Bankwest Transaction account [General Discussion]

[neon_crossing]

I can confirm the refresh method is now working again.

 

[coles525]

Seems to be working ok with me now also.

 

[ramamba]

Subscribing - the last few pages have been entertaining!

I went even further, and signed up after years of lurking around

Hello, World!

 

[ETA_2022]

I'm making payments using Westpac's payway payment system and I need a way to make a macro pause, so I can I enter the 5 digit security code, before it continues to process (loop) the macro?

Any help would be appreciated.

Don't worry. I've discovered the PROMPT command - it's exactly what I need - perhaps others will find it useful too.

 

[coles525]

Change it to 3 seconds?

 

[Cephalopod]

Lets get back on topic guys instead of jumping on Rick's back.

Has anyone been having a little trouble with the telstra transactions? I am finding my macro stuffing up because I am getting the 'second tranacation in 48 hours' screen intermittently not coming up and screwing up the flow of the macro.

I get random issues with Telstra.

I don't use the macro anymore though - I run a python script. It determines whether the 48 hour screen comes up and if it does responds appropriately.

It does not fix all errors though so I have it run twice. If a card declines more than 3 times it's removed from the "cycle" so on the second run any cards which potentially have already done their 50 trans will only try again 3 times.

I'm happy to share my python script with people but you need to install python first:
How to Install Python on Windows

 

[Nerv]

Long time Members of this Forum would likely know my first name.

But I'm waiting for a PM to advise of my full name, and DOB, as able to be identified from "a two minute search".

Geez, how far off topic is this ??

Do any of you REALLY think that anything I've done, has made any difference to your own ( if any ) BW accounts ??

How do any of you draw the line ?? Was 50 transactions a day ok ?? Or, was it the 'value' of the transactions ??

I think BW objected to one cent transactions, in principle. I would wonder if ten one cent transactions a day would have attracted attention ??

I also thought, that others would have been interested in my experience of dealing with BW in this regard.

Very disappointed in a 'theme' that presents here ...

Certainly not the 'spirit' of the Forum I would prefer ...

Kudos earning a few thousand points, but I'm sure you could find better ways to spend your time. Maximising the use of an account to earn more points is one thing, but valuing your time at 1800 points per hour is crazy. There are lots of hints on this forum about how to get the most from points, but going so far they shut your account is not cool.

I'm surprised Coles didn't ask you to leave and refuse to accept your payment. The cost of accepting your 1c payment is far greater than the expense of 5 points. Take a look at how much it costs to process card payments as a small business and you begin to see who is paying for reward points - although I suspect you don't care. If I was the manager at your local Coles I'd tell you to leave and not accept your payment - they're under no legal obligation to accept your payment and have the right to refuse your 1c payments - read the government rules on this. Regarding your dispute with the bank, I would recommend walking away and getting a job where you can fly for work and earn a real amount of points (stop dealing in chump change and aim for the stars). Hours spent trying to get a few thousand points is insane and the very reason the bank account works so well - it preys on people who give an irrational value to points.

I'm not surprised your account has been closed. I'm sure, like me, bankwest is more perplexed at the odd behaviour than concerned that you cost them $60 in points. To me, it looks like the account is designed to make people use the account for everyday purchases and salary payments. Some people will breakdown their milk and bread purchases into 2 or 3 payments and I'm sure this would be encouraged. The type of purchasing behaviour where someone does hundreds each day, however, would be an outlier and I suspect has actually generated heat from their business bank who has to deal with merchants calling up and saying they just spend a hundred in bank fees processing a $5 purchase (imagine the cost of processing 500 transactions where each transaction costs 20cents {not suggesting coles doesn't have a better deal than the average small business}).

 

[ETA_2022]

... The cost of accepting your 1c payment is far greater than the expense of 5 points. Take a look at how much it costs to process card payments as a small business and you begin to see who is paying for reward points - although I suspect you don't care. If I was the manager at your local Coles I'd tell you to leave and not accept your payment ...

... The type of purchasing behaviour where someone does hundreds each day, however, would be an outlier and I suspect has actually generated heat from their business bank who has to deal with merchants calling up and saying they just spend a hundred in bank fees processing a $5 purchase (imagine the cost of processing 500 transactions where each transaction costs 20cents {not suggesting coles doesn't have a better deal than the average small business}).

