| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 616.1 | | PATE::MACNEAL | ruck `n' roll | Fri Oct 16 1992 17:13 | 5 |
| � If quite a number of people withdraw at other times, did it
� ever occur to them that this is how the members want it to work?
They have other options besides a Christmas Club available to them if
they want it to work that way. DCU even offers a U-Name-It Club.
|
| 616.2 | It's *my* money, after all | FDCV14::DOTEN | stay hungry | Fri Oct 16 1992 21:13 | 5 |
| As long as there's a club I can join to get *my* money when I want it.
If I wanted a CD I'd buy one! :-)
-Glenn-
|
| 616.3 | | SQM::MACDONALD | | Mon Oct 19 1992 10:07 | 17 |
|
Re: .1
Why are you consistently apologizing for the DCU? What is acceptable
to you is YOUR business. If you prefer to take what's offered and
figure out how to adapt to it, then operate that way all you like.
Just because others prefer things a different way doesn't make your
views valid and their views not. Frankly this consistently apologetic
attitude of yours does the DCU more harm than it does help. No matter
what you or I want, if the DCU doesn't consistently satisfy enough
of its members, then they'll go elsewhere and the DCU will go belly
up. I have no problem with any policies or rules the DCU adopts WHICH
REFLECT THE INTERESTS AND/OR NEEDS OF THE MEMBERS and not the
convenience of the DCU.
Steve
|
| 616.4 | DCU's Christmas Club account | CADSYS::FLEECE::RITCHIE | Elaine Kokernak Ritchie | Mon Oct 19 1992 10:23 | 15 |
| DCU's is the first Christmas Club I ever had that let you have access to the
money before the disbursement date (usually October). I had mine one year, then
closed it out. Why?
A Christmas Club is supposed to be a limited access account to help you save for
Christmas (Holiday) Shopping. When I found I could withdraw from it in March
to pay a Visa bill, or in June to buy a bicycle, I then didn't have the money
in the fall to do my shopping with. Compared to every other banking institution
I have ever used, DCU's Christmas Club account has been broken, and they are now
attempting to fix it. I think this is a good thing.
However, this won't make me re-open my CC account. ESPP has a much better
rate of return.
Elaine
|
| 616.5 | Some questions before I put in my $.02 | SCAACT::AINSLEY | Less than 150 kts. is TOO slow! | Mon Oct 19 1992 10:24 | 12 |
| re: .0
At the other Credit Unions I belong to, the Christmas Club program is
run such that you get a slightly better interest rate on the CC account
than you get on your regular savings, in return, you can't withdraw the
money until the end of the program, without losing the extra interest.
It's like a n-month CD except you put the money in periodically, rather
than all at once up front.
How does the DCU version work?
Bob
|
| 616.6 | | SQM::MACDONALD | | Mon Oct 19 1992 11:21 | 27 |
|
Re: .4
> Compared to every other banking institution I have ever used, DCU's
> Christmas Club account has been broken, and they are now attempting
> to fix it. I think this is a good thing.
First, I guess this has to be said again and again. The DCU is NOT
A BANK. It is a credit union which exists for the benefit of its
members not for the benefit of stockholders interested in making
a profit on their stock.
Second, I make purchases throughout the year which are intended to
be Christmas presents. ALL my shopping is done before December 1.
That is not a good thing for me.
Re: .5
> How does the DCU version work?
This is part of my gripe. I am not aware that the Christmas Club
pays any more return than any of the others savings options. Am
I wrong about this? Anyone?
Steve
|
| 616.7 | I love one liners! | STAR::BUDA | We can do... | Mon Oct 19 1992 11:38 | 22 |
| RE: Note 616.1 by PATE::MACNEAL
> They have other options besides a Christmas Club available to them if
> they want it to work that way. DCU even offers a U-Name-It Club.
Because it has a name 'Christmas Club', it must follow the rules that
management decides, not those of the owners? Hmmm, why do I think this
is backwards?
Think about it: DCU is around for its owners. The owners wish to
remove money from an account that does not have any special laws (fed,
etc.) associated with it. DCU management does not like what the members
are doing and thinks that it must stop. Did they ever think that just
MAYBE the members really need the money right now? Maybe members
spouses have just lost their job. Maybe they just lost their job. Just
maybe medical bills just reached a threshold and they had to do
something.
DCU is for its members. Capricious rules and the people who make them
should be thrown out.
- mark
|
| 616.8 | | PATE::MACNEAL | ruck `n' roll | Mon Oct 19 1992 11:43 | 12 |
| I am not apologizing for the DCU, I am merely pointing out the facts.
If you don't want a traditional Christmas Club, there are other options
available to you. I could turn your accusation/question around and ask
why you have to go out of your way to bash the DCU, but I won't get
personal.
