 1 through 7.
# 9. To make a general complaint or inquiry. The contact will then be put on hold, pending the attention of my automated answering service.
# 10. This is a second reminder to press* for English. While this may, on occasion, involve a lengthy wait, uplifting music will play
for the duration of the call

Regrettably, but again following your example, I must also levy an establishment fee to cover the setting up of this new arrangement. May I wish you a happy, if ever so slightly less prosperous New Year?
Your Humble Client
Fumar

Here's a high 5!

[MMC24]

Sounds reasonable to me. The only thing I would add is charging the bank a nominal fee for processing your checks. Something like $5.00 per transaction should do it.

[ouma1938]

Great! I love it!

[mr bob]

That revenge was sweet but what was the name of the bank in
question?

[Cassie325]

Originally Posted by MMC24

Sounds reasonable to me. The only thing I would add is charging the bank a nominal fee for processing your checks. Something like $5.00 per transaction should do it.

This was great!!!

[Barefoot]

Jokes aside, this is an interesting query.

I use Citizens for my chequing account because they are welcoming and polite and cheery. And have good apples and popcorn.

I use Bank of America because their CD rates are better than Citizens.
And because they're a huge bank so I think my money is safe there. Even though I think the Customer Service Reps at B of A must have to attend Snarl School before they're unleased on customers.

[MMC24]

Originally Posted by Barefoot

Jokes aside, this is an interesting query.

I use Citizens for my checking account because they are welcoming and polite and cheery. And have good apples and popcorn.

I use Bank of America because their CD rates are better than Citizens.
And because they're a huge bank so I think my money is safe there. Even though I think the Customer Service Reps at B of A must have to attend Snarl School before they're unleashed on customers.

If you had to handle other peoples money all day long, day in and day out and be paid "peanuts" for doing it, than you would snarl too after a while.

[Barefoot]

Originally Posted by MMC24

If you had to handle other peoples money all day long, day in and day out and be paid "peanuts" for doing it, than you would snarl too after a while.

That is a good point! However I'd think the people in Customer Service at Citizens are probably paid about the same as at Bank of America.

The staff are Citizens are normally delighted to help, and I find them extremely pleasant. Too bad their investment rates don't compare.

[Boomer]

Originally Posted by Barefoot

Jokes aside, this is an interesting query.

I use Citizens for my chequing account because they are welcoming and polite and cheery. And have good apples and popcorn.

I use Bank of America because their CD rates are better than Citizens.
And because they're a huge bank so I think my money is safe there. Even though I think the Customer Service Reps at B of A must have to attend Snarl School before they're unleashed on customers.

About that Snarl School thing, you are exactly right -- sort of.

I know a young woman who had worked at a small-town bank as a teller. She loved it there because of the friendly atmosphere and customer service. She got to spend her work day being nice to people.

But then she got married and moved and had to change jobs. She ended up interviewing at one of the big, really big, banks. She was told that in their training, the tellers are instructed to spend the least amount of time possible in an exchange with the customers. In fact, she had the impression that they could be marked down on evaluations if they were too friendly. They were to give a robotic greeting and then get the job done. Human pleasantries were officially discouraged for the sake of speed and whatever else may have been the reason. She was offered the job but did not take it. She knew that she would flunk out of Snarl School.

I will say though that when this bank feels that it is to their advantage to act in a quite friendly manner, they can pour it on. It appears to me that their tellers are instructed that if they see a particularly large balance, they are to ask if the customer would like to meet with an "investment" adviser.

Quite often that person being chatted up is an older person who is just there for a CD. And, of course, those "investment" vehicles the tellers are trying to connect their customers to are often annuities with high, high commissions built in.

It happens. It appears to be part of the teller's job from what I have seen. I don't know if a finder's fee can be involved. Maybe not. But I wonder how a teller's ability to reel 'em in is covered at evaluation time.

Anyway, I stopped this from happening to an elderly person who suddenly was being circled and chatted up when the teller at National Snarl Face Bank saw his CD amount. Fortunately this person asked me about it -- in time. And he went back to an old-fashioned CD -- at a different bank.

Of course, I know that trying to bring in investment clients is part of what big banks do. But having tellers out there as scouts I think is quite creepy.

I do not like big banks at all. Ironically, I was looking hard a few years ago at buying some shares of bank stock. But I just could not do it because I just don't like big banks.

Anyway, Barefoot, you're on to something maybe with that Snarl Face School stuff. I think it might be real. And sadly, I think there are a lot of very nice people who have to play by the big bank rules because they need their jobs.

Boomer

[tony]

Originally Posted by Boomer

And sadly, I think there are a lot of very nice people who have to play by the big bank rules because they need their jobs.

I have heard this about people needing their jobs, too. Like the people who used to call us ever few seconds to buy something before the Do Not Call List, and I used to buy it, too.

