Some bank charges are meaningless

Its main purpose is to first draw attention to the absurdity of some bank fees and to encourage representatives of banks to discuss the future of those who bother clients the most.

Kadoron is therefore announcing a poll for the most absurd fee. In 2005, the poll increased the fee for the outgoing payment. The absurdity of this fee was proved by the pbh nvtvnka of our portal.

At work, the ten of us agreed to punish an unpolished colleague by saying that we would spend a hundred crowns on him. For every long crown to a colleague, the bank deducted a fee for an outgoing payment of more than 6 crowns from him. The person won 1000 crowns, but paid a total of 6,000 crowns in fees.

After the survey was announced, the banks canceled the fee for the incoming payment. But it wouldn’t even be esk banks not to compensate for the profit somewhere. Simultaneously with the abolition of the fee for incoming payment, eBanka increased the fee for keeping electronic banking in all price programs. Raiffeisenbank, in turn, adjusted the fee for vbr from the ATM and the fee for keeping it here (package).

Among the absurd fees for 2006 was the fee for withdrawals from the bank’s own ATM. In the second place there is a fee for keeping bnho here, in the third place there is a fee for ethnic item. The latter fee is paid by the bank for any movement on it. The joke is that they are often in addition to the bench fee for transactions. For one and that operation, pay the bank not once, but twice. Their absurdity is shown by a post from the Bankovnipoplatky.com portal.

Among other things, probably the most absurd bank fee was when the bank wrote me a positive month in a total of 0.04 halls, which was a change. But the absurd thing was that they deducted 3.90 crowns for this transaction as a fee for the item.