Featured Savings Rates

Popular Posts

Featured Accounts

Valor Credit Union Adding Fee That Punishes Members with Prime Rate CDs


Update 2/18/2015: Good news! Valor Credit Union has decided not to implement this new CD fee. I received confirmation this afternoon from a Valor official. They will be notifying members with this letter.

Valor Credit Union (formerly Tobyhanna Federal Credit Union) has mailed a new fee schedule to its members that includes a 3% processing fee for additional deposits on CDs with terms over 60 months. The new fee takes effect on 3/17/2015. The Prime Rate Certificate is no longer available so this new fee can only affect existing Prime Rate Certificates. One of the features that made the Prime Rate Certificate attractive was the ability to make additional deposits. Once this new fee takes effect, add-on deposits will become very costly.

Thanks to the reader who found this change and alerted me. I contacted the credit union and confirmed the new fee is scheduled. Below is an excerpt of the email the reader received about the new fee from Valor Credit Union:

Thank you for inquiring about the Prime Rate CD and the new 3% processing fee. This is a newly-instituted fee that will apply to our CD products with a term of more than 60 months, including the Prime Rate CD.

There will be no fee assessed for deposits made to your Prime Rate CD before 3/17/15. Beginning on 3/17, any deposits into your Prime Rate CD would be charged this new 3% processing fee.

You may continue to add funds to the CD at any time, but each deposit after 3/17 will be subject to this fee.

According to the reader, the credit union only listed the new 3% processing fee in a new fee schedule that he received in the mail. The fee schedule listed around 40 various fees. Unless members look through the entire fee schedule, they can easily overlook this 3% processing fee. Many members with the Prime Rate Certificate will likely be shocked when they try to add money to it after 3/17/2015.

Valor Credit Union’s Prime Rate Certificate was unique in that it allowed additional deposits. Typically, CDs only allow one deposit when the CD is opened. The add-on deposit feature made the CD attractive and it helped to offset the CD’s downsides like a long 7-year term and a harsh early withdrawal penalty.

Valor Credit Union’s new 3% processing fee on additional deposits will essentially negate the benefit of making add-on deposits. The Prime Rate Certificate had an interest rate of 3%. Thus, it will take about a year for additional deposits to earn enough interest to cover the processing fee.

Valor Credit Union may claim that the original terms of the Prime Rate Certificate are being maintained since add-on deposits are still allowed. However, the new processing fee has a material impact on the Prime Rate Certificate’s value. It’s similar to the impact of increasing an early withdrawal penalty. If this fee had been specified to members before the CD was purchased, fewer members would have opened it.

This is another case of a credit union retroactively changing the terms of its CDs. It’s similar to the cases when Fort Knox Federal Credit Union and CEFCU increased their early withdrawal penalties on existing CDs. Both of these credit unions claimed that their member agreements gave them the right to change the fee schedule at any time. The only limitation is that they must notify members of the changes within 30 days of the changes taking effect.

Even if these credit unions believe that making these changes isn’t breaking any rules, the changes are sneaky and unfair in my opinion. I wonder what the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) would think. The following is an excerpt from the CFPB’s "about us" page describing their mission:

ensuring that consumers get the information they need to make the financial decisions they believe are best for themselves and their families—that prices are clear up front, that risks are visible, and that nothing is buried in fine print.

In my opinion, Valor members didn’t get the information they needed when they opened the CD. There was no indication that additional deposits would be charged a 3% fee. If a credit union can charge fees on deposits into a CD, what stops a credit union from adding a withdrawal fee when a CD matures?

Related Pages: Valor Federal Credit Union, Wilkes Barre

Related Posts

Interested Party
Interested Party (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #1
Regrettably, Valor is within their rights regarding this new fee. Is it sneaky and a jerk thing to do? The answer is yes, it is. Are they notifying their clients in accordance to their original promise? Once again, the answer is yes. If given the opportunitiy to do business with this insitution, would I? This answer is a resounding NO.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #5
"Within their rights..."  I wouldn't you for my lawyer!
dave9354   |     |   Comment #12
This is nothing but highway robbery!! What a horrible deceitful way of treating your hard working members! Theives!!
me1004   |     |   Comment #50
Actually, it is very questionable whether this fee is legal. They made that add-on feature, and to their 7-year CD, a pretty fundamental attraction for this very longterm  CD -- we discussed it in the threads when it was originally offered last  year, how that feature being promoted as a key benefit was the decisive matter to consider whether to take out this CD. Now, after they lock you in and still early in the term, they  take action that for all intents and purposes withdraws the basic feature, as that fee makes any add-ons a losing proposition.

I see this move as decidedly worse than changing the rules of early withdrawal penalties, especially when that early withdrawal possiblity was never promoted as a basic feature of the CD. This action adding the 3% fee for all intents and purposes is serving to negate the very feature  of  the CD  that made it something to consider. 

I do think this add-on feature was so fundamental to this CD that that action  is very legally  suspect -- and it it something that should  be challenged.

This now should put Valor at the top of the list of dirty financial institutions, even ahead of Fort  Knox CU, which changed it early  withdrawal penalty; at least Fort Knox  had not promoted the early withdrawal possibility as a  basic feature of the CD.
51hh   |     |   Comment #2
Thanks so much for the early alert, Ken!  What is the prudent strategy against such a tricky action by Valor?  I do not feel safe with this credit union to put more money in by 3/17/15.  Who knows what tricks they will play next!

Going to CFPB as a group may have some impacts; personally I do not think that we should take this stuff passively.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #3
Thank you Ken for posting this information. I reviewed the Certificate Account Agreement I signed to open a Valor prime rate CD and the language describing rates and deposits is as follows:

"Rate information: We use the average daily balance to calculate the dividends on this account. The floor rate for this certificate is 3.000% and the ceiling rate is 7.000%. Deposits can be made at any time."

That is the only information provided about deposits. There was no language indicating that Valor reserves the right to change the conditions or terms for deposits or fees after the account has been opened, either without notice or with a 30-day advance notice. If they do institute this 3% fee for new deposits I will file a complaint with the CFBP to propose they have violated the terms of the agreement. I encourage others to do the same.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #4
Fraud is fraud!  The stated APY is incorrect and was not properly disclosed as to the effective rate for additions!!  Plus other arguments!
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #8
Good point. Assuming you opened a 7 year CD with $1000 in 2014, then added $1000 in April 2015. Your second $1000 would only earn a 2.5% return over the next 6 years, including a 0% return in year 1 (3%- 3% fee). Combine that with your original investment and you would earn somewhere between 2.5% and 3% for the whole CD- LESS than the stated minimum APY of 3% and a clear violation of the Valor agreement.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #9
Another sad part is they could attempt to change something else in the future, too.  Thus, at a minimum, it may be of less impact to look at the EWP, confirm in writing with the cu, and move the money...the net impact may be less...especially for those that anticipated adding a significant amount of money in the out years.

