British Expats

British Expats (https://britishexpats.com/forum/)
-   Canada (https://britishexpats.com/forum/canada-56/)
-   -   Why Post Dated Cheques? (https://britishexpats.com/forum/canada-56/why-post-dated-cheques-637698/)

Almost Canadian Oct 29th 2009 3:58 am

Re: Why Post Dated Cheques?
 

Originally Posted by Alan2005 (Post 8054860)
I wouldn't make that comparison either; there is no moral high ground. Banks behave in the way that they think they can get away within the regulatory framework they operate in.

Just as individuals do:rofl:

Alan2005 Oct 29th 2009 4:01 am

Re: Why Post Dated Cheques?
 

Originally Posted by Almost Canadian (Post 8054866)
Just as individuals do:rofl:

It's a pity we as individuals don't get given a wad of tax payers cash when we screw up.;)

jimf Oct 29th 2009 4:17 am

Re: Why Post Dated Cheques?
 
I read somewhere that Canada has % limits on foreign banks or subsidaries of foreign banks operating in Canada so it's hardly suprising that in terms of customer facing services or efficiency of back office operations it's behind the UK (and other countries with more open markets).

Also, 5 to 10 years ago weren't the Canadian banks desperate to merge with each other so they could "compete with the big boys on the world stage". It seems they were saved from themselves to a certain extent although not for the right reasons. Weren't the mergers stopped from going ahead for political reasons rather than any particular rationale for a low risk banking system?

Edna Bucket Oct 29th 2009 4:42 am

Re: Why Post Dated Cheques?
 

Originally Posted by jimf (Post 8053604)
There was a good interview on the BBC website earlier this week where Evan Davis was speaking to Warren Buffet. WB put it very well but basically said that companies and individuals in the finance sector have been taking a cut out of the wealth generated by the economy out of all proportion to the value they add. He made a joke about say if a group of people were stranded on an island and grow their own food etc would they all decide it would be a good idea if 15% of them went off and started trading in what the rest were working to produce?


Evan Davis podcasts are also available and worth listening to.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006sz6t

northeast canuck Oct 29th 2009 4:55 am

Re: Why Post Dated Cheques?
 

Originally Posted by jimf (Post 8054906)
I read somewhere that Canada has % limits on foreign banks or subsidaries of foreign banks operating in Canada so it's hardly suprising that in terms of customer facing services or efficiency of back office operations it's behind the UK (and other countries with more open markets).

Also, 5 to 10 years ago weren't the Canadian banks desperate to merge with each other so they could "compete with the big boys on the world stage". It seems they were saved from themselves to a certain extent although not for the right reasons. Weren't the mergers stopped from going ahead for political reasons rather than any particular rationale for a low risk banking system?

You are right there - I believe the limit is 49%. This is also what has held back the airlines and the telcos over the years. The airlines used to have a limit of 25% although I believe that has recently been increased (or is scheduled to be increased) to 49% as well. This is why you do not see "Virgin Canada" here. Air 2000 ran into trouble when they started Air 3000 which they later were forced to offload to Canadian investors and rename it Canada 3000 because they ran afoul of the 25% law. This is one of the reasons the airline industry here is always lurching from one financial crisis to the next (even when times are good). The same with the telcos - there is currently an Egyptian firm trying to break into the Canadian cell phone market but they have the same issues with the ownership rules - I believe the CRTC are due to rule on it this month.

This is a double edged sword. The British government take the opposite approach. Sell the lot to anyone with the cash. A couple of weeks back the government announced it would sell the Dartford Tunnel. The Ontario Teachers Pension Plan owns whole swathes of the British infrastructure. Is this a good idea? Probably not. But the opposite is protectionism like we have here in Canada and consumers ultimately pay the price for this. I would rather see something in the middle.

Yes, back in the 90s the banks wanted to merge. In fact, I remember reading the headlines when the government prevented the merger - on my flight to Britain when I left. This was reported as sensational! A blow to the banks in the name of the consumer! These were very unloved institutions. "Unloved" is perhaps too mild a term for it - maybe reviled, or detested might be more accurate. They had been running a cash-grabbing campaign for a few years with their fees-for-everything approach to banking and had caused huge upset to the general public. So the banks were prevented from merging - but as you correctly suggest - it was for political reasons. People hated the banks. As it happens, it probably saved Canada from becoming one of these countries that has come unstuck with a banking sector magnitudes bigger than GDP. That's why I find it absolutely amazing to come back here over a decade later to find the banks being held up almost as "heroes". They are not, as Alan2005 has shown in his posts. They operate like any other bank - they will not think twice about bankrupting you or repossessing your home if you run into trouble. It hasn't happened to me but it has happened to friends and others close to me. This is why in my view banks are never something to be celebrated and definitely should never be taken at face value as so many people do.

jimf Oct 29th 2009 6:24 am

Re: Why Post Dated Cheques?
 

Originally Posted by northeast canuck (Post 8054984)
You are right there - I believe the limit is 49%. This is also what has held back the airlines and the telcos over the years. The airlines used to have a limit of 25% although I believe that has recently been increased (or is scheduled to be increased) to 49% as well. This is why you do not see "Virgin Canada" here. Air 2000 ran into trouble when they started Air 3000 which they later were forced to offload to Canadian investors and rename it Canada 3000 because they ran afoul of the 25% law. This is one of the reasons the airline industry here is always lurching from one financial crisis to the next (even when times are good). The same with the telcos - there is currently an Egyptian firm trying to break into the Canadian cell phone market but they have the same issues with the ownership rules - I believe the CRTC are due to rule on it this month.