I believe the noter back a few is right about the interest rate being
the same as that for a regular savings account. I think that that
reflects the fact that the money is available at any time. I would
hope that if the DCU is going to go with the traditional Christmas Club
account that they too would also pay higher interest as other
institutions do.
|
| 616.9 | | PATE::MACNEAL | ruck `n' roll | Mon Oct 19 1992 11:50 | 16 |
| �Think about it: DCU is around for its owners. The owners wish to
�remove money from an account that does not have any special laws (fed,
�etc.) associated with it.
This is a red herring. If they want to have this type of account, then
they can open one. There are other options besides the Christmas Club
to do this from. The DCU is not saying you can't do this. They are
saying you can't do this from a Christmas Club, use one of the other
Clubs.
�Maybe members
�spouses have just lost their job. Maybe they just lost their job. Just
�maybe medical bills just reached a threshold and they had to do
�something.
I don't see anything that would preclude this from happening.
|
| 616.10 | | TUXEDO::YANKES | | Mon Oct 19 1992 12:14 | 19 |
|
Re: .6
>First, I guess this has to be said again and again. The DCU is NOT
>A BANK. It is a credit union which exists for the benefit of its
>members not for the benefit of stockholders interested in making
>a profit on their stock.
While this paragraph is technically true, it makes sweeping
inferences about _why_ people join a credit union. Some people do join
a credit union since it gives them the "warm and fuzzies" about helping
their fellow employees. Others join simply because it, as a place to
do financial transactions, is more convenient or has better rates than are
found in the other places in the area that this person could do their
financial transactions at. Neither view is right, and neither view is
wrong. (But trying to equally satisfy both sets of people proves to be
quite a challenge!)
-craig
|
| 616.11 | | SQM::MACDONALD | | Mon Oct 19 1992 12:44 | 37 |
|
Re: .8
> I could turn your accusation/question around and ask why you have
> to go out of your way to bash the DCU, but I won't get personal.
I don't consider commenting on an upcoming change that affects me
directly and which I don't like to be "bashing" the DCU. And for
the record, it is NOT the change per se which I object to, but
again, the fact the the DCU appears to be operating unilaterally
again without determining what the members want.
You can repeat your point about other options all you like BUT IF
THAT IS NOT WHAT THE MEMBERS WANT THEN YOU ARE CONSISTENTLY MISSING
THE POINT.
> I would hope that if the DCU is going to go with the traditional
> Christmas Club account that they too would also pay higher interest
> as other institutions do.
This would be the ONLY justification, IMO, for even considering doing
this. Without some compensating benefit why would I want to tie up
my money?
Re: .10
> Neither view is right, and neither view is wrong. (But trying to
> equally satisfy both sets of people proves to be quite a challenge!)
Craig, I agree with you totally. The only thing which is wrong, IMO,
is making policy which is counter to what the members want and if they
aren't checking with us when they consider making the kind of change
we're discussing here then they're going about it the wrong way.
Steve
|
| 616.12 | Geesh! | CADSYS::FLEECE::RITCHIE | Elaine Kokernak Ritchie | Mon Oct 19 1992 12:45 | 24 |
|
Re: .6
>> Compared to every other banking institution I have ever used, DCU's
>> Christmas Club account has been broken, and they are now attempting
>> to fix it. I think this is a good thing.
>First, I guess this has to be said again and again. The DCU is NOT
>A BANK
I thought I was generic enough. I should have said "financial institutions".
I have had Christmas Club accounts at banks, savings and loans, cooperative banks
and DCU.
I'll now admit that the flexibility is good for buying Christmas gifts earlier
in the year. But I think it is too flexible, because it lets you withdraw your
money without giving a reason. Basically, it is just a separate share account
with the same interest.
Maybe they should make it more RSVP like: restrict withdrawals to one per month,
so you could buy gifts in July or September. Remember the old 90-day notice
accounts?
Elaine
|
| 616.13 | | TOMK::KRUPINSKI | Repeal the 16th Amendment! | Mon Oct 19 1992 13:12 | 20 |
| Macneal makes a good point:
DEFCU offers a number of different financial products to members.
One of them, called, "Christmas Club", has certain features that
make it a unique product. The complaints I've heard have been that
this "Christmas Club" product didn't meet needs that some members
have. But that's OK! That product isn't designed to meet those
needs!
It's like complaining that your Geo won't comfortably seat six adult
passengers - GM makes a lot of products, and that one doesn't happen to
meet that need. But GM does make products that do.
So the "Christmas Club" doesn't meet certain needs that some
members have. That doesn't mean it is a bad product for it's
intended use. A better question is does DEFCU have a product
that does meet the needs that a "Christmas Club" doesn't, and if
not, why not?
Tom_K
|
| 616.14 | | PATE::MACNEAL | ruck `n' roll | Mon Oct 19 1992 13:26 | 9 |
| � You can repeat your point about other options all you like BUT IF
� THAT IS NOT WHAT THE MEMBERS WANT THEN YOU ARE CONSISTENTLY MISSING
� THE POINT.
