Banco Popular changes its ways

By Felix Salmon
November 23, 2010
post about Banco Popular's ATM fees on Sunday, Banco Popular has been in touch to say that they're fixing things.

" data-share-img="" data-share="twitter,facebook,linkedin,reddit,google" data-share-count="true">

It seems I got results! In the wake of my post about Banco Popular’s ATM fees on Sunday, Banco Popular has been in touch to say that they’re fixing things.

But first, a correction: the charge saying “debit of ATM with flat fee” was not a flat fee after all, despite what the customer-service person told Engels, the account holder. Instead, the $10 was the aggregation of five $2 charges for using five different out-of-network ATMs over the previous month.

As of today, that changes: every time you use an out-of-network ATM, you’ll see a separate $2 fee on your statement, saying “Non-Popular ATM fee”.

That’s definitely a positive change, since up until today, Popular would save up all those bank fees in its back pocket and hit you with them all at once, at the same time as charging its $5 monthly account fee, thereby maximizing the chances of driving you into overdraft territory. That’s less likely now.

What’s more, Larry O’Brien, Banco Popular’s head of marketing, promised me that the bank would put a full schedule of all its fees up on its website. Again, that’s a huge improvement on the status quo, where you’re told the fees once — when you open your account — and then subsequently only on a piecemeal basis as and when they change.

In the case of the $2 out-of-network ATM fee, for instance, Banco Popular customers got a letter on July 15 that as of August 15 they could use the Allpoint network of 33,000 ATMs free of charge. In that same letter — which O’Brien has promised to send me, and I’ll post here when he does — they were also told that the surcharge for using an out-of-network ATM would rise from $1.50 to $2.

Incidentally, this stuff isn’t transparent even to relatively senior bank officers. Enrique Martel, the Banco Popular media relations person, initially told me that existing customers weren’t told about the rise in the ATM surcharge to $2. And even O’Brien said at one point that the $2 charge went into effect for existing customers only on November 8, rather than on August 15. (November 8 is the date that the bank changed the way it reported the charge on its statements.) So it’s hardly surprising that Engel’s customer-service rep got things wrong too. This is why having a public website for such information is such a good idea: it makes it much easier not only for customers but also for employees to get everything right.

In any case, well done to Banco Popular for changing the way it charges so quickly. And let’s hope it doesn’t take too long for them to put their full schedule of fees up on their website.

Update: Here’s two slightly different versions of O’Brien’s letter, and the statement insert. (All PDFs).

More From Felix Salmon
Post Felix
The Piketty pessimist
The most expensive lottery ticket in the world
The problems of HFT, Joe Stiglitz edition
Private equity math, Nuveen edition
Five explanations for Greece’s bond yield
Comments
3 comments so far

Much ado about nothing?

Many banks charge $2 for an out-of-network transaction. It is mildly outrageous (since it doesn’t cost them nearly that much to pay off the ATM owner), but should not come as a surprise to anybody these days.

Engels apparently visited an out-of-network ATM five times that month. Perhaps he should plan ahead to avoid that need?

Posted by TFF | Report as abusive

Transparency includes how the transaction is stated on the bill. And if it is a transaction fee it should be written as such and each and every time along with the withdrawal, not a lump sum. Mine are done that way. (and here in Canada still almost always $1.50)

One thing about an ATM is you do NOT HAVE to plan ahead and carry too much cash in your wallet. It not only can burn a hole sitting there, but constantly pulling a wad of cash is like saying rob me please. I never carry more then a hundred on me.

It also wasn’t much ado about nothing in that Felix tried to clarify and the employee muddled the answer. Having fees be transparent by saying exactly what they are for is the only way to ensure employees and customers understand. The bank muddied it’s own waters and Felix cleared it up.

Congrats to Popular bank for their comments on the previous blog.

Posted by hsvkitty | Report as abusive

Agreed, transparency and employee training/communication are important. And that is the issue more than the fee itself.

Posted by TFF | Report as abusive
Post Your Comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/