Posted in Generalon May 27, 2008
Dear Wells Fargo,
I really want a bank that just keeps my money safe and accessible. I don’t want you calling me many times selling some soft of subscription package to your many programs. I signed up for the national do-not-call list, which means that I really don’t like being bothered my various offers made by calling me. Just because I bank with you, doesn’t mean that I really want to be bothered by you.
Tonight you called me, hiding the caller identification of the source call. Thats just plain sneaky, and something I wouldn’t expect from a bank that I would like to trust.
If you call me, I will refuse any offer you present. Please stop calling me. I told that last caller not to call me again. If I receive any more phone calls from you that do not directly concern my financial accounts, I will strongly consider moving my funds to a different institution.
July 17, 2008 update:
BOB, in comment 10180, was very nice to describe to me Wells Fargo’s privacy policy. According to his suggestion, I went to their website and found my privacy settings already set to the following:
So my question now is the following? Were my privacy settings always prohibiting contact? Or were they changed by the Wells Fargo representative who called me last with whom I requested that they no longer call me?
The good news is that I haven’t been called in quite a while. Also, now I know that any calls I may receive in the future are in contradiction to my privacy settings and against Wells Fargo’s privacy policy.
Does anyone know where I can find similar privacy settings on the Discover Card website?
Update July 24 Today I received another phone call which introduced itself as being associated with Wells Fargo. When I asked the guy if he was aware that I had specified in my Wells Fargo privacy settings that I wish not to be contacted, he asked me what privacy settings I was talking about, and then he suggested that my system was incorrect.
Posted in Businesson Feb 14, 2008
According to a story on Slashdot today, The SCO Group received $100 million of investment to get themselves out of bankruptcy and back in the forward business direction.
SCO has been in loosing in law suits it brought against Novell and IBM.
I couldn’t think of better news. I mean, from the people perspective, any good engineers still left at SCO might not loose their job. From another people perspective, now SCO has money to pay Novell, so they don’t have to lay off people.
All in all, I think all this means is there is a bigger turkey to roast and cut up.
Posted in Insightson Feb 1, 2008
I think the game of monopoly got it wrong. When there are bank errors in your favor, if you want to be ethical and try and correct the error, you rarely are left benefitted.
Posted in Generalon Feb 13, 2007
One of my readers wanted to know about fees at University Villa in Provo, Utah. While I’m not the authoritative source, I thought I would share what I know.
Every month, there is a $10 communications fee in addition to rent and utilities. A semester parking sticker costs $15. Failing a cleaning check is suppose to incur a $5 recheck fee. Failing a cleaning check twice usually results in cleaning charges which is variable depending on what needs cleaning. Paying rent late incurs a $20-25 late rent fee.
Parking after midnight with out a permit risks getting a boot on your vehicle, which results in a $55 fee to University Parking Enforcement.
Posted in Educationon Oct 25, 2006
After almost two months of work and waiting, I finally found out today that Portland State has recognized me as a resident of Oregon, which basically means that I pay less tuition. I’m glad they were so wise. I would hate to have had to use a picture of my webbed toes in an appeal.
Posted in Businesson Oct 16, 2006
It is interesting to note though that there is no post on any of Google’s blogs about the Google purchase of YouTube for $1.65 billion (yes Marge, billion). I left this comment on another web site, and thought it might be of value here too:
And I am really confused with Google’s acquisition here. I don’t think we’ve seen Google do something like this before. Typically we only see Google purchases that get Google into a business. In this case, Google Video was an already existing competing product to YouTube with very similar technologies. Unless I’m missing something, YouTube has very little to offer Google with respect to technology. Video’s on YouTube have questionable ownership rights and so buying YouTube for the videos doesn’t make a lot of sense. YouTube is a fad, and so I think it would be disappointing for Google to dish out over a billion just for a name. What am I missing? What is really worth $1.6 billion that Google couldn’t do on its own?
Posted in Funnyon Jul 11, 2006
Yesterday I went to see the new Pirates of the Caribbean movie at the Wynnsong Carmike theater in Provo, Utah. When I went to pay for my ticket, I tried to use my American Express card, but was informed that they don’t accept American Express. So I had to borrow some cash from a friend to buy the ticket, no biggie.
So while sitting through and watching the 25 minutes of pre-feature trailers and commercials, I noticed that there was a commercial for American Express. I just think it is pretty for a place that doesn’t accept American Express cards to be showing an American Express commercial.
Recent Comments