Fee Free....Old Citi Sig card BT\cheque to self......NOT HAPPY!

[PLANT]

Hi all,

So I have the Fee free Signature card.
I have been told repeatedly by AFF/Ozbargain members and Citibank that I am entitled to a CHEQUE to self once a year at 0% for 12months!
I have used this offer or benefit before without issue.

Today I ring up to use it again and knew it was a bad omen when the voice recording said welcome to Platinum Card services???????
Once I got through I was informed I can only BT at 1.9% for 12months?
I was transferred to a customer service officer and again informed that, the BT at 1.9%, is the only offer available at this PROMO time?
Would not check with manager or refer me to another officer or "make my request available" as they have done in the past!

Is this the new norm?
Are others being told the same?

 

[theblank]

Definitely not a standard feature for this card ( nor any credit card). 0% balance transfers are regular promos that come and go. There is no pattern and is targeted.
Sorry but you have been misinformed.

 

[casanovawa]

Yeah, I think this is an offer that comes and goes, I just paid back a 0% BT offer that i used a cheque to myself....

Probably even at 1.9% if you went and whacked it in your home loan you could still make a net benefit of it, but i will be waiting for the next 0% one....

I had seen increasingly adds from Citibank about almost like access loans or ready credit at lowish interest rates and was wondering if they were going to do away with some of these 0% BTs, but hopefully they will continue to offer these in the future...

One thing that does annoy me these days, and I was thinking about writing to the ACCC, was these banks that offer 0% balance transfer offers and then slip in a 2% or so 'establishment fee', what a crock, it quite obviously requires hardly any cost to set these up and i think its a misleading way of offering a 'free' balance transfer... I know ANZ does this...

 

[theblank]

One thing that does annoy me these days, and I was thinking about writing to the ACCC, was these banks that offer 0% balance transfer offers and then slip in a 2% or so 'establishment fee', what a crock,

You would be wasting your time. They are complying with the laws by disclosing the fee up front. It doesnt matter that the writing is smaller.

it quite obviously requires hardly any cost to set these up

I think I know where you are going with that, but that doesnt count in this situation. They can charge any up front fee for service they like to create revenue, as long as its disclosed. It does not have to be fair or reasonable. The consumer can choose to pay or choose not to take up the service. If the price is unreasonable, nobody will buy it.

Its only the "reactive" charges that they are required by law to only charge to recover their costs, like processing a bounced cheque.

 

[robtemt]

I tried to call today and see about a retention bonus, and was put through to customer relationship expert. She offered me 0% for 18 months, up to 80% of my credit limit, for a cheque to self. I don't have any balances on any cards, so didn't really want to go for that. I was hoping for a points offer. However, I'm on a no fee for life offer already, so they don't have much love for me.

 

[SOPOOR]

Didn't want to start a new thread. Asking on behalf of a family member who has a fee free for life signature.


With the cheapest to self it seems like it's considered a bt. Is this correct or still the case.

If the account is in credit. And you write a cheque for the surplus are there any fees or is this allowed?

 

[OzEire]

With the cheapest to self it seems like it's considered a bt. Is this correct or still the case.

Yes, I had this situation and it was considered a BT by Citibank.

If the account is in credit. And you write a cheque for the surplus are there any fees or is this allowed?

No idea, but be very careful. Citi read their own TnC to their own advantage. Thankfully the FIO agreed with my interpretation of those rules. I spoke with multiple Citi staff who all gave a slight variation on the rules, hence be very careful.

 

[SOPOOR]

Yes, I had this situation and it was considered a BT by Citibank.



No idea, but be very careful. Citi read their own TnC to their own advantage. Thankfully the FIO agreed with my interpretation of those rules. I spoke with multiple Citi staff who all gave a slight variation on the rules, hence be very careful.

Thanks. That's very interesting.
My relatives account is about to go into credit and they want a cheque written out so I will need to investigate for then

 

[psi999]

Was just having a poke around my citi signature 'cheque to self' option and noticed my current offer had increased from 8.90% (a few months or so back) to 12.99%

I don't carry a balance and only trickle a few dollars through it a month (toll road account) so this is rather laughable. If this card didn't come with priority pass id cancel it in a heartbeat.

 

[DeKa]

Was just having a poke around my citi signature 'cheque to self' option and noticed my current offer had increased from 8.90% (a few months or so back) to 12.99%

I don't carry a balance and only trickle a few dollars through it a month (toll road account) so this is rather laughable. If this card didn't come with priority pass id cancel it in a heartbeat.

If that's a government operated road toll account (eg e-toll in NSW) you should move it off Citibank Visa effective 15 June 2017 anyway, as you'll earn no points from 15 June on government transactions.

Saying that if you're on fee free for life signature card, I think you'll find from July that the signature card is a reasonable earner.

 

[theblank]

Saying that if you're on fee free for life signature card, I think you'll find from July that the signature card is a reasonable earner.