Someone should also get the press coverage on this!  Ken, any suggestions?  Offer yourself for an interview???
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #14
I believe the EWP on this cd is 2 years interest. 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #136
The APY isn't impacted. It's a processing fee. Your net return is inconsequential to the calculation of the APY on your deposit. 

Ever consider that these people know Banking 101? They knew they couldn't remove the deposit add feature. So they imposed a fee.

its actually quite smart....
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #6
I just looked at the new fee schedule posted on the valorcu.com website, but I didn't see this fee listed.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #7
I meant the valorcu.org website.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #15
The fee list on their website is from 2/1/15. The new fee schedule, with the 3% processing fee, starts 3/17/15. The new fee schedule us not on their website. 
dave9354   |     |   Comment #10
What a sneaky thing to do to its' members. Rest assured they will not get another penny from me. I will definitely be filing a complaint. Everyone who is a member should be writing to the president of this credit union! I believe there is a link on their website to contact the president of this credit union via email. Let us all give him a piece of our mind!
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #16
I once tried to call him to discuss another item of concern and he refused to take my call or to call me back,  The link is a market/image trick and not real.
mcandrewsm   |     |   Comment #85
I've emailed him through the website and it works. He responds.
mcandrewsm   |     |   Comment #91
It was about a bounced check fee, I haven't emailed him about the CD fee. He got right back to me and refunded it.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #11
Can anyone post the exact wording of the original CD agreement? Fees are a subtle way for financial institutions to change the rules as the game progresses. Some are fairly adjusted in reaction to market forces but others are used to lure new money and/or fleece unsuspecting depositors, borrowers, etc. If they can charge 3% on additional deposits why not 20%, a number that would effectively end new deposits. My bet is their lawyers are gambling no one mounts an effective complaint, new money dries up and annual bonuses remain intact!
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #29
Actually, the 3% fee is a number that will effectively end new deposits.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #31
. . . . . which surely is their intent.  People this stupid, and deceitful, do not belong in credit union management.  With credit unions, members are supposed to matter!

Has anyone noticed, yet?  We don't even have an apology!!!
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #13
I am the person who noticed this 3% fee and passed the info to Ken. Valid mailed me a new list of fees and I was about to throw it out. Decided to look it over and saw the 3% processing fee buried amongst the others. No mention to highlight it as affecting Prime CD holders. I emailed Valor and confirmed the fee. I was thinking about adding more money to my Prime cd before 3/17 but I don't think I'm going to do it. I just can't do business with an organization like this. What if after 7 years they add a fee to move money out of the credit union? I'm all for reporting Valor to whatever agency I can. The is nothing in the CD contract I signed that links a fee to future deposits. To add the fee after signing is deceitful and Valor should be ashamed of themselves. Francis
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #17
iIbelong to another cu that added a new required fee for fraud protection after many people opened a promo cd with them, & although they added a way around the fee, if you don't do the work around options (direct deposit & e-statements), then you are subject to the fee. The fee at this cu, in addition to the Fort Knox & CEFCU cases, added to my feeling that cu's and banks can change the rules whenever they please. it does seem like at the very least they should be required to allow customers close any open cds/iras with them without penalty when they change the rules.  
Interested Party
Interested Party (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #19
Unfortunately when people acquire a CD, the terms act as a contract. Both parties are bound to the contract and if one of the parties is found to be in breach of the contract the penalties stated in the contract apply.

You can close your CD at any point in time you want, however, if you decide to close your CD early or before the term ends, you will be in breach. As a result, they will rob you, er... I mean impose a penalty that is described in the contract you agreed to.

Don't make the mistake and think that I like these new terms. I don't and I feel that this is a, for lack of a better term, JERK thing to do. The only advise I can give to those who purchased this CD is add as much money as you can before the changes take place. 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #22
Not a breach...a customer has a put and there a price to pay for the customer exercising the put..."a right to sell" verses a call..."a right to buy."
Interested Party
Interested Party (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #18
The credit union is using the clause, "We reserve the right to change the terms at any point..." that is in the contract. By doing this, it obviously works to their advantage. This is clearly "at any point" and they are choosing to profit from this change in terms. They own the credit union and they get to make the rules regarding the products they offer. Gee, must be nice...
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #40
Is the wording you referenced in the CD agreement?
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #63
"We reserve the right to change the terms at any point..."  That is funny. They tell you up front that they may **** you later.  Lets them do anything they want after the fact. After the required 30 day notice, a new term of account could say "Any Account or CD closed after 3/17/15 will only receive 50% of its value."

I will never put any money into a credit union or bank that pulls crap like this.

Current members of the credit union should complain fast and loud. Look what happened the TurboTax Deluxe. Two weeks later, out comes the apology.

pearlbrown   |     |   Comment #20
I have been laddering Prime Rate CDs at Valor as a safety net against lower CD rates.  The earliest one opened has another 4 1/2 years to maturity, the newest one 6 1/2 years.  I would have to close all my RCAs in order to free up cash to add to these CDs before 3/17, but as someone has already said, no longer trust them.  What is to keep Valor from adding other fees?  Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.    I will need to think about what to do with the funds already on deposit. 

I do heartily agree that we should not let this go unaddressed, and as 51hh and others have  suggested, contacting CFPB may be an effective strategy.

It's ironic that the institutions which have acted dishonorably and unfairly by changing terms at will have been credit unions (looking at you NASA, Fort Knox, CEFCU et al.  Move over so Valor can join you in the Financial Institution Hall of Shame).  They apparently have forgotten that they are supposed to be not-for-profit organizations that exist to serve their members rather than to maximize corporate profits, and are in reality as greedy as the banks with which they compete. 
pearlbrown   |     |   Comment #21
I have not received the notification mentioned, and am grateful to the alert reader who took the time to read the correspondence and contact Ken, and to Ken and his technical partner(s) for providing a forum where we can all continue to share information.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #26
Did you receive anything in the mail from Valor recently? The "notification" was just a 4x6 card that listed their new fees. You have to read thru all the fees to find the processing fee. I'd bet most would throw out the card before reading. 
pearlbrown   |     |   Comment #45
Nothing from Valor.  I process all mail myself (even make sure there is nothing jammed into the folds of grocery store ads, flyers, etc).  Because the large print giveth and the small print taketh away, I open and read anything and everything from a financial institution. 
lou   |     |   Comment #38
Pearlbrown, I sent you a personal message (PM). Please look at your inbox for my message. I would appreciate it if you could PM me with a response.  Thanks
lou   |     |   Comment #37
Pearlbrown, I sent you a personal message (PM). Please look at your inbox for my message. I would appreciate it if you could PM me with a response.  Thanks
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #23
As a veteran of the war years ago at USCU over their add-on CD, I thought something might happen to this Valor deal.  But no way did I foresee this precise outcome.  And I surely did not anticipate the deal would go sour this soon!

At USCU back in the day, a grace period was given during which additions to the CD accounts were still permitted.  In that aspect Valor is similar.  I hope other similarities ensue, to wit:

A legal challenge was mounted against USCU and things ended up going very poorly for the credit union.  In the end, the USCU president resigned in disgrace.  The deceptive, dishonorable, clown in charge at Valor needs to meet a similar fate, and soon.  At USCU the situation did not drag out over years.  The guy there was gone in a matter of months.