I guess you are right there. I am missing your point entirely. I
don't understand what the fuss is about since you can still do exactly
what you want to do -- deposit money into an account other than your
primary savings or checking and withdraw from it when needed. The only
thing you can't do is call it a Christmas Club.
|
| 616.15 | | PATE::MACNEAL | ruck `n' roll | Mon Oct 19 1992 13:28 | 5 |
| �Maybe they should make it more RSVP like: restrict withdrawals to one
�per month,
There are no longer any restrictions on withdrawls from the RSVP
account.
|
| 616.16 | | SQM::MACDONALD | | Mon Oct 19 1992 14:40 | 39 |
|
Re: .14
> I guess you are right there. I am missing your point entirely.
OK, let me summarize and then be done with it. We'll probably
just have to agree that we disagree:
o First, the DCU Christmas Club has always been like all other
DCU savings accounts with no restricted withdrawals and
members have apparently have become used to it being that
way and in more than just a few cases have exercised it that
way.
o Second, What good reason is there for changing? If they
propose to make it more restricted and, in return, pay higher
interest that's worth considering, but that's not the way it
was explained to me. I quote the teller: "Too many people
were making withdrawals from their Christmas Club." To which
I reply so what, because other than, as you put it, that it
is called a Christmas Club, it's no different from any other
account. So I might ask you rather, what the fuss is about.
o Third, and this is purely principle, we went through a long
fight last year with the DCU because many of us felt that they
were not managing the DCU according to the needs and wishes
of its members. Making a change like this without first
communicating the concern they have and, after receiving input,
making the decision is, IMO, evidence of the same kind of
management behavior that led to that long, unpleasant, fight.
I don't consider this a nit. I believe that it was likely a
number of relatively minor things like this which led over time
to last year's showdown. I hope it never has to happen again.
but in fairness to the DCU so that they CAN meet our needs and
wishes we owe it to them to clear about what we want and why.
These points together are why I brought this up.
Steve
|
| 616.17 | no biggie | SCHOOL::SUSEL | Danced my feet down to the knees! | Mon Oct 19 1992 15:41 | 8 |
| what is the big deal??
if you want to take out your money before oct when xmas club is
disbursed, then don't join one! use any of the NUMERUS acounts
that we, as members can start. This is a nitpick, and an unproductive
one at that.
|
| 616.18 | Give us a reason for the change | FDCV14::DOTEN | stay hungry | Mon Oct 19 1992 19:28 | 14 |
| The big deal is that the club works one way today and they want to up
and change it. I'd like to know why all of a sudden, out of the blue,
they have to change how the account I've had for years works.
Why don't they just keep the Christmas Club the way it is and use one
of their other "many" clubs for whatever they are trying to achieve.
That way those of us who like the account the way it is can keep with
it and those that want the account to work differently can sign up for
the new one.
It's not a nitpick when you put a lock on *my* money when that isn't
how the account was supposed to work when I signed up.
-Glenn-
|
| 616.19 | An existing product can't be changed? | RGB::SEILER | Larry Seiler | Tue Oct 20 1992 08:48 | 29 |
| But they gave a reason: the "Christmas Club", which was always supposed
to be an account that was filled through the year and mostly emptied in
October, was being treated by the members like any other savings account.
Why have a product with a different name that looks like and is treated
like existing products? It would be like Digital bringing out two
essentially equivalent computers with essentially the same price and
features. Actually, Digital has done exactly that, but is trying to stop.
I suppose what people in the current "Christmas Club" want is to have
their Christmas Club deductions transferred to an ordinary account
with a minimum of personal intervention -- surely the name of the
account is not the issue! Fair enough -- perhaps someone could ask
the DCU to automatically convert existing Christmas Club users to an
existing product (that allows withdrawals throughout the year) and
offer the new "Christmas Club" as something people should explicitly
sign up for if they want the enforced-savings feature of a traditional
"Christmas Club".
Enjoy,
Larry
PS: I don't know about anyone else, but what I was fighting for last
year was to put an end to misleading statements or outright refusals to
answer to members -- such as eliminating a whole category of service
(free checking) under the guise of offering "more choices", not to mention
stating that profits have increased when the numbers suggest that they
decreased dramatically. Surely this is in a different category from
asking members who want to make withdrawals throughout the year to switch
to an existing DCU product that is designed to meet that need.
|
| 616.20 | | WLDBIL::KILGORE | Bill -- 227-4319 | Tue Oct 20 1992 09:21 | 21 |
|
Re .19:
Perhaps the underlying cause for complaining about the change is the
off-handed way in which it seems to have been communicated (and
implemented?).
I have a Christmas Club account. The amount for this year has been
transferred to savings. I've heard indirectly that the club account is
changing. When does this take effect? What about the money that's going
in right now? Will the default action be to continue deductions but put
restrictions on withdrawal? What restrictions? Or will the deductions
go to a restriction-free account? Which account? Will the new
restrictions be accompanied by higher earnings?