Understatement of the century.

 

[Legoman]

If that's a government operated road toll account (eg e-toll in NSW) you should move it off Citibank Visa effective 15 June 2017 anyway, as you'll earn no points from 15 June on government transactions.

True dat. I moved mine from Signature to HSBC Platinum instead for that very reason. The exclusions are exactly the same for the HSBC Platinum as they are for Citi Signature, but HSBC doesn't specifically and deliberately say "this includes Australia Post and public transport fees" like Citibank have done, so it's been left slightly more vague, so there's a small chance I guess that some points will sneak through. Doubtful I know, but even a small chance is better than no prospect at all as it is with Citibank.

Is anyone else amazed that Citibank have been able to get away with saying things like...

a range of major restaurants and restaurant chains, major hotel chains and flights directly booked with major airlines

and...

selected purchases made at major petrol outlets, major supermarkets and major national retailers

without ever naming what these "major" restaurants, airlines, supermarkets, retailers & petrol outlets actually are?

I find it staggering they've gotten away with this. How it can be left so open to interpretation by the bank such that if they want, they will never have to pay any points at all if they wish is amazing. The whole points scheme is now so opaque and complicated, that for me it's effectively worthless. I won't cancel my card because being fee free, it's still a perfectly good and functional VISA card, but really, that's all it is anymore now. If I was paying a fee for it though, it would be cancelled no doubt.

 

[oz_mark]

without ever naming what these "major" restaurants, airlines, supermarkets, retailers & petrol outlets actually are?

As one of the footnotes states, it is largely up to the classification of the business by the merchant and their bank.

 

[Legoman]

As one of the footnotes states, it is largely up to the classification of the business by the merchant and their bank.

The problem with not knowing beforehand though is obvious to anyone who holds multiple cards. How can you judge which card is most advantageous to use when you have no idea what classification of purchase one of them will use? I have an Amex which come October is going to change from 1:1 points for certain spending to 1:2. How can I compare whether this will still be better to use going forward than my Citibank Signature, when I have no idea whether this type of spend will earn points at Citibank or not? It's an utterly ridiculous way to do it by Citibank. Rather than risk no points at all, I will err on the side of caution and not risk using the Signature card at all since I have no idea where the goal posts exactly are.

 

[theblank]

The problem with not knowing beforehand though is obvious to anyone who holds multiple cards. How can you judge which card is most advantageous to use when you have no idea what classification of purchase one of them will use?

Easy, Use it once and check. If it doesnt work out in your favour, then use another card. Whats the worst it could possibly cost in points if you didnt get the higher point rate the first time.

It's an utterly ridiculous way to do it by Citibank.

other banks are doing it this way too, which suggests that its not. So most are in the same boat.

There is no way any bank could possibly know which retailers fall into the categories. Though in most cases its going to be fairly obvious if a retailer is major or not. I'll take a stab in the dark, that BP is major, the local Matilda is not.

 

[PLANT]

I'm holding the card and limping towards 20K in points to be able to transfer....then it will be Westpac Plat, ANZ QF Black and NAB for payments that don't take the mighty AMEX(Unless I have Visa1 )

 

[Cynicor]

I'm holding the card and limping towards 20K in points to be able to transfer....then it will be Westpac Plat, ANZ QF Black and NAB for payments that don't take the mighty AMEX(Unless I have Visa1 )

Exactly the same! This card is going to the bottom drawer once i hit my 20k. I'm at 18.5 but 2 big dinners should do it.

 

[Isochronous]

Anyone had any luck with Citi BT/cheque to self offers lately?

 

[PLANT]

Nope it's now a myth/unicorn.

 

[Legoman]

Nope it's now a myth/unicorn.

Yep, I'm afraid so. Those days are long gone. There is no prestige in credit cards anymore. They're all pretty much the same now and their only worthwhile benefit anymore is the convenience of consolidating purchases into one lump sum payment each month and the ability to delay that payment for up to 55 days typically.

I've noticed recently that in much the same way as regulating the way ATM fees would be disclosed and charged had exactly the opposite effect of what it was intended and advertised to do (reducing the overall fees banks could gouge from ATM transactions, but actually ensuring that all ATMs would from that moment on charge the absolute maximum fee they were allowed to), that a lot of businesses have started surcharging for CC use now.

Hardly surprising really I guess. All the publicity surrounding regulating and capping surcharges seems to have alerted a lot of businesses to the charge they perhaps couldn't be bothered compensating themselves for previously and now they're making up for that. I've noticed suddenly lots more businesses that previously you would not have expected to surcharge like restaurants and chain/franchise stores of various types are now surcharging for CC use. Not the really big duopoly supermarkets yet, but certainly some petrol stations around me are surcharging now, whereas before the reforms they did not at all. Also noticing a lot more very obvious NO AMEX signs being displayed.

Everytime the authorities try to do something to reduce fees & charges, it has the opposite nett effect.