I doubt anyone is doing this with a small business. Coles, Telstra & Woolworths are definitely not small, nor is Optus, Transurban or most energy retailers, so I'm not sure that the payment processing fees incurred by a small business are relevant.

Having said that, a business of any size has the right to do any of the following:

• introduce a payment processing fee to make smaller payments uneconomic for the customer
• introduce a minimum payment amount (across the entire business, not for one customer) to prevent smaller payments
• show the cost of processing the payment on the receipt, so that the customer is aware of the cost of processing their payment.

I know that I, as one who doesn't run a business, have little idea of the payment processing fees that are incurred by a business, except that most businesses I deal with, if they charge a payment processing fee, charge a percentage of the purchase amount. So I might reasonably conclude that the payment processing fee incurred by the business on a 1¢ payment, would be 0.01¢, 0.015¢, 0.02¢ or even 0.03¢, except at Qantas, Jetstar & Virgin Australia where it's around $7 or $8.

That is why making people aware of the cost of processing their payment is most useful, as people can self regulate when fully informed (who knew that a payment using a platinum card costs more to process than a standard card). However if that doesn't achieve the desired result, then introduce a payment processing fee or a minimum payment amount.

Banning a customer doesn't seem like a good business decision in a world full of social media, where that customer may tell everyone, loudly, about this unfair business that screws their customers (don't we all think it was the other person or business who caused the problem), so they may lose more business ($'s) than the processing of hundreds of 1¢ payments cost them.

 

[Cephalopod]

It's actually against MasterCards rules to implement minimum purchase amounts in actual stores. Obviously a ton of merchants ignore this.

Not sure whether the same rule applies online.

If one of my mates complained a bank kicked them out for making 1000 1c transactions to obtain huge frequent flyer points I wouldn't actually care so the social media/marketing aspect is largely irrelevant. The types of customers a bank or business would lose from listening to this word of mouth complaint are probably customers they don't actually want in the first place

 

[Rick93]

For those who are interested .... ( and if you are not - then I don't care for you EITHER ! )

In Bankwest's letter to me, in response to a complaint made to the Financial Ombudsman Service ( FOS ), they stated the following:

'The circumstances that led to the closure of your account was the unusual use of your account to make multiple consecutive payment transactions at a very low rate, some at one cent each, for payments ( such as purchases at Coles ) that would ordinarily be paid by one transaction'.

As I previously mentioned, after speaking to a Bankwest representative, they seem to have had no idea, that Coles 'permitted' one cent transactions via their self-service check out machines.

I am proceeding against Bankwest for a 'settlement'.

 

[coles525]

I personally would be interested in updates, even if it's dpne via PM.

Not our (the user) problem for following all the rules from the supplier (BW) and biller (phone, internet, toll road etc....).

 

[N860CR]

In my experiences with the FOS... Just take whatever Bankwest offer as their "gesture of good faith". You'll get nothing from the FOS if they make a decision. They always side with the financial provider and, regardless, it will drag out for a year at least.

I had a very good case against AAMI (regarding them inflating renewal policy prices) and it dragged from November 13 to December 14 (with AAMI not making contact at all during the process) before the FOS announced "we're not continuing" for some petty reason along the lines of "no such policy exists at the price their advertising hence you're actually no worse off".

I've had the same issue with a solid complaint against Citi (a credit card product that was misrepresented by the call centre worker) and the FOS have clearly been worded up by Citi with exactly what to ask to try to catch me out. I can sense another "you're no worse off as the product they told you about doesn't actually exist" thing coming on...

The whole things a joke.

 

[Cephalopod]

In my experiences with the FOS... Just take whatever Bankwest offer as their "gesture of good faith". You'll get nothing from the FOS if they make a decision. They always side with the financial provider and, regardless, it will drag out for a year at least.

I had a very good case against AAMI (regarding them inflating renewal policy prices) and it dragged from November 13 to December 14 (with AAMI not making contact at all during the process) before the FOS announced "we're not continuing" for some petty reason along the lines of "no such policy exists at the price their advertising hence you're actually no worse off".

I've had the same issue with a solid complaint against Citi (a credit card product that was misrepresented by the call centre worker) and the FOS have clearly been worded up by Citi with exactly what to ask to try to catch me out. I can sense another "you're no worse off as the product they told you about doesn't actually exist" thing coming on...

The whole things a joke.