I don't mind changes if they make sense, but I do like to understand
what the changes are, when thet are implemented and how they affect me
personally. The last campaign was as much about open and effective
communication as anything else. On that count, one might observe from
the Christmas Clug account modifications that little has changed.
|
| 616.21 | They are changing the rules mid-stream | FDCV14::DOTEN | stay hungry | Tue Oct 20 1992 09:29 | 10 |
| When I opened my Christmas club account there was never any mention of
restrictions about when money could be withdrawn. I fail understand why
some folks here think the DEFCU Christmas Club was ever intended to
operate differently. If they didn't let me withdraw from the account
before October I never would have opened it. This is the account I
wanted and opened: DEFCU happens (happened?) to call it a Christmas
Club account. As someone already pointed out, not everyone does their
Christmas shopping after October.
-Glenn-
|
| 616.22 | If they up the interest, it would be a Good Thing | RANGER::MCANULTY | | Tue Oct 20 1992 10:28 | 8 |
| I on the other hand, saw no advantage to opening a Christmas Club
account because it does not provide _any_ benefits except a seperate
account. If they offer a slightly higher interest rate on the limited
Christmas Club, I'd be very happy, and probably keep some more money
there, treating it as yet another place to build up larger chunks of
cash, the way I treat ESPP now.
Peter
|
| 616.23 | :-) | XLIB::SCHAFER | Mark Schafer, ISV Tech. Support | Tue Oct 20 1992 10:58 | 2 |
| Good Grief, Charlie Brown! What do you need a Christmas Club for,
anyhow? Charge it! That's what the VISA is for ...
|
| 616.24 | The DCU ocean | STAR::BUDA | We can do... | Tue Oct 20 1992 11:02 | 25 |
| RE: Note 616.9 by PATE::MACNEAL
> This is a red herring. If they want to have this type of account, then
> they can open one. There are other options besides the Christmas Club
> to do this from. The DCU is not saying you can't do this. They are
> saying you can't do this from a Christmas Club, use one of the other
> Clubs.
The rules are changing because DCU wants them to, not because the members
want them to. If that is a red herring, then you have seen a lot of looking
into the DCU ocean...
Smart marketing sometimes name the same item with different names. Take a look
at the DEC 8974.
> I don't see anything that would preclude this from happening.
Today, yes. Tomorrow on what your need to see more restrictive rules it
is likely to not be allowed.
What business reason are they changing the rules for? That would answer
most everyones questions. Are we going to receive another, 'Choices'
hype about how nice the color black is?
- mark
|
| 616.25 | | SCHOOL::RIEU | Say Goodbye George! | Tue Oct 20 1992 11:04 | 6 |
| I agree with the note a few back. I have heard NOTHING from DCU
about changes in this account. Kinda reminds me of way back when. You
know, remember when they changed the minimum balance on checking for
accruing interest? Remember how they forgot to mention it? Where's this
communication?
Denny
|
| 616.26 | | PATE::MACNEAL | ruck `n' roll | Tue Oct 20 1992 13:20 | 14 |
| �The rules are changing because DCU wants them to, not because the members
�want them to.
Once again we are seeing a few members of the DCU notesfile who claim
to know what the membership does not want. How are you qualified to
speak for the membership? Obviously you do not speak for me on this
issue and there are a few others even in here who do not agree that
this is a problem.
I do agree with Bill Kilgore in that there seems to be a communication
problem. I have had a Christmas Club account at DCU for about as long
as I've been at DEC, yet I've heard nothing on these changes. Did I
miss something in the last issue of Network? Where is the
communication from our allegedly more communicative BoD?
|
| 616.27 | | STAR::BUDA | We can do... | Tue Oct 20 1992 14:52 | 22 |
| RE: Note 616.26 by PATE::MACNEAL
�The rules are changing because DCU wants them to, not because the members
�want them to.
> Once again we are seeing a few members of the DCU notesfile who claim
> to know what the membership does not want. How are you qualified to
> speak for the membership?
I suppose I should post this in response to most of your one liners...
> Obviously you do not speak for me on this
> issue and there are a few others even in here who do not agree that
> this is a problem.
I can think of very few people who can speak for you and of those that
could, they are no longer on the DCU board.
Change for change is not a good reason. It sounds like management is
going back to its old tricks - non-communication.
- mark
|
| 616.28 | | SQM::MACDONALD | | Wed Oct 21 1992 11:42 | 25 |
|
Re: .26
> �The rules are changing because DCU wants them to, not because
> �the members want them to.
>>> Once again we are seeing a few members of the DCU notesfile who
>>> claim to know what the membership does not want.
And once again, you have gotten it wrong. No one has said that
they know or don't what the membership wants on this issue. What
they have said is that if the DCU has made a decision to make
changes to the Christmas Club accounts without first ensuring that
they know what the membership wants then they have made that decision
for their own reasons and not for reasons which have to do with
the membership. I don't claim to know what the membership wants on
this issue. I *can* say what *I* want on this issue and would gladly
have said so *if* I had been asked. If that question had been asked
and it happened that most of the membership preferred the change
*then* I wouldn't have been upset. Do *you* get it now?