I agree with voices here saying this CU no longer can be trusted.  Because I am not smart enough to have foreseen this ridiculous deposit fee scheme/fraud, I realize I'm also not able to guess what these idiots will dream up next.  It could literally be anything.  I also avoid at all costs dealing with known criminals.  You are entitled to your opinion.  To me the people running Valor are crooks, plain and simple.  Stay away.  Stay as far away as you can.

Valor Credit Union management:  WABOA!!
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #27
As far as Valor giving us a grace period, we'll that's only because we figured it out ourselves. In the mailing with new fees there was no mention of a grace period. In fact they had this new fee in a list with many other fees so it wouldn't be easy to find. 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #30
I dunno, maybe "grace period" was a poor choice of words.  I just meant USCU did not drop the hammer without notice.  There was a period of time at USCU during which CD owners could add funds.  After that we were cut off.  I do concede, though:

I'm sure USCU gave us a letter which described the changes, and members' options, in an open and forthright manner.  This was unlike what Valor has done.  I agree with you that Valor's "notice" was published in a sneaky and deceitful manner, intended to obscure the new "terms" by hiding them amongst many other changes.   This is despicable.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #150
Wow. What we know now is that the Valor president  actually listened to his customers and changed the course. Quite an admirable step that I've never seen amongst bank presidents. I can't remember a bank president responding publically to a fee change. I give credit where credit is due. Doubt this wanted to be done, but still a quick change in plans deserves a lot of credit. 

Lots of of respect where respect is due where no one listens to their customers. 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #24
As the CU's new name indicates, they have a lot of nerve.
buffalo bob
buffalo bob (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #25
I am not happy about this.  I have this cd and I added money last week.  I will be sure to do one more  add on before march 17.  They are obviously not an upstanding credit union but I am still happy to be getting little more than 3 percent.   It still doesn't look like rates are going to be going up much in the next couple of years.
gregk   |     |   Comment #28

It's effective even if not legal fraud in my judgment.

What a now disreputable institution.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #70
That is why I never went for the 3% Prime Certificate.  Been there done that!
Ed (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #32
Thank God I didn't opened a CD with this scam of a CU. It smelled fishy to me when they would not sent out monthly interest checks, meaning money can only go in, but don't come out. Add to that, 10 years of locking out your money with no income.

The only saving grace about the promotion was the ability to add to your existing deposit....now with the processing fee, it means you can't even do that....so call it what it is - a scam. The CU is not stupid, they know many of you were making deposits of the minimum amount, hoping to add more once interest rates goes up. Well, they sure pre-empted that didn't they?

They locked you in at a 3% rate, for 10 years, with no interest coming out. Now you can add more money without paying a fee, and they keep changing their name meaning some sort of ownership change. For a CU that only takes your money, without giving anything back means they are in trouble. Don't bank of collecting any interest after 10 years because they might now even be around that long.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #33
Cool your jets, Ed:  It's a seven year CD, not ten years.  And in just a few months it will be a six year CD.  Also, we all have a month remaining during which we can add money.

Is this bad?  Yes, of course Valor management is now revealed as disreputable.  But everyone already knew about the interest payout terms.  That was revealed up front . . no surprises.  People not wanting those terms, like you, did not go in.  Fine.  There was no deceit regarding that aspect.

This latest change with the fee, of course, is another matter entirely.  I doubt too many of us saw this coming.  Imposition of a fee now is wrong and unfair.  And the manner in which they have gone about notifying us is despicable.
Ed (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #35
And you are so sure you will keep the 3% interest in 6 years? So sure that a CU that seem shaky in solvency to resort to such tricks to raise capital will be around for that period of time?

Hence the reason why I always want to collect monthly interest from my CDs....I saw too many banks and CUs failing during the Great Recession....whereby having an account with anyone of them means having the terms and rates of your CDs nullified. Good luck on your 6 year wait, because I am not sure how cool your jets will be if this CU pull another trick.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #36
You're entitled to you opinion vis a vis interest payout.  Others might disagree.  Main thing is there was no deceit.

If the CU goes belly up no big deal.  I have been in three banks that failed with a LOT of my money inside.  It's never a big issue.  You just get your money back, with interest, assuming you remain withing the NCUA limits.

Your last point is your best, and I think you are right on that one.  Any CU that will pull a stunt like this cannot be trusted.  None of us can foresee what they will pull next.  It could be anything.  It is, indeed, unwise to do business with any organization known to be untrustworthy.
mcandrewsm   |     |   Comment #92
I agree. The fee obviously isn't to make them money. It's prob the only way they can stop the deposits from coming. WHo knows, maybe in a few months if they need deposits they'll get rid of it. It actually seems like an interesting way around the cd disclosure. They cant stop from putting in, they cant decrease the rate. This way they can increase or decrease the fee to control the funds coming in.

EIther way, 3% is an awesome rate.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #34
They put me thru the wringer to open this CD... it took over a month and they wanted everything but my first born child before they would open the account.  I started getting icky feelings as this process was going along which is why I only put in the minimum (I K). I was already feeling leery about adding more money anytime soon.  Upon hearing this so glad I didn't.  Please keep this thread going with updates on complaints!
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #39
This is so shocking.  I imagine it was too good to be true to get 3% interest in this low rate environment.  The credit union was probably getting large inflows of money from desperate savers and just was not able to keep up.  I have initiated transfers from PenFed whose 7-year CDs just matured.  I am hoping that the transfers will go through before the 3/17 deadline.  Thank you so much for posting this.  What is the agency to which a complaint can be made?
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #41
I think its not fair to add these fees But maybe they realize that they made an error on high rate and can't afford to allow more deposits. The alternative is the CU going under and your CD's are closed and you lose the rate.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #42
The use of fees in this manner is probably illegal since it effectively changes the interest rate stated in the offering. Enough noise may result in a policy change.

Another issue I detest is the automatic CD renewal ploy. I wish the regulatory agencies would require a check box on every CD contract: AUTO RENEW AT NEW TERMS or CLOSE. Our PenFed paperwork stipulates: CLOSE TRANSFER TO ACCOUNT NO 1234567.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #43
Do you feel confident that, at the end of the term, there is a closure option that you can exercise or have we agreed to a renewal without an alternative closure?
I hate Fort Knox FCU
I hate Fort Knox FCU (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #44
The CFPB and NCUA did not help us with the Fort Knox FCU ripoff, so I doubt they will do anything here.  They tend to punt big issues like this that effect many people.  I have found them toothless wallpaper in my prior complaints about Chase and Ft. Knox.
51hh   |     |   Comment #46
Last time when I had a minor issue with a credit union, CFPB quickly transferred my case to NCUA, and since the said credit union belongs to a Texas oversight agency, I was transferred to that agency; all within a week.  Then the case was resolved satisfactorily with an apology letter within 24 hours.

Maybe CFPB changed within a year or two, They are responsible and efficient from my perspectives.  Just my input.

