It's funny to hear banks bellyache about all the costs of doing business. Perhaps instead of complaining they should just find another business. I'm tired of banks trying to justify their greed with BS excuses. Why not just say "we want to make as much money as possible, so this is what you'll pay to do business with us" instead of making up these sorry sounding tales of woe that your poor poor bank just can't afford to stay open without charging you to walk through the door?
For countless YEARS, before electronic everything and even ATM's, these charges didn't exist. Then when ATM's came around we were told that banking would become less expensive because the banks could reduce their staffing. Then in the late 80's and early 90's they started adding monthly fees to accounts that didn't meet ever increasing minimum balance requirements. Then when direct deposit and electronic bill pay became commonplace they started eliminating those fees. Until they realized they could gouge customers further by jacking up fees once again by charging non-customers to cash checks. Of course the stupidity of this policy just reinforces most peoples' common sense instinct to avoid doing business with a bank that would try to extort you into opening an account with them just for the privilege of not being gouged another fee to cash a check.
Banks are not an unprofitable enterprise. Like any other business, sometimes you have "loss leaders" to bring in other more profitable business. Checking and savings accounts are those kind of loss leaders. Most gas stations make most of their daily profit on non-gas purchases. Maybe they should start charging a $5 surcharge if you don't buy a Coke or get your oil changed while you're there too!
I'd hope so, since it's a Federal requirement of the Patriot Act.
Prove it. Cite the specific chapter and section of the Patriot Act that mandates banks take the fingerprints of any non-customer cashing a check. Make sure it says the word "fingerprint" in the citation.
I love how so many people knee-jerk with the "Patriot Act" catch-all answer when someone questions their shady business practices. It's like the car dealer who insists he has to run your credit report to sell you a car, even if you've come in with your own financing. As long as I've produced a valid identification in compliance with the Patriot Act, any further action such as fingerprinting me or pulling my credit for a non-credit transaction is nothing more than a way to bully the customer into spending more money with them.
Bully the customer by charging them a $6 fee and taking their fingerprint often enough and eventually they'll open an account with you so you can gouge them in monthly fees, ATM fees, forex fees, etc.? That's an awesome business model!
I've cashed countless checks and bought several vehicles since the passage of the Patriot Act without once surrendering my fingerprint(s) or authorizing release of my credit report to do so. I simply walk out of any branch or dealership who makes such nonsense a condition of doing business with them. There are always other enterprises willing to do business on an honest level and not demean the customer by parroting the "Patriot Act" lie to try to coerce a potential customer.
I have the luxury and intelligence not to fall victim to this kind of BS by banks and other businesses. The sad fact is that these kinds of policies are specifically targeted at the unsophisticated consumer; the working Joe, the young and inexperienced, immigrants, the elderly. The people unlikely to fight back and who can usually least afford it.