Steve
|
| 616.29 | Generic Accounts | PENUTS::WBRUNER | Stats | Wed Oct 21 1992 13:41 | 8 |
| DCU stopped calling this a Christmas Club a long time ago. Same thing
with the Vacation Club, the U-Name-It-Club, and even the Savings
Account. DCU has just been calling them Share 1, Share 2, Share 3,
and Share 4.
But I agree with those that say WHERE'S THE COMMUNICATION!
Bill
|
| 616.30 | | PATE::MACNEAL | ruck `n' roll | Wed Oct 21 1992 17:40 | 16 |
| � And once again, you have gotten it wrong. No one has said that
� they know or don't what the membership wants on this issue.
Excuse me Steve, but go back and read the quote from Mark Buda again.
Your most recent comments on this issue are a bit clearer, but I must
admit that in your earlier replies you came across in much the same way
as Mark did.
�If that question had been asked
� and it happened that most of the membership preferred the change
� *then* I wouldn't have been upset.
Do you know for sure that that question was not asked? There was a
membership survey shortly after the new BoD took office. Perhaps a
question regarding expectations of Christmas Clubs was on the survey.
I wasn't surveyed, so I don't know.
|
| 616.31 | They're statements disagree | FDCV14::DOTEN | stay hungry | Wed Oct 21 1992 20:44 | 15 |
| > DCU stopped calling this a Christmas Club a long time ago. Same thing
> with the Vacation Club, the U-Name-It-Club, and even the Savings
> Account. DCU has just been calling them Share 1, Share 2, Share 3,
> and Share 4.
Huh? My statements have a heading above the section for each account:
Share 1 PRIMARY
Share 2 CHRISTMAS
Share 5 CHECKING ACCOUNT nnnnnnnn
-Glenn-
|
| 616.32 | | SQM::MACDONALD | | Thu Oct 22 1992 11:38 | 13 |
|
Re: .30
>Do you know for sure that that question was not asked? There was a
>membership survey shortly after the new BoD took office. Perhaps a
>question regarding expectations of Christmas Clubs was on the survey.
>I wasn't surveyed, so I don't know.
I wasn't surveyed either so as far as I am concerned the question
was never asked.
Steve
|
| 616.33 | | WLDBIL::KILGORE | Bill -- 227-4319 | Thu Oct 22 1992 14:05 | 7 |
|
<<< Note 616.26 by PATE::MACNEAL "ruck `n' roll" >>>
>> I do agree with Bill Kilgore...
Boy, did that send a shiver up the back of my neck! :-)
|
| 616.34 | I must be dense... | GIAMEM::MUMFORD | Dick Mumford, DTN 244-7809 | Fri Oct 23 1992 09:48 | 16 |
| re: Xmass Clubs
I must admit to a fair amount of confusion after reading these notes.
A Christmas club, at any insitution where I have ever had one, has been
a limited-access vehicle designed to save money for Christmas shopping.
There is no access to the funds until they are disbursed in the Fall.
You agree to that when you open the account. There are deadlines for
opening these accounts. It is a form of forced savings for a goal.
DCU offers this type of account. They also offer other accounts where
you *can* have access to your money, if you so desire.
It all seems pretty simple to me. Other than the obvious opportunity
for some noters to skewer one another as they usually do, what is the
issue?
Dick. 8-)
|
| 616.35 | The problem is quite simple to describe | FDCV14::DOTEN | stay hungry | Fri Oct 23 1992 11:25 | 18 |
| RE: .34
Hello? Have you actually read these replies?
The DCU Christmas club has never worked the way you describe. Just
because some other institution(s) force you to save your money for what
they call a Christmas club doesn't mean the DEFCU has to.
For the last time: the DEFCU is randomly changing how an account works.
They shouldn't do that, in my opinion. If they want to create a new
account to do what they want, that's fine. But I didn't join the
Christmas club for some sort of childish "forced savings plan". Why are
they trying to foist that on me all of a sudden?
If you still don't understand the issue, I don't know how to make it
any clearer.
-Glenn-
|
| 616.36 | | PATE::MACNEAL | ruck `n' roll | Fri Oct 23 1992 12:20 | 17 |
| � Hello? Have you actually read these replies?
Have you?
� For the last time: the DEFCU is randomly changing how an account works.
Randomly? Seems to me like they are bringing it in line with offerings
in the rest of the industry -- if this change has indeed occurred. I
still haven't seen any type of official announcement.
�But I didn't join the
� Christmas club for some sort of childish "forced savings plan".
Then you joined the wrong club. You could have accomplished what you
wanted in other ways that have always been available at DCU.
|
| 616.37 | | FDCV14::DOTEN | stay hungry | Fri Oct 23 1992 12:40 | 31 |
|
>� Hello? Have you actually read these replies?