This is a double edged sword. The British government take the opposite approach. Sell the lot to anyone with the cash. A couple of weeks back the government announced it would sell the Dartford Tunnel. The Ontario Teachers Pension Plan owns whole swathes of the British infrastructure. Is this a good idea? Probably not. But the opposite is protectionism like we have here in Canada and consumers ultimately pay the price for this. I would rather see something in the middle.

Yes, back in the 90s the banks wanted to merge. In fact, I remember reading the headlines when the government prevented the merger - on my flight to Britain when I left. This was reported as sensational! A blow to the banks in the name of the consumer! These were very unloved institutions. "Unloved" is perhaps too mild a term for it - maybe reviled, or detested might be more accurate. They had been running a cash-grabbing campaign for a few years with their fees-for-everything approach to banking and had caused huge upset to the general public. So the banks were prevented from merging - but as you correctly suggest - it was for political reasons. People hated the banks. As it happens, it probably saved Canada from becoming one of these countries that has come unstuck with a banking sector magnitudes bigger than GDP. That's why I find it absolutely amazing to come back here over a decade later to find the banks being held up almost as "heroes". They are not, as Alan2005 has shown in his posts. They operate like any other bank - they will not think twice about bankrupting you or repossessing your home if you run into trouble. It hasn't happened to me but it has happened to friends and others close to me. This is why in my view banks are never something to be celebrated and definitely should never be taken at face value as so many people do.

I agree this is a double edged sword, however, British companies own foreign assets to a very great degree also which is good for those businesses.

A particular problem with the foreign ownership of assets in the UK is that in certain sectors British companies don't have the same access. Eg water and power utilities are open in the UK but there is no way British companies could buy up the same assets in France or Germany. It does seem as though the German and French utilities favour their home customers compared to those of the companies they own in the UK.

I'm not sure that the Ontario Teachers Fund itself owns that much British infrastructure. I remember it took a minority stake in Northumbrian Water when the French got out and it was relisted. Certainly various pension funds UK and foreign do own significant parts of the infrastructure though. I think the UK is probably too open in some respects. It doesn't really matter if foreign companies own paint factories etc but is it really in the national interest to have Heathrow owned by a foreign company?

BristolUK Oct 29th 2009 7:31 am

Re: Why Post Dated Cheques?
 

Originally Posted by The Aviator (Post 8048814)
I doubt many landlords would have a clue what tenants are like in the UK. Canada seems to have much more or a renters culture than the UK. Renters seem to be of quite a diverse range of reliability. Having been a landlord, I can say I am more than happy to have left that era behind.

My brother was a landlord in the UK and he had nothing but problems with tenants not paying rent.

I'm the owner of a duplex in NB. I have been let down by a couple of tenants but mostly it's been brilliant. Some seem almost grateful that you rent to them, although maybe that's because the standard of my accommodation is good and I allow their pets.

From what I've heard about renting in Ontario I wouldn't touch it there. Here, one of my tenants has been as much as two months (nearly three) behind and I've trusted her because she actually catches up.

It can be inconvenient but I'd rather get the money late than have to look for replacements, risking a vacancy in between.

Rete Oct 29th 2009 7:38 am

Re: Why Post Dated Cheques?
 

Originally Posted by wizzard (Post 8048477)
In Toronto a lot of landlords also ask for the years rent in backdated cheques, I guess so that they fell more secure in knowing you will pay and not just leave and so you don't forget to mail a cheque or whatever. However while you can do it if you like it is not legal for them to require it under Toronto tenant rules, they can only ask for first and last months rent. They are also not allowed to ask for security deposits or anything similar. When your lease expires and you move out they are also obliged to pay you 6% interest on the last months rent that they have been witholding.


Why would you back date a rent check? Do you mean forward date it?

It is illegal here in the states.

BristolUK Oct 29th 2009 7:44 am

Re: Why Post Dated Cheques?
 

Originally Posted by Alan2005 (Post 8049358)
I wouldn't ever give anyone post dated checks. I used to hear stories about people that did this in the UK and the landlord cashed them early. The bank didn't check the date when they were presented.

I issued a post dated cheque in the UK once (for a utility bill) and the recipient cashed it early and I went overdrawn.

The bank told me that they pay on a cheque when presented even when post dated, meaning the post dating of a cheque was irrelevant.

I assume that information was correct. In Canada it appears there is more appreciation of the intention behind post dating a cheque.

Alan2005 Oct 29th 2009 7:46 am

Re: Why Post Dated Cheques?
 

Originally Posted by BristolUK (Post 8055295)
I issued a post dated cheque in the UK once (for a utility bill) and the recipient cashed it early and I went overdrawn.

The bank told me that they pay on a cheque when presented even when post dated, meaning the post dating of a cheque was irrelevant.

I assume that information was correct. In Canada it appears there is more appreciation of the intention behind post dating a cheque.

Yes it appears that way (from Steve_P's post earlier).

BristolUK Oct 29th 2009 7:50 am

Re: Why Post Dated Cheques?
 

Originally Posted by Alan2005 (Post 8055302)
Yes it appears that way (from Steve_P's post earlier).

Ah...I jumped a page or two.

http://images.sodahead.com/images/po..._3_medium.jpeg

:rofl:


All times are GMT -12. The time now is 8:23 am.

Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.