Saturday, December 19, 2009

3 Tampa Area CUs Charging Fee Per PIN Debit Purchase

News Channel 8 is reporting that at least 3 Tampa area credit unions are charging a fee for each PIN debit transaction.

According to the story, Bay Gulf Credit Union is assessing members 50 cents each time they use PIN debit for a purchase. GTE Federal Credit Union is charging 25 cents per transaction and The Railroad and Industrial Federal Credit Union is charging $1 every time its credit union members use their PIN numbers.

"Bay Gulf President Bill DeMare said the credit union was forced to impose the fees because of recent losses due to debit card skimming."

By charging a fee on PIN debit, this will create an incentive for their members to use signature debit in place of PIN debit.

It will also help the 3 credit unions' earnings, since the interchange fee received by a credit union or bank associated with signature debit transaction is higher than the interchange fee per PIN debit transaction.


  1. If you believe this story, then I have some swamp land in Arizona that I want to sell you! Skimming does not work with a PIN number! Skimming only works with signature debit! Skimming a card means that you electronically steal the track 2 data off of the plastic. But unless you have the PIN number associated the card, then the track 2 data is usesless. Why on earth would they encourage people to use signature debit by charging those folks who are usind a valid security protocol--INTERCHANGE FEES. Seriously, the only folks these CUs are fooling is themselves. If they really want to prove their point, why don't they start charging a $1 everytime someone uses their PIN at ATM machines? Let's make all the ATM machines signature ATMs? These credit unions who are supposed to be supporting their communities and supposed to be reflecting the interest of their membership are just as disgusting and gross as the big banks now and their Boards of Directors should clean house.

  2. A bipartisan group of senators last night introduced a bill to expand credit union business lending authority.

    The text of S. 2919 had not been received by the Government Printing Office as of this morning. However, a CUNA lobbyist said he expected the legislation to maintain the increase in the business lending cap from 12.25% to 25% of assets and the increase in the threshold of what is considered a business loan from $50,000 to $100,000.

    CUNA Senior Vice President of Legislative Affairs John Magill said the push will again be to use the jobs bill as a vehicle for passage. He pointed out that the bill would creating 108,000 new jobs and permit $10 billion in new lending for small businesses. When asked about the bill’s chances, Magill replied, “I feel better than I have in the four years I’ve been here.”

    Sens. Mark Udall (D-Colo.), Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Kristen Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) introduced legislation.

    CUNA President/CEO Dan Mica used the opportunity to take a swipe at the bankers, who he said are the only lobbyists opposed to the legislation, “the same institutions that accepted billions of dollars of taxpayer money while restricting access to credit for consumers and small businesses, and bitterly opposing well-capitalized, not-for-profit credit unions to lend to their small business-owning members.”

  3. Well, add another credit union to your list..Achieva, formerly Pinellas County Teachers credit union is now charging 25 cents per PIN transaction..nice to see that after coming back from vacation on every other transaction!!! I thought being a member of a credit union had "benefits"..apparently not!!



The content is provided for educational purposes only, with the understanding that neither the authors, contributors, nor the publishers of this site are engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other expert or professional services. If legal or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.

Comments appearing in response to articles appearing on this site do not necessarily reflect the views of the ABA. ABA makes no representations regarding the truth or accuracy of commentary or opinions that may be posted in response to the articles that appear on this website.

The inclusion herein of any link to a website, either in the text of an article or in a comment, does not denote any approval, sponsorship, or endorsement by the ABA, and ABA is not responsible for the content or opinions expressed on those linked websites or related commentary. This content is not licensed to third parties sites and is not affiliated with any third party site. Any reference to the author or this content on any third party site on the Internet is not authorized by the ABA.

It is the policy of the American Bankers Association to comply fully with all antitrust laws. Certain discussions should be considered off-limits, including those that contain competitively sensitive data such as price and cost information, or statements that could be construed as reflecting an attempt or desire to control or influence a particular market or markets. Future pricing or other prospective competitive information should never be shared.