>
> Have you?
Yes, I have. Have I said something that would lead you to believe that
I haven't as the noter I was responding to did?
>�But I didn't join the
>� Christmas club for some sort of childish "forced savings plan".
>
> Then you joined the wrong club. You could have accomplished what you
> wanted in other ways that have always been available at DCU.
I have no idea where you get these comments, but *I'll* try to reply
rationally.
I did *not* join the wrong club. I've been in the Christmas Club for
many years now and it has always had one set of rules. That's why I
opened the account. The DEFCU is indeed randomly changing the rules.� I
don't care what the rest of the industry is doing. I care that the
DEFCU offered me a particular service and now they are up and removing
it.
-Glenn-
__________
�I will grant you that I haven't seen any official communication
either. With any luck, this is just a big rumor that isn't true!
|
| 616.38 | | PATE::MACNEAL | ruck `n' roll | Fri Oct 23 1992 12:53 | 16 |
| � Yes, I have. Have I said something that would lead you to believe that
� I haven't as the noter I was responding to did?
As much as he did. He's is voicing the same opinion as others in this
topic have. Just because his opinion is different from yours doesn't
mean that he hasn't read this topic.
�I care that the
� DEFCU offered me a particular service and now they are up and removing
� it.
That's the point that you seem to be missing in all of this (which is
why I asked if you had been reading the previous replies). They have
not removed this service. You can still do what you want to do.
People who want to have a traditional Christmas Club can finally have
one. It's really a win-win situation.
|
| 616.39 | Why should I have to change my accounts? | FDCV14::DOTEN | stay hungry | Fri Oct 23 1992 13:06 | 34 |
| > That's the point that you seem to be missing in all of this (which is
> why I asked if you had been reading the previous replies). They have
> not removed this service. You can still do what you want to do.
> People who want to have a traditional Christmas Club can finally have
> one. It's really a win-win situation.
One last try - I'm done after this. :-)
They have removed the service that they have called from day 1 the
"Christmas Club account". The existing account I have that goes by this
name is having it's rules randomly changed. I have mentioned before
that if they want to have a new account to work in a new way then fine,
go ahead and do that. But don't change the current offering all of a
sudden.
The win-win situation would be to keep the account as it has always
been and to create a new account to do whatever it is that they want it
to do. The point of all this in my eyes is why should I have to go and
close an account I already have and open a different account that does
what the first account used to do all along? That makes no sense.
You seem to be assuming that a "traditional Christmas club" is some
sort of industry standard thing. It's not. DEFCU isn't the only place
that allows early withdrawels. Let the people who want to have a
"traditional Christmas club", as you call it, open that sort of account
if they want to. Leave the behavior of my existing accounts alone,
thank you.
-Glenn-
P.S.: And I'll reiterate that this is all conjecture until, and if, we
get an official communication stating that the Christmas Club will have
it's rules changed.
|
| 616.40 | | PATE::MACNEAL | ruck `n' roll | Fri Oct 23 1992 13:27 | 7 |
| Conversely, Glenn, why should I (and others) change our accounts. I'd
be willing to wager that most folks who signed up for Christmas Club
accounts were expecting an account that could not be randomly withdrawn
from.
I've had accounts in a variety of institutions and have never seen a
Christmas Club run the way DCU has run it.
|
| 616.41 | | SQM::MACDONALD | | Fri Oct 23 1992 14:01 | 30 |
|
Re: .40
> Conversely, Glenn, why should I (and others) change our accounts. I'd
> be willing to wager that most folks who signed up for Christmas Club
> accounts were expecting an account that could not be randomly withdrawn
> from.
This is the same issue as is often seen in software engineering:
Take functionality away from your customers at your peril.
Perhaps you and others did sign up expecting that the DECFU Christmas
Club would work precisely as all others that you knew about. That's
YOUR problem for not ensuring that you knew whether it was or wasn't.
Let the buyer beware. In this case, a number of the buyers DID beware
and specifically CHOSE to get into it at least in part because they
could make random withdrawals. For those of you who want an account
with no random withdrawals allowed, Glenn has suggested that perhaps
the DCU could institute a new type account specifically for that
purpose. You could enter into it up front BECAUSE that is a
service/option that you want. That way all customers get what they
want.
You've had a perfeclty reasonable alternative suggested and you
rejected it. To suggest that the rules should change now, because it
never operated the way that YOU wanted it to or expected it to is not
only selfish, but just plain hostile. What is your problem?
Steve
|
| 616.42 | | ATSE::MORGAN | Silence, the sound of peace | Fri Oct 23 1992 14:04 | 24 |
|
I wholeheartedly agree with Dick in .34! If you can withdraw monies at
any time, then this is not a Christmas Club (CC) as I have aways known
them.