Doing something because you need the job is not so simple, really. I know we all have to work, but I hold it against people who are nasty because some employer requires it. It is not an excuse that you need your job. They do it because they do it.

If we are to believe it is O.K. to act that way for an employer, because you need your job, because you are only following orders, then it must be O.K. for a mob hitman to ply his trade innocently, also. Just doing his job. He needs his job.

[Boomer]

Originally Posted by tony

I have heard this about people needing their jobs, too. Like the people who used to call us ever few seconds to buy something before the Do Not Call List, and I used to buy it, too.

Doing something because you need the job is not so simple, really. I know we all have to work, but I hold it against people who are nasty because some employer requires it. It is not an excuse that you need your job. They do it because they do it.

If we are to believe it is O.K. to act that way for an employer, because you need your job, because you are only following orders, then it must be O.K. for a mob hitman to ply his trade innocently, also. Just doing his job. He needs his job.

Whoooooaaaaa!!! Mr. Tony, Mr. Admin, Sir! Hold your horses!

First of all, you lifted me out of context. At a closer look, you will see that the young woman I was talking about did not take the job when she found out that she would have to attend Snarl Face School.

Second, I know women who, for one reason or another, are not equipped to start over when their bank is taken over by a monster bank. Because of their age or insurance or for whatever reason, they may be grateful that they get to keep their jobs. That does not mean that they will be nasty mean. These women do not do that. But it does mean that they may look nervous about not being allowed to be friendly like they used to be. And it means that they will need to follow the new rules -- even having to push for those annuity sales reps. (And I have actually seen one who looked embarrassed about doing so. But you know what. She was just trying to keep her job for those few years until Medicare.)

Attitude is on a continuum. There will always be those who are glad not to have to bother to be nice and there are those who may enjoy snarling, but for the most part, there are those who just have no choice but to do the best they can while following instruction from the boss.

Philosophy does not enter into it. It's the real world out there and sometimes that world is not an easy one for women in low paying jobs, especially for older women in those jobs. And it's really rough when the rules change for them, late in the game.

So I don't know what it looked like I was saying this morning. Maybe I had not had enough coffee yet. But let me clarify here that I would never say that a sell-out was OK. And if it sounded that way, then I guess I had better get a grip on proofreading for content.

btw, There is a happy ending to my little story about the young woman who refused to go to Snarl School. She was just offered a job in a small bank in the town where she now lives. She moved there over a year ago and had taken a different kind of job after turning down the big bank. But now she is back in the kind of bank where she feels like she belongs. (Now, this part is strange. -- I left the house between the two posts I have written here today, and I actually saw and talked to the woman's mother. I had not seen her for more than a year. -- Weird, huh?)

So anyway, Mr. Tony, Mr Admin, Sir, that was not what I meant. A sell-out is not OK. But there are many, many shades of gray in this one. And I guess that last part I wrote, the one you grabbed in the quote, could have been made a little clearer. I did not mean they should be nasty. But I did mean that they may not be allowed to be truly friendly and they may have to do sales pitches. Of course, they should not be snarly. Oh, well. That part of my post sure looks bad hanging there all by itself. I better be more careful with my early morning writing.

But, even so, I also think there is a really big difference between somebody who may not have a lot of job options, trying to keep a job, even though there may be things required that go against the grain, and a HITMAN!!!!

Boomer (Hey, now maybe I will go see if I can get into a big fight about commas.)

[uujudy]

Originally Posted by Boomer

About that Snarl School thing, you are exactly right -- sort of. . . .

She was told that in their training, the tellers are instructed to spend the least amount of time possible in an exchange with the customers. In fact, she had the impression that they could be marked down on evaluations if they were too friendly. They were to give a robotic greeting and then get the job done. Human pleasantries were officially discouraged for the sake of speed and whatever else may have been the reason.

Boomer

Right on! This isn't limited only to banks. A friend who works at a local grocery store said that their transactions are timed, and if they're evaluated as "slow" it impacts their raises. The checkers who are the fastest get the highest raises. I didn't realize it impacted their performance reviews, so now I feel guilty about all the times I purposefully slowed waaaaay down when I thought they were trying to rush me. Yes, I'm guilty of doing that. Big time. Whenever 'they' start talking fast (from the grocery checker to the computer guru on the other end of the line) my contrariness kicks in and suddenly I can't find my credit card or I have trouble understanding their explanations and I need to have them repeated to me, and I just get slooower and slooooower. The faster they try to go, the sloooower I go. Now I feel guilty -- Not necessarily faster, just guiltier.

You would think that these companies would figure out that they're just shooting themselves in the foot with this bean-counting approach to customer service. It's too bad the employees are the ones who have to suffer for management's misguided decisions.