I would go through Valor first (that I did) all the way to their senior management (being highly critical on their act but with some politeness), then CFPB.

Customers are responsible for their own welfare and owe it to themselves to have a good fight.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #47
I still have not  received notification and I have not taken note of anything posted on their web site with regard to the fee. Ironically, I made note this morning  there is still a display indicating that the Prime Rate CD is still available and of course we know that this is not the case.  They certainly do not seem to have their act together.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #51
Valor does not recognize open and honest notification, a special letter focusing on this change for example, as a priority, moral or otherwise.  Notification, members finding out, mitigates against their primary goal of limiting further deposits.  As such, Valor has descended into a morass of sleaze.

It's funny, the old Tobyhanna was a trusted, respected, name.  It was a pretty good outfit with a sterling reputation.  The Valor name on the other hand is still very new, but it's already forever tarnished and soiled beyond redemption.  Going forward, and for good reason, nobody will trust Valor.

This is an internet age, the internet has a really long memory, and years from now when people Google "Valor", all this bad behavior will spill out over and over again.  It's just desserts in my view.  No financial institution should pull this kind of stuff.  
I HATE Fort Knox FCU
I HATE Fort Knox FCU (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #49
Like I said above, the CFPB seems to be responsive with single customer issues sometimes, but will usually punt the issue to another agency for multi-customer items.  That is what they did on the Fort Knox abuse where they punted it to NCUA which did nothing!
bill (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #52
We should lodge a mass complaint immediately!!
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #53
From a May 2014 posting at DA on Tobyhanna...

"Have you done your due diligence on the CU?  What is its primary customer/membership base...is that an issue in the long/short term, e.g. will the "base" be open in x years?  Are you physically "close" to a branch?  Is the financial statement robust?  Why is there a posting of an opening for a CFO...why is there a vacancy?  What red flags are there?  And, what is the "delta" in the rates from that otherwise available (after all that is all "you" are looking at!) or what is in your financial bucket list?

"Have fun!  But spend/invest wisely!"

And...interest rates aren't everything!
Annoyed depositor
Annoyed depositor (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #54
I have filed a complaint with the CFPB, and I urge others to do likewise.  The form is quite user-friendly.  
Every contract imposes on each party an obligation of good faith and fair dealing.  Particularly in a consumer setting involving a contract of adhesion, courts will carefully scrutinize a provision that purports to give one party unilateral right to alter the contract terms.  
Here, as others have pointed out, the "add on" feature was very much a material term.  It's different in only in degree from Valor saying, for example, that it would reduce the interest rate to 1% for the rest of the term, or make the term 20 years or 20 days.
Let's see if the CFPB actually has any clout.  If they can't stop this – a pretty egregious case – it will be hard to take them seriously as an industry watchdog.    
The CFP be should also be urged to act quickly, because Valor has now put us in a difficult position of making decisions before March 17.   
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #55
May want to copy Sen. Liz Wright
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #83
Liz Warren
dave9354   |     |   Comment #59
I have just completed filing my complaint!
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #61
I completed my complaint also. 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #77
Just filed mine.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #127
In my opinion, Valor deserves a lot of praise. Can anyone name a single financial institution that actually listens and acts to the feedback they get? The fee is legal, they can charge whatever they want for their services provided they give us 30 days notice of an adverse change.

i for one am proud of any bank or credit union that acts based on feedback. Kudos Valor! 
Ratesaver   |     |   Comment #56
Wow,  I have quite a few cds with this credit union and was hoping nothing would happen like I am reading.. I got the Fee Schedule and didn't quite look it over till today after reading comments ...  Thanks to Ken and the other person who spotted it.... I will surly make a complaint with the CFPB and in person when I go down the bank.... Was going to open other acc... Thank god I did not a this point...I am hoping they will rethink it and if enough people complain we will see.... PEOPLE Please Complain
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #57
I thank those who already have filed a complaint.  I also have done so, and it is very easy.  Just go here:


The more complaints they receive over a short space of time, the better will be our chances for success.  If we do not fight together on this, we will hang separately.  Please file a complaint.  It only takes several minutes.
dave9354   |     |   Comment #60
File your complaint with CFPB and email the credit union with your complaint!! There is " strength in numbers" Even if you do not have an account with them. Some day you may need our help with your banking institute. Thanks.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #62
Best leverage is also with Sen Liz Wright...she is the author of the legislation action for its existence!
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #82
You mean Liz Warren.
pearlbrown   |     |   Comment #67
Thanks for posting the link.  You are right that it is very easy to file and it only took a few minutes, start to finish. 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #132
I think everyone seems to have fallen off their rocker. A CU, with no requirement  to have to listen, actually listened and changed course. 

Now you know what will happen, since we filed all these complaints, (which are merit less now) they'll be glorified by everyone as the ones who "listened to the people". Our strength in numbers when going to the CFPB will be diminished now that all of our complaints will be useless. It just gives them more ammunition to flight against more regulation and oversight.

And our credibility will be wasted away by not approaching this the right way. 
pearlbrown   |     |   Comment #58
This morning I thought about this event from the opposite perspective and asked myself why the credit union would take this step, knowing that they would incur the wrath of the depositor base.       

My best guess is that they are out of balance with respect to funds on deposit and loan demand.   That is, they do not have (or anticipate) sufficient loan demand to put the money to work at a high rate, but they are committed to paying an attractive rate on a significant amount of money.  If you wonder what the person who calculated their potential exposure (at the high end:  (# of Prime Rate certificates issued * 250000 insured balance) – total balance currently deposited in Prime Rate certificates) looked like immediately after, this is probably a fair likeness. 

It boils down to the basics:  if there is insufficient (current or anticipated) loan demand to put that money to work, they bleed money and risk survival of the institution.   I suspect that Valor management was swamped by a tsunami of funds that poured into the credit union and did not act quickly enough to close the floodgates.  Other institutions have tempered their risk when offering attractive CDs or other accounts by limiting the time it is available, by discontinuing it once a certain total is reached, or by limiting it to pre-existing customers.   Valor, however, did none of those things.    Like Bob Barker on “The Price is Right”, they said “Come on down!” and to their surprise, we all did.   

So are they incompetent or evil?   "Overwhelmed and not ready to play in the big leagues" might be a fairer assessment. 

Too slow to detect a problem and take decisive action?  Most definitely.        

Am I willing to make additional deposits before 3/17?  Absolutely not. 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #64
But in the end, none of that matters. A credit union or bank has to be prepared to LIVE by (and HONOR) its decisions. You can flip it right back around again, and say "well, I put $5000 in a CD at Bank X, but looking at things now, I'm going to need more money for my dental bills and a new TV, so I demand Bank X to give me my CD money back without an early withdrawal penalty."

Doesn't quite work that way.
pearlbrown   |     |   Comment #65
I wasn't defending them, simply trying to look at the problem from a different perspective.  I don't disagree that all parties need to be prepared to live by and honor the terms of the agreement. 

