We received the following emails, the first 20th March and the second on 3rd April which we found very interesting and thought should be shared.
Email 1 – 20 March, 2009
I have recently checked my bank statement and have found that I have been charged $2.00 for a withdrawal at the local workers club. I bank with Westpac, but when I questioned the fee was told that it was a charge from the Bank of Western Australia. I was politely put through to Bank West and explained the situation. The main point of my argument was that at the time of withdrawal, there was a change of screen on the ATM which said that I was going to be charged $0.00 for the transaction, so I thought nothing of it and proceeded with the transaction. I thought that the banks have a duty of disclosure to let us (the consumer) decide whether or not we accept the charge. In this instance I feel that I have been mistreated and/or misled as the fee was to be $0.00.
Bank West has said that they will have the ATM checked, but at this stage were not prepared to reimburse my $2.00.
We asked the source to send us a picture if they went back to that venue and the ATM was still showing a charge of $0 and…
Email 2 – 3 April 2009
I have since been back to the ATM in question and the screen has not changed, however this time I cancelled the transaction as I would have been charged the $2.00. I have attached a photo of the screen to make sure I’m not making this up.
So far, I have not been contacted by the bank regarding this matter and I am after some advice as to what I should do next to have this problem rectified….is this not a case of “Obtaining Funds By Deception”?
We have suggested that Consumer Affairs may be able to advise on how best to proceed.
But isn’t it interesting how larger corporations manage to act so quickly when they have something to gain, and so slowly when there’s as little as $2 at stake?
There are two morals to this story…The first is to check your statements, since it seems that what the screen tells us may not always be true.
The second – if the banks are so unwilling to give our source (and how many others) back $2 then it must be worth something…If you use the same ATM each week, because it tells you the transaction cost is $0, when really it is charging you $2 each time (Hey, your busy so you don’t check your bank statement that thoroughly); 52 weeks in a year, $2 a week….there’s a $100 + and that’s just you. How many people use an ATM each day?
The other interesting fact is that the title of the screen says “Notice to INTERAC cardholders only!”… Interac is the Canadian ATM switch network. It looks like the ATM owner hasn’t bothered updating the screens on their ATM to make them Australia-specific.
Does this legally mean that as I know I’m not an Interac cardholder (as I have an Australian and not Canadian card) I could dispute any direct charge even if it said $2? After all, the title of the screen quite clearly says it refers to Interac cardholders only, and hence, not me!
That’s a very interesting point!! I work for the company “Chubb” and it seems as if, the atm is exactly the same & goes through bank west again, the transaction says $0.00 this is in QLD… Is it just me? or could it possibly be EVERY Bank West ATM???
hmm, i would have to say, i think its every bank west ATM, i work for chubb and they have atm’s here in the office.. ATM is operated by bankwest.. and it says the exact same thing that you will be charged $0.00 ?
So in all end, is it every bankwest atm that says this? Also mentioning that there is a sticker on the atm itself that says “This atm charges a feee of $2.00″ but still comes to the point that the screen says otherwise… that sticker would be something anyone stuck on there..
Raise your complaint to the Banking Ombudsman and get them to log it as a systemic issue, then the bank will have to act, and act quickly, and it will cost them much more than your $2 in fines.