<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Business briefs: Citi slims down &#8230; ATM drunks shafted</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/14/business-briefs-citi-slims-down-atm-drunks-shafted/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/14/business-briefs-citi-slims-down-atm-drunks-shafted/</link>
	<description>now with extra source</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 02:48:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: MA</title>
		<link>http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/14/business-briefs-citi-slims-down-atm-drunks-shafted/#comment-13539</link>
		<dc:creator>MA</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-13539</guid>
		<description>The comment on the new ATM fees and recent media comments by the CEO of Customers Limited are interesting, but I was very surprised at a letter I received from St.George last night.&lt;br /&gt;Not only will you as a customer be paying the fee disclosed on the ATM (eg. $2 example in the St.George pamphlet), but the bank will STILL charge an additional Other ATM Fee (knowing the banks I am assuming this won&#039;t change from the current $2 level - and interestingly the fee was not specified in the brochure)...&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Now someone is seriously double dipping here. As I understand from Customers Ltd comments, you previously paid $2 to your bank, and they then paid say $1 to the 3rd party/ independent ATM owner, which he found unfair as they provided all the services, and so your Bank retained $1.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;So now you pay $2 to the ATM provider (which they retain), and then another Fee to your bank ($2 again)...&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Now who&#039;s laughing all the way to the bank??</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The comment on the new ATM fees and recent media comments by the CEO of Customers Limited are interesting, but I was very surprised at a letter I received from St.George last night.<br />Not only will you as a customer be paying the fee disclosed on the ATM (eg. $2 example in the St.George pamphlet), but the bank will STILL charge an additional Other ATM Fee (knowing the banks I am assuming this won&#8217;t change from the current $2 level - and interestingly the fee was not specified in the brochure)&#8230;</p>
<p>Now someone is seriously double dipping here. As I understand from Customers Ltd comments, you previously paid $2 to your bank, and they then paid say $1 to the 3rd party/ independent ATM owner, which he found unfair as they provided all the services, and so your Bank retained $1.</p>
<p>So now you pay $2 to the ATM provider (which they retain), and then another Fee to your bank ($2 again)&#8230;</p>
<p>Now who&#8217;s laughing all the way to the bank??</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cindie</title>
		<link>http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/14/business-briefs-citi-slims-down-atm-drunks-shafted/#comment-13540</link>
		<dc:creator>Cindie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-13540</guid>
		<description> I got hit by the new atm fees this morning without realising it...early morning, late for work, and needed some cash. So I stopped at the ATM on the way to work. I was still half asleep and didn’t take much notice of what the screen said. Apparently, because I checked my balance first I got charged $2. Then I withdrew $20 so I got charged another $2. A total of $4 in fee’s on a $20 transaction, not to mention that I haven’t yet gotten my bank statement, so who knows what my bank will charge me for NOT using their ATM?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Apparently, a new ‘Direct Charging’ model came into effect for ATMs in Australia on 3rd March 2009. After being utterly p&#039;#%*d off and googling the reforms,I came across this new website -  www.atmfeetracker.com - and thought it might be a help to other people too. It would be great if we can get everyone using it and updating ATM fees they find, particularly those in pubs and clubs that are privately owned, as the more people who use it, the more info there is for others!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I got hit by the new atm fees this morning without realising it&#8230;early morning, late for work, and needed some cash. So I stopped at the ATM on the way to work. I was still half asleep and didn’t take much notice of what the screen said. Apparently, because I checked my balance first I got charged $2. Then I withdrew $20 so I got charged another $2. A total of $4 in fee’s on a $20 transaction, not to mention that I haven’t yet gotten my bank statement, so who knows what my bank will charge me for NOT using their ATM?</p>
<p>Apparently, a new ‘Direct Charging’ model came into effect for ATMs in Australia on 3rd March 2009. After being utterly p&#8217;#%*d off and googling the reforms,I came across this new website -  <a href="http://www.atmfeetracker.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.atmfeetracker.com</a> - and thought it might be a help to other people too. It would be great if we can get everyone using it and updating ATM fees they find, particularly those in pubs and clubs that are privately owned, as the more people who use it, the more info there is for others!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Object Caching 466/476 objects using apc

Served from: www.crikey.com.au @ 2012-02-12 16:00:50 -->