I would be willing to bet that if you ask them, they will deny having violated the terms of the CD, and instead claim it is a change in fees, which they are entitled to do.  But a bad act is a bad act, and however they choose to spin it, the Internet has a long memory and this maneuver will not be forgotten. 

Your example is about depositing money and then wanting to withdraw it without a penalty.  The penalty for early withdrawal is known at the time you purchase the CD so that is not really in keeping with the situation at Valor.

This is more like someone who buys a membership to a gym and the membership comes with the promise of unlimited use of the facilities.  "Great!" you think "I can work out before breakfast, at lunch, and stop by on my way home in the evening".  But after some time has passed, you are informed that now there is a a fee for entering the building.   You can still make all the visits you want, but you will have to pay at the front door each time. 

However we choose to look at it, there is no denying that most of us who planned to use the add-on feature as a hedge against continued low rates have lost confidence and trust in the institution.  What we each need to decide, depending on our own situation and circumstances, as well as other options which may be available to us, is whether we continue to trust the credit union and stick to the plan.     The other decision we have to make as individuals is whether we will bring light to this offense by contacting CFPB, NCUA, and other credit union organizations.   I definitely intend to do that. 

Being a CSR at Valor this week has to be a nightmare.    They are the people who are on the front lines, who have to explain and sell this change to irate customers and take a browbeating.

The individuals who were unprepared to manage the assets are insulated from the consequences of their actions and decisions, which means that it will be business as usual.  They may be the only winners in this mess. 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #142
Outstanding. Thank you
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #71
The credit Union could also fail due to a poor decision on it's part if it has to continue with fund additions at this interest rate. In a way they have to protect the members and institution from failure even though they may have made a bad decision. This thread reminds me of PENFED
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #72
Hopefully this change will prevent the credit union from failing.  Otherwise, things could possibly be much worse for Toby investors if Valor failed as I pointed out from a previous posting :

"What possibly could be the real difference is if the following scenario happened:

 Suppose you paid taxes on 4 years of unpaid earnings and then Toby goes under. NCUA pays your insured principal amount but not the unpaid accrued interest earned that you have paid 4 years of taxes on.  I really do not know that this would be the case, but I would have to get some kind of written verification that I would not lose the 4 years of accrued interest that I already paid income taxes on."
mcandrewsm   |     |   Comment #93
I like your comment. I think the same. The addition of the fee certainly couldn't have been easy. But then again, they can decrease (or I guess increase it even more) when they need deposits.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #66
Could someone post a pdf of the revised fee schedule?  I must have tossed out the copy I received, if I received it.  I think it would be helpful for filing a complaint.  
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #68
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #73
Thank you for posting that fee schedule.  I finally found the 3% certificate fee, which is not especially obvious considering its importance.

Also of concern is the $10 inactivity fee, EVERY SIX MONTHS, if your share account is inactive.  That's just nuts!!!

Valor obviously is in deep doo doo. 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #74
Yes, thanks so much for posting, #68.  And thanks also #73 for mentioning the inactivity fee!  It is actually $10 per quarter.  That is awful!  So everyone with a prime share CD will get stuck with $40 a year ($260 or $270 over the remaining life of the CD for those who opened them recently) if you do not waste time making useless deposits or withdrawals into the associated share account every three months?   A share account from which nothing can then be moved into the CD itself without paying an enormous fee?  Outrageous.  This should also be mentioned in everyone's complaints.  
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #75
Exactly.  Ken has never devoted a lot of ink to inactivity fees.  I wish he would.  I manage personally quite a few potential inactivity situations.  I can tell you the industry standard is ONE YEAR . . NOT SIX MONTHS!

This so-called "Valor" outfit is moving rapidly from bad to worse.  The stuff they are pulling is outrageous, right across the board!!  And it is all being done with malice of forethought.  Some credit union!  Credit unions are supposed to be on the side of members.  Dealing with Valor is like dealing with one of the big money center banks!!  Members do not know from what direction will come the next Valor attack on our wallets and on our well being.

Anonymous   |     |   Comment #76
I'm relieved at the last moment I didn't open and fund the account with this credit union. I didn't like where I couldn't withdraw interest on a monthly basis for income. I'll live with the hard pull on my credit report for a couple of years. It's better than dealing with these unscrupulous characters, for 7 years, and waiting for the next move on their part to dilute the benefit of an account with them.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #80
Yea, what's next from Valor in fees? When the CD matures is it beyond them to ask for a heafty "Transfer Fee" to ACH your money somewhere else?
mcandrewsm   |     |   Comment #88
That's not true. I spoke with them about this. You only get charged if you only have a $5 savings account with nothing else. I have the Kasasa checking and called about this fee.
gm (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #78
i will see what the cfpb says when i file my complaint since i have the cd that i opend in december.  i only have the minimum in there so far but was planning to deposit more when another cd matures in may but now won't.  will see what the cfpb says
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #81
What is next, no withdrawals until maturity allowed.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #89
What comes next is anything Valor says comes next.  It's pretty clear at this point Valor neither recognizes nor respects reasonableness when it comes to changes in terms of their CD, or any other of their, products.

Toby is dead.  Valor lives.  And clearly at Valor now, ANYTHING GOES!!!
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #84
On the Fee schedule it says "ALL Fees cover costs incurred by the Credit Union."
That is a blatant, bald-face LIE. It does NOT "cost" them 3% to PROCESS a deposit.
(Remember, this fee is labelled as a "processing fee").
If it did, then it would be assessed for ALL deposit accounts (savings, checking, etc).
It is certainly not a "Processing" fee as Valor contends, and it certainly doesn't not cost Valor 3% to "Process" a deposit (which is DIFFERENT than having to pay 3% INTEREST)
dave9354   |     |   Comment #90
How could a 100.00 deposit and a10,000.00 be any different? It is one deposit! But 3% of 100.00 is much less than 3% of 10,000.00!
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #101
Valor like PENFED has gone from peoples favorite to the worst. 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #103
I have great rates and service from Penfed and they do a lot to help our troops.......so you can just shut your mouth.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #106
What does a troll care about troops.  Trolls care only about themselves.  Trolls are scum.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #148
What a foolish comment...
mcandrewsm   |     |   Comment #104
Just spoke with the Credit Union, apparently due to "popular demand", they've decided not to charge this fee.

I have mixed emotions. It makes me proud that people still have a voice in their CU's and now I feel bad for all the complaints filed. Maybe we should have just contacted them.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #105
Acknowledged.  Course it's also possible all the comments here, combined with all the complaints, turned the tide!!
pearlbrown   |     |   Comment #107
I did contact them, and expressed my concerns calmly and politely.  The individual(s) with whom I spoke were adamant that this fee was needed.   Do not doubt for a moment that they are monitoring the Internet and DA especially very closely.

When you spoke with them, did they mention how they were going to communicate this new turn of events?    They already sent out letters advising of the fee - will they be making a second mailing or updating the website?
Kennewickman   |     |   Comment #108
This story should be in the mainstream media. Don't ya think?
mcandrewsm   |     |   Comment #111
Does anyone know how to retract a complaint from the CFPB?
mcandrewsm   |     |   Comment #109
They said they were posting a letter from their CEO and a revised fee schedule to their website.