Sounds like your first complaint was dismissed appropriately. FOS clearly state:

the level of an insurance premium charged for a general insurance product or the application of rating factors in determining a premium, unless the dispute concerns non disclosure, misrepresentation or incorrect application of the premium.

The amount of a renewal clearly falls outside of this bounds.

FOS is very clearly on the side of the consumer. I worked in banking for 6 years. They never ruled on the side of the institution - not once, in my entire time in banking.

It's going to be amusing though because whilst FOS is on the side of the consumer they will rule against the consumer when justified and it will not surprise me if BankWest take the points accrued off "Rick" and then FOS agrees because we are in the wrong, without a doubt.

 

[ETA_2022]

(imagine the cost of processing 500 transactions where each transaction costs 20cents {not suggesting coles doesn't have a better deal than the average small business}).

Does anyone know what a $450 credit card payment would cost a business in payment processing fees, if a 1¢ payment costs 20¢?

(for anyone that's interested, [Alt]+0162 = ¢)

 

[markis10]

Does anyone know what a $450 credit card payment would cost a business in payment processing fees, if a 1¢ payment costs 20¢?

(for anyone that's interested, [Alt]+0162 = ¢)

It's not unusual for a business to have its merchant fees based on average sale, getting a lot 1c transactions would lower the average and up the fees

 

[Cephalopod]

It's not unusual for a business to have its merchant fees based on average sale, getting a lot 1c transactions would lower the average and up the fees

Agree with this answer.

It's usually done based on average sales or a flat rate.

 

[danwell]

Bugger the points... I'm just enjoying finally being able to stick it Telstra in some way. After years of cough customer service, inflated prices and products often unfit for use, I'm glad I'm costing them more than I'm making them for a while

 

[N860CR]

Bankwest Transaction account 10K QFF promo [Back on offer till Oct 31]

Sounds like your first complaint was dismissed appropriately. FOS clearly state:



The amount of a renewal clearly falls outside of this bounds.

FOS is very clearly on the side of the consumer. I worked in banking for 6 years. They never ruled on the side of the institution - not once, in my entire time in banking.

It's going to be amusing though because whilst FOS is on the side of the consumer they will rule against the consumer when justified and it will not surprise me if BankWest take the points accrued off "Rick" and then FOS agrees because we are in the wrong, without a doubt.

Actually no, in this case it was regarding AAMIs false advertising "safe driver rewards" discount where they jack up the premiums to apply a perceived discount.

My bigger concern was that i raised that clause with them early, advised why I felt it didn't apply, they agreed and it went on for nearly a year before they changed their mind.

AAMI also never responded to me or them at any point, however the FOS continued to extend the deadlines for AAMI. I felt every different person asked the same question in a slightly different was, almost like they were looking for a slip up. The same has been happening with the Citi case (also approaching a year since opening it).

In my experience, take what the provider offers at first contact. It's far less stressful.

 

[burmans]

Sounds like your first complaint was dismissed appropriately. FOS clearly state:



The amount of a renewal clearly falls outside of this bounds.

FOS is very clearly on the side of the consumer. I worked in banking for 6 years. They never ruled on the side of the institution - not once, in my entire time in banking.

It's going to be amusing though because whilst FOS is on the side of the consumer they will rule against the consumer when justified and it will not surprise me if BankWest take the points accrued off "Rick" and then FOS agrees because we are in the wrong, without a doubt.

I agree, the banks are not enamoured in any way with FOS and feel they take the side of the consumer IF you have a reasonable argument in terms of law and/or the T&Cs. In particular they are on the side of the consumer if they feel there has been a breach of the T&C's. In this regard I disagree with Cephalopod because the 50 transaction a day limit he keeps on mentioning is NOT disclosed in the T&Cs and hence any attempt by BW to enforce would be regarded by FOS as non disclosure which is taken very seriously. Having said that the basic premise that they can close an account is in the T&Cs so I think any settlement would be very limited if FOS are involved.

 

[Rick93]

Am I right in thinking, it could go either way ?

Ok, so, can anyone give us all a quick rundown, on what happened with the AMEX promo of c. 2009 ?

The AFF Member who was successful in getting AMEX to credit him / her with some 13 million 'points' ( not sure if QFF or AMEX Reward Points ) ...

I seem to recall, this Member ( and others ) 'went into bat' with the FOS .... AND WON.

Why was this ??