After sleeping on it...
I suggest this represents a quantum leap in attitude by Standard Bank. It's time to draw a line in the sand, really.
If it's a case of they want to get rid of cheques, then this is effectively a penalty fee for receiving cheques. That's as valid an argument as saying invisible policing stops reckless driving.
My manager mentioned nothing about banks wanting to get rid of cheques, although he did say they considered them an insecure method of payment. He says this new fee is as a result of the costs associated with processing a cheque.
Really?
Have costs really climbed so much more than the service fee increases on cheques, they need an additional levy to cover the gap?
Or perhaps they're trying to shift the cost burden across payer and payee, in which case we could expect a reduction in cheque service fees?
If either of these possible reasons were actually true, why the big sneak approach? Why the lack of notice?
Just what is the bank's view of business account holders? A captive cash cow or a valued client that should be treated with some measure of respect?
Even if there's a processing cost issue at stake here, I'm reminded of the Raymond Ackerman quote about loss leaders "An island of loss in a sea of profits." The banking industry must surely be aware of the compound effect of having a business account on their books. Most of my employees bank with Standard because I bank with Standard. Their income gets into their bank account that much faster, and many of them seem to care about that.
Then there's additional services - asset finance, possibly insurance products...
Here's my closing thought on this from me, at least for today.
Even if the other banks follow Standard's lead and this becomes yet another unavoidable cost of banking for the business community in this country, there is one thing that won't go away:
Standard Bank will always have been the first.
They started it, and that's going to sit in the memory banks.
Did you like this article? Share it with your favourite social network.