I think it was a great first step, but I think people need to voice their concerns to a bank or credit union first and let them try to address it. Instead we (including I) went flying all over the place filing complaints before giving them an oppertunity to respond.
dave9354   |     |   Comment #110
As I said "strength in numbers"  The squeaky wheels got the oil!! Thank you all for filing the complaints! I also thank the credit union for rectifying their mistake. This was the only fair solution.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #119
No one should feel bad about making a complaint!  Valor did not announce that they were "thinking about" adding this fee and ask for our feedback.  They did not make a typo or other inadvertant mistake that would call for a request for clarification.  This was not just some rumor that was circulated.  They announced plainly (if sneakily) that that were unilaterally changing the terms of the certificate  agreement.  They reiterated this in emails.   They made a conscious decision and appeared to have every intention of carrying it out -- and fast.  Recourse to the appropriate authorities was a wholly justified response, and may well have played a role in their ultimate decision.  
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #149
I contacted the credit union first before lodging a formal complaint with the CFPB and NCUA later the same day. So I tried to do it properly, but I have to say, I was honestly surprised by the arrogance of the rep I spoke to. While he was perfectly polite (as was I), when I asked him if the credit union were to consider legal other hypothetical fees and scenarios (of which I gave him some ridiculous examples), he answer was "Yes." At that point, to me, it seemed better simply to start a formal complaint process than spend time emailing the CEO or leaving comments on its site. I don't feel guilty about doing so at all -- and I think us perhaps us saying we'd bring this to the attention of the CFPB and NCUA (and then actually DOING so) had at least as much to do with the CU's change in attitude as emailing the CEO or leaving comments on their site.

I'm glad to see Valor reversing course. Let's hope going forward everything will be above board, so that, as someone in an earlier post mentioned, anyone searching google for "Valor Credit Union", will be able to come across positive postings about the credit union, instead of them trying to pull stunts like this.
Ken Tumin
Ken Tumin   |     |   Comment #112
Good News! I just received confirmation from Valor Credit Union that they decided NOT to implement this fee. I've updated the post with more information.
dave9354   |     |   Comment #113
Just read the letter. Hooray! Thank you Ken! This just made my day!
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #114
Which fee are they not going to implement, the 3% fee for add ons to the existing cd or the $10 inactive fee? Is the $10 inactive fee quarterly or every 6 months? 
valor member
valor member (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #115
Here is my message I wrote to Valor using their messaging:

I had a word with your manager "Rich" about the 3% "processing fees" you added to process deposits into the "prime rate CDs", and subsequently eliminated. This gentleman gave me the excuse that because of overwhelming response to your CD you wanted to stop accepting additional deposits, and to discourage members you added this fees.

Please note that the "processing fees" ought to be something fair and balanced.  It goes against common logic that to process a $100 deposit you will need $3 worth of processing efforts, but to process $1000 deposit you will need $30 worth of processing efforts.  How exactly do you justify this to a common member such as myself?

In fact the deposit into Prime Rate CD that are made from checking account as a "transfer", it on par with a transfer from checking to saving and vice-versa.  Which is (and ought to be) free.

I suspect Valor is getting lot of deposits, but is unable to make sufficient loans to keep up because of the terms of the Prime Rate CD that allow limitless deposits. 

A wise management would have foreseen such a possibility right at the beginning, and would have placed some sort of an upper limit right at the get-go.  I see that management of Valor is/was not wise enough for this, and failed to anticipate this.  It is rather amusing to see that Valor is resorting silly tricks such as placing 3% "processing fees".

I have a request:  Please stop acting in such a manner, that Valor now has become a laughingstock on the internet!  I associate "Valor" with something very different than this sort of pathetic display of instituting the fees and then rescinding it.

Please let me what's your reaction to this message, and if your reaction is "No Comments" then be sure to sent such a response.

Anonymous   |     |   Comment #139
Beautifully stated
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #121
Ken, what about the $10 charge for no activity in the account?  Is that charge every 3 months or every 6 months? I was going to add to my cd but now I really don't think I have enough trust in them so I find the inactivity fee of more interest.....especially since they don't have shared branches.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #118
Congratulations to Ken and the awesome power of Deposit Accounts dot com!

I hope this ends here and stays out of the newspapers.  I do not want to see Valor further tarnished.  Such a thing would harm existing members.  Damage was done to Valor by this unfortunate episode.  It's time now for quiet reflection on the part of Valor management, for rebuilding of trust, and for healing.
valor member
valor member (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #120
Actually I would prefer if the story gets into the newspapers and the unwise people who (mis) manage the 'management' at Valor leave.

The healing should involve removal of the un-trustworty / cowardly personnel involved in this debacle.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #122
Ok, now that the 3% CD add-on fee is history how about addressing the $10/quarter share account inactivity fee imposed on CD holders who were forced to open a share account with Valor.  
51hh   |     |   Comment #123
I also wrote to Valor via their PM (addressed to their president) yesterday.  But like I said before, "... in a polite but firm manner."  That was my first step. 

Lesson learned: (1) customers can fight against unfair treatment, but always with tact and without attacking the entity at issue (it is their unfair terms we are not happy with), calling names is not our style, (2) always bring it up through the management chain, then to BBB or CFPB, rendering the entity an opportunity to react, adjust, and accommodate, (3) no need for any mutual attack among ourselves, (4) address issues one at a time, (5) remember this example that customers will win only if we proactively fight for our rights.

Thanks again Ken and Francis for the early warning!

51hh   |     |   Comment #124
BTW, Valor won back my trust and loyalty for their quick and courteous action in response to our complaints.  It takes courage and maturity to do that!
valor member
valor member (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #126
Both trust and loyalty? Wow.

The trust that got lost because of such a cowardly act of discouraging the members to put additional money was won back merely because of removal of what was unjust to start with?  Like I said ... Wow.

It takes an exceptionally unwise bunch of management personnel to put an offer out of limitless additional deposits.  It takes an exceptionally cowardly bunch of management personnel to put in place the 3% fees.

Courageous and mature ????  ... What comes to mind is:  "I trust Valor to do the right thing, after trying out a dirty trick, and losing!"
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #129
#126.... I'm with you on that one, I'd rather put money into Nasa fed credit union for a 49 month 2.35% cd then trust Valor for a 3.04% 7year....... I'm more interested in the inactivity charge considering Valor doesn't have shared branches... that is a pain.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #141
So is business now a school yard game of bully and coward? A bank is a business and is required to disclose their change in terms. They sent it. I'm not sure how this is "cowardly or dirty". They disclosed what they were going to do 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #135
Couldn't agree more. The fact that they changed course without any "official" intervention speaks loads of positive volumes. To read some of these comments from people whom are getting a 3% rate of return and act like spoiled children when it's over is just plain sad.

I'd personally love it if Valor Management simply did what other CU's and banks have done and do a change in terms and jack up that early withdrawal penalty to 7 years. 