*** What is the difference between the DCU CC and the U-Name-It Account? ***
If there is no difference, then simply start using the U-Name-It
account instead. If you (the collective you) don't want to have forced
savings, then the U-Name-It account is for you. The CC is for those
that want forced savings. Two different accounts for different
purposes.
I also believe that if DCU makes this a "real" CC account, then they
should offer higher interest rates. If they were to do that, I would
start putting money into it instead, if not for Christmas, then just to
get the higher interest rate.
-- Jim
p.s. I understand the point that they should not change things out from
under us, and that there is an issue with that fact (if it's true). But
I agree with what they are doing. Perhaps they need two Unameit accts?
A U-Name-It-This and a U-Name-It-That account? 8^)
|
| 616.43 | Sorry - couldn't resist | MUDHWK::LAWLER | Employee says 15000 analysts must go! | Fri Oct 23 1992 14:16 | 9 |
|
>What's the difference between christmas club and U-Name-it?
The fact that _they_ named it... :^)
-al
|
| 616.44 | Higher rate would be pointless | MUDHWK::LAWLER | Employee says 15000 analysts must go! | Fri Oct 23 1992 14:22 | 20 |
|
> I also believe that if DCU makes this a real CC account, then
> they should offer higher interest rates.
Looking at the DCU Rate sheet from 5-october:
The rate for a generic Savings account is 3.30%
The rate for s Standard ($100) 6-12 mo cd is 3.37%
The rate for a jumbo ($90,000 CD) for 6-12mo is 3.49%
Given that the christmas club account should probably fall
(rate-wise) between a savings account, and a CD, I submit
that any "extra interest" bonus on a christmas club
account would be somewhere between Tiny and Miniescule...
-al
|
| 616.45 | | WLDBIL::KILGORE | Bill -- 227-4319 | Fri Oct 23 1992 14:46 | 20 |
|
There may be good reasons why DEFCU wants to change the fuctionality
of the Christmas Club. They may believe that most people want limited
access, and for all we know they may be right (though I don't include
myself in that group). They may see that such a practice will add to
the financial stability of the credit union, and they may well be right.
They may even want the default to be this limited access account,
so that people have to make a conscious decision to move their
deposits to a regular savings account, instead of creating a new limited
access account and winding up with most people just staying in the
traditional account; that may have been a sound tactical business
decision.
The point, the whole point, and nothing but the point, is that they
seem to have made some decision, but they didn't bother to COMMUNICATE
it; and this gawdawful discusion is taking place in the vacuum they
thus created.
DEFCU management still doesn't get it.
|
| 616.46 | | SQM::MACDONALD | | Fri Oct 23 1992 14:54 | 16 |
|
Re: .45
> The point, the whole point, and nothing but the point, is that they
> seem to have made some decision, but they didn't bother to COMMUNICATE
> it; and this gawdawful discusion is taking place in the vacuum they
> thus created.
>
> DEFCU management still doesn't get it.
Thank you, Bill. You've said it best.
Steve
|
| 616.47 | | PATE::MACNEAL | ruck `n' roll | Fri Oct 23 1992 15:25 | 5 |
| I don't think anyone is arguing that point, Bill.
As far as hostility and such goes, personally, I've seen that coming
more from the "I don't want a Christmas Club to be a Christmas Club"
folks.
|
| 616.48 | | TOMK::KRUPINSKI | Repeal the 16th Amendment! | Fri Oct 23 1992 17:01 | 23 |
| We are overloading this note.
There are two problems, in no particular order:
1) DEFCU changes how the "Christmas Club" account works without
adequate communication.
2) Before the change, the DEFCU definition of a "Christmas Club"
was not the same as the "industry standard" definition.
Both are problems. Two further confuse things, in trying to correct
(2), DEFCU introduced (1).
But they are two separate problems, and deserve separate discussion:
(1) DEFCU should not change how an account works without proper
notification.
(2) Some people have a need for "enforced savings". Others enjoy
the flexibility of continuous access to their deposits. DEFCU
should provide products which satisfy both needs.
Tom_K
|
| 616.49 | | ROULET::JOERILEY | Everyone can dream... | Sun Oct 25 1992 21:44 | 10 |
|
Just for the record I'm with the don't change what I've always had
crowd. Some folks just don't wait until Oct. to do all their Christmas
shopping. Just a small question for our B.O.D. members that read this
conference and usually know more than the rest of the members, I noticed
that none of you have stepped in to either deny or confirm this rumor
could you please enlighten us all?
Joe
|
| 616.50 | Back from VaKay... | GUFFAW::GRANSEWICZ | | Mon Oct 26 1992 12:54 | 31 |
|
RE: Note 616.26 by PATE::MACNEAL
>Where is the communication from our allegedly more communicative BoD?
Hmmm, I might conclude you don't believe we have been more
communicative? Have you sent mail, called or try to communicate with
any of the Board about this? I know I haven't received any such
communication. Communication is a two-way street.