Others have done it....

Only saying hopefully we didn't awake a sleeping giant with this...you do know that Credit Unions can place a bylaw in place capping all deposits per member permanently. I'm just saying that who knows if they were ready to launch a better product and now they'll re-group with something more restrictive than a fee. 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #125
I already asked them about this. They only charge this if you have no other product or service with them. Assuming to keep old accounts from sitting around. So, by virtue of the Prime Rate CD, we're safe. 
51hh   |     |   Comment #128
#126: I said, "... my trust and loyalty."  :-)  You can do/think whatever you like.

Anonymous   |     |   Comment #153
Thank you.
dave9354   |     |   Comment #130
Wow! 128 comments! Ken, could this be a record!
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #131
I believe that the good news is just a form of damage control for now.  Don't be surprised if some other negative change takes place in the near future.  It appears that their deposits are heavily outweighing their loans based on their recent moves and they don't know what to do about it.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #133
I looked at their financials, they're sitting at around 85% loan to share which is very healthy for liquidity. They might have a tight margin are too much money is going into the CDs. 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #134
THOUGHTS on Valor now that the issue seems to be resolved (for now)

Yesterday I submitted a formal complaint to the NCUA directly, the CFPB directly, as well as to a reporter for a major newspaper, detailing numerous points regarding what Valor was attempting to do. Here are three things to think about:

(1) This of course was not a processing fee of any kind. When I spoke to the Valor rep, he point blank told me the reason for the fee was to try to stop more deposits. Yet it is the institution's responsibility to assess its own risk, not the consumers.

(2) If Valor was so concerned about being exposed to too many deposits, then why, after discontinuing the Prime Reserve CD for a while, did they BRING BACK THE SAME CD PRODUCT AGAIN, as recent as DECEMBER 2014 (with the only change being a max cap of $100,000 for the 3%)? If Valor was really worried about possible exposure to too many deposits, then it is gross incompetance on the part of the institution itself to BRING BACK the same CD as recent as December, encouraging people to deposit up to $100,000 each.

(3) If it were to be ruled legal for an institution to impose a brand new, out-of-nowhere fee on a guaranteed time-deposit product like a CD (with a contract), then what are the limits?
Instead of a credit union truthfully saying "We're just going to ignore our own contract language" (allowing additional deposits), could an institution instead simply accomplish the same thing by -- in the middle of a CD's term -- instituting a "100% Processing Fee" on new deposits? What about if it was "99.5% Processing Fee?" Where is the limit? If a new "100% Processing Fee" out of nowhere on a time-deposit CD is deemed a legal end-run around contract language allowing additional deposits, than a CD's contract isn't worth the paper it's printed on. If it's not legal, then where is the limit? 100%? 99.5%? 3%? What's the difference?

I'm glad to hear they have rescinded this attempt to (illegally, I believe) pass any responsibility onto their customers. I'm not going to recall my formal complaints with the NCUA and CFPB, but will let them take their course just to be safe. Now that the issue has been resolved, such complaints should (going through the normal process) most likely close out relatively quickly.

One last thought is, this CD isn't a perfect CD. It has plenty of cons as well (money locked up for 7 years, interest rates most likely going up soon, a SEVERE EWP, a hard pull on your credit record upon joining the credit union, and having to remember to constantly do some activity every few months in your share savings account to avoid fees) but for myself, I felt the pros outweighed the cons. It is my responsibility to live up to my end of the deal, and Valor's to live up to their end of the deal. I'm glad they've finally stopped trying to unilaterally change the terms. I went though something like this before with another institution (so this wasn't the first time for me), and like with Valor now, the other institution had to then change back to the original terms as well. It reminds us all again, to always be vigilant.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #138
Trust me, it's not over. That fee was an ingenious way to stop the add-on feature. It doesn't impact the APY or the terms of the account so they couldn't run afoul of violating the disclosure. Their membership agreement pretty much lets them do anything else they want. What was so cunning was that the fee didn't run afoul of the CD disclosure and complied with the membership agreement.  (Didn't officially charge us  for the feature but charged us for processing of it). They've got some **** good legal counsel behind the scenes. I'm sure this isn't over but what I think what comes next might be worse. Credit unions can cap deposits per shareholder and actually make you take your money back. A lot different than banks. Pretty scary. I really, really hope we didn't cut off our nose to spite our face with this. 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #140
PS: a PS to my above main post: Just to be clear, I submitted my formal complaints to the NCUA and CFPB (and emailed the reporter) BEFORE learning that Valor would finally honor its original terms and stop trying to charge it's new "processing fee." I have since emailed the reporter and informed him of the positive outcome of this, but instead of trying to stop an official complaint already in progress at the NCUA or CFPB, I'm simply going to let those go through the process normally (as I stated above, with the issue now resolved, they should close out quickly).
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #144
Just hoping that their management doesn't cap their deposits and send us all checks. They did the right thing and listened to feedback, from somewhere, which is quite admirable in a world of "do whatever you want" financial institutions. Just hoping that a tide a complaints doesn't spur them to take a more drastic maneuver. 
Sylvia   |     |   Comment #143
I agree.  The chronology seems to suggest a reactive management style that lacks appreciation for what makes a brand.  It's not the mechanics of creating a name, e.g., "Valor", but the trust that customers place in that name.  This backtracking on the totally unprecedented 3% fee makes me feel no better about the organization.  They've not regained my trust.  Until the CD matures, I now feel I will have to always be on alert with this CU.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #145
They won back my loyalty. Any bank that reacts to feedback from their consumers is a rare exception. 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #137
Thank you for pursuing and reporting on this, Ken.
This revisionist behavior is entirely unacceptable
PatM356   |     |   Comment #146
Ive followed this blog and have known about this CD long before it was so public. 

- The product is fantastic. 

- The interest rate is great.

- This product has been around for quite a long time. I've lived in NEPA my whole life and have seen Tobyhanna evolve from a tiny CU to a VERY competitive player in our area. My sister has been a life long member and her's is almost at maturity. 

i got the new fees mailed to me and saw it. It was what it was; I thought at the time. Disappointing, but they added a fee for something. They tend to place fees for premium services, abusive transactions or to slow attention to a product or service. Sort of just like adding a fee for a checking account. While the Kasasa is a great free deal, (which I love)  I'd imagine if a tsunami of money flooded in, we'd be seeing a fee to stop it. It's hard to argue with their rationale for it. I suppose I see it more as a financial cooperative than a place to get 3%. I'm thinking the sudden attention caught them off guard. I've only seen their local advertising so I don't know if their broadcasting this product all over the place or not. 

I don't pretend to know why they did it, but it makes me truly trust them even more that they withdrew it. They obviously saw the reaction and are planning another route. Don't discount this Credit Union. They've got growing pains but are becoming a regional player. 

Having been a member for a long time, I suppose I just know how they operate. They really do have a member-centric mentality. The branch manager once opened a branch on a Sunday night so I could get into my safe deposit box. It's just that kind of place. 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #147
Well said. 