RE: Note 616.49 by ROULET::JOERILEY
>Just a small question for our B.O.D. members that read this
>conference and usually know more than the rest of the members, I noticed
>that none of you have stepped in to either deny or confirm this rumor
>could you please enlighten us all?
I have been out on vacation for the last two weeks. That is why I have
been absent in this conference. I know Paul is also out of town. And
since we are the only two Board members who have chosen to participate
in this conference on a regular basis, the perception of desertion is
there. I apologize for this.
I will now be brutally honest with all of you. This note is the
*first* I have heard of these changes. I have a call into DCU HQ to
try and find out exactly what is going on with these accounts. Until I
know all the facts (vs. speculation) I will withhold commentary.
I will let you all know (as soon as I can) what I find out.
Phil
|
| 616.51 | | TOMK::KRUPINSKI | Repeal the 16th Amendment! | Mon Oct 26 1992 13:29 | 19 |
| >Where is the communication from our allegedly more communicative BoD?
>Just a small question for our B.O.D. members that read this
>conference and usually know more than the rest of the members, I noticed
>that none of you have stepped in to either deny or confirm this rumor
>could you please enlighten us all?
Phil and Paul have done, IMO, a great job in communicating
with us. But they do have "real" jobs, and are entitled to
take a vacation now and then. If the other 5 members of the
BOD were also communicating here, then it would probably
not be noticed if Phil or Paul went away for a week or two,
but for one reason or another, the other members of the BOD
have chosen to either write here very sparingly, or not at all.
Phil and Paul can't do it all themselves, I'd direct complaints
about lack of communications to those 5 members, not to Phil
or Paul...
Tom_K
|
| 616.52 | | PATE::MACNEAL | ruck `n' roll | Mon Oct 26 1992 16:22 | 2 |
| Tom_K, since you have singled me out I ask that you show me where I
singled out Phil or Paul.
|
| 616.53 | | TOMK::KRUPINSKI | Repeal the 16th Amendment! | Mon Oct 26 1992 18:45 | 14 |
| Keith,
Even though you referred to "our allegedly more communicative BoD",
and "B.O.D. members that read this conference" (which I took to
refers to Phil and Paul, as they are the only two BOD members
who actively participate), and I did use those words to put my
point in context, it was not my intention to single you out.
They were simply good words to frame my point.
I was trying to forestall the notion that Phil and or Paul
were being deliberately uncommunicative. Sorry if I inadvertently
offended you.
Tom_K
|
| 616.54 | Xmas Club status | GUFFAW::GRANSEWICZ | | Tue Oct 27 1992 13:09 | 17 |
|
I have determined the following concerning DCU's Christmas Club
accounts. DCU discontinued opening new Christmas club accounts
in January 1992.
Everybody who had Christmas club accounts retained the account and
still does. They continue to function as they were originally
designed; regular deposits, no restrictions on withdrawals, a check
(or transfer) made around October.
A replacement product more in line with other institutions is planned
in the future but no date has been set and no details are known at this
time. In the meantime, members can open 'U-name-it' accounts and
deposit funds there. The only difference will be that DCU will
not automatically send you a check (or transfer the money) around
October. You will have to do that yourself through Easy-Touch, etc.
|
| 616.55 | | ROULET::JOERILEY | Everyone can dream... | Tue Oct 27 1992 23:22 | 3 |
| RE:.54
Thanks
|
| 616.56 | | SQM::MACDONALD | | Wed Oct 28 1992 15:49 | 20 |
|
Re: .54
Phil, thanks for your reply, but there is one thing still not clear:
> Everybody who had Christmas club accounts retained the account and
> still does. They continue to function as they were originally
> designed;
> A replacement product more in line with other institutions is planned
> in the future but no date has been set and no details are known at this
> time.
Does this mean that the current Christmas Club accounts will be
"grandfathered" or does it mean that when the "replacement product"
goes on line that anyone currently holding a Christmas Club account
will have to either go with the new rules or close the Christmas Club?
Steve
|
| 616.57 | | GUFFAW::GRANSEWICZ | | Thu Oct 29 1992 12:16 | 12 |
|
RE: .56
>Does this mean that the current Christmas Club accounts will be
>"grandfathered" or does it mean that when the "replacement product"
>goes on line that anyone currently holding a Christmas Club account
>will have to either go with the new rules or close the Christmas Club?
Steve, I'd rather not speculate on this at this point. I was told that
none of the specifics have been laid out yet and don't want to mislead
anybody or increase people's blood pressure.
|
| 616.58 | | SQM::MACDONALD | | Thu Oct 29 1992 14:30 | 14 |
|
Re: .57
OK, for now, that makes sense.
I would suggest, however, that the DCU when considering such
things in the future makes an official communication to that
effect rather than having people find out from local DCU office
personnel. For the record, I did not get the sense from the
woman at the TAY2 DCU branch that she was telling me anything
that she thought she shouldn't.
Steve
|