They changed cousre from pure customer response. They didn't have to get sued or fought into something that they have all the money in the world to fight against. 

this is why I love credit unions and now Valor. They actually care about their members and listen. Interst aside, I want a place that responds to their members.
h_meister   |     |   Comment #151
Some random musings re Valor:


This is relatively small Credit Union with 65 employees.  There are probably eight to ten professional back office staff plus the CEO, CFO and three VPs. My point is that Valor’s institutional bandwidth to consider the pros / cons of issuing the Prime Rate Certificate is very thin.


The CEO of Valor, Sean Jelen is 33 years old.  He came to Valor three years ago from a similar sized credit union where he was a COO and a staff manager.  He’s clearly sharp and ambitious but hasn’t been in bank management long enough to have seen even a single yield curve cycle.  In a credit union this size, I doubt its board has the industry knowledge / technical acumen to bird dog him when necessary.


He clearly wants to transform the credit union (Toby – Valor) and has probably done some good things for products and service.  At the same time, I’m not looking for Steve Jobs to be running a credit union; my preference is a solid Main Street Banker (maybe a new age Jimmy Stewart).


Getting back to the Prime Rate Certificate, my take is Valor put this product to market to build their asset base to support one of Mr. Jelen’s initiatives, going strong into business banking.  From pulling their financials, I can see the other loan category (where a business portfolio would sit) is up $19MM (33%) and is the driver of their year over year loan growth.  While building the portfolio, their yield has seen a modest drop of 18bps and was at a decent 4.82% this past December. 


To prudently grow lending portfolio, you need the deposits and that’s where the seven year CD comes in.  It’s a very attractive rate and they’ve locked in the deposits with the draconian EWP along with a no interest payout until maturity.  No problem for me, as it was disclosed up front. Their deposit to loan has been consistent across 2014 at 85%, once again a good sign. 


The looming problem is what is their deposit yield exposure? I did a quick guesstimate on what they might have paid on interest:


·       If 50% of the all other shares is in the 7 year CD ($10 MM) and they’ve been on the books three months on average, that’s $80K incremental interest expense that hit Valor in 2104. 


·       That’s less then 5% of FY14 net income and jumps to $320K for 2015 assuming no more add ons. 


The size of the potential asset add on exposure is the crux of the matter, in terms of how much a credit union this size can absorb. My feeling is that $30 to $40 million in balance inflow in 2015 is viable since it the deposits wouldn’t all be on a full year.  That’s increases full year interest expense for the seven year CD towards $1MM.  Once over $40MM, the credit union will need to start looking at expense saves and if it doubles to $80MM that I think management is in hot seat.


I think Mr. Jelen has plans for the credit union and transformative programs cost money. More interest expense means less money for these programs.  If I were the credit union, I would make an offer to the clients in the seven year CD that the EWP is waived for withdrawals made in a pre determined period.  Sort of a do over and lets those customers who are appalled  at the credit unions behavior here to exit and allows Valor to reduce the risk with potential asset on


Full disclosure: I opened prior to the seven year being capped at 100K and have made one add on for between 10 and 20K.  I have a large CD maturing on 3/16 and was planning to make a decent five figure deposit with Valor.  At this point, I’m on the fence on adding on, even with Mr. Jelen’s about face.  I’ve got a question of trust with them and wouldn’t be surprised to see come up in the future.


One other point.  I appreciate all the efforts of this community for protesting Valor’s actions in trying to impose an unacceptable, unethical modification to a CD.  I plan to file a complaint with the NCUA, to get this issue on the record and encourage all

having a similar perspective on Valor’s actions to document their grievance.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #152
I was quite intrigued by what you wrote and I gave you a thumbs up.  While I'm a rather wild and crazy person, I'm not quite nuts enough actually to believe what I'm about to expound here, inspired by your comment, is the truth.  Nevertheless, here goes:

You caused me to consider the possibility (only) Jelen could be a smarter 33 year old than we might otherwise think.  You seem to be a thoughtful individual.  Jelen has succeeded in injecting some measure of doubt into your personal decision prior to move funds to Valor in 2016.  Perhaps your reaction is not a one off.  Perhaps others also are now concerned regarding future movements of funds to Valor.  That outcome is not all bad for Jelen.  Just sayin'.

His cost:  Valor has taken a serious trust hit for the present.  Jelen, having now made amends (was that the plan all along?), might figure the passage of time will heal the trust issue.

His reward:  He limits inflows owing to the lack of trust he created.  He thereby saves the credit union, while retaining his job and avoiding entanglements with regulators.  He also has foreclosed none of his options going forward should this loss of trust not be sufficient to limit inflows sufficiently, as hoped.

Again, naaaaa, I don't really think Jelen is sufficiently cerebral to have planned this all out in advance.  It's a rather fanciful theory, IMO.  But I also am aware some young people are quite smart and creative.  This is 2015.  Stranger things have happened.

Whether this entire episode was planned in advance or (most likely) not, Jelen has a win here and he will keep his job for sure.  The guy is a player.  I tip my cap to Mr. Jelen.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #158
I thing Toby/Valor made a massive wrong-way bet in forcasting the rapidity and degree that interest rates would rise. I think they forsaw the 3% rates with the add-on feature as becoming below market rates in the reasonably near future. They apparently saw their mistake and wanted to cut their losses. Actually, it's possible that PenFed had a similar bet, with their 3% certificates in Jan 2014. They did not have an add-on feature, however, which made their offer less speculative for them. In addition, PenFed is massively larger and could mitigate those rates in the future, which they did. Very low rates this year, not even competitive. Rather unusual for PenFed.  Add your comment
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #175
I believe you're onto something. He earned his stripes in NYC banks and on Wall St from what I read when I googled him. The man's obviously not a fool and instinctively knows how to react in a very calculated and precise way. He's an accomplished 33 year old banker with an Ivy League masters running a credit union in Scranton???? I can't just underestimate a background like his. I'm certain every single step, no matter how small that he's taking was well planned 10 steps ago. I'd love to know how a Scranton cu snagged a guy with that background. He's either done a total turn around and turned his career back to helping people or he's got a place that's got much, much bigger ambitions that's yet to come. 

We won in the end, but his background tells me Valor has some big plans. 

I can't exactly say that his motives in ending it were member-motivated or damage control, but after reading his bios; he's a pretty smart and calculated guy. 

I'm with you that this isn't quite damage control and not quite member-motivated. 

But in the end, I do appreciate that he ended the fee. I'm convinced he knows he could charge it, but I can't figure out his exact motive as to why...
observor (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #156
Random but mostly about Jelen

It is remarkable to note that you are focusing on Jelen - at random of course!  You know what they say: most muslim men show up at airport hours early because they are sure at "random" they will be flagged for extra security checking!

Anyways if this debacle - that of offering limitless additional deposits and subsequent application of 3% processing fess and subsequent cancellation of the said fees - was a planned operation by Jelen then looks like it has failed to generate much of trust in the outfit he is leading. I guess earning trust of the members ought to be one of the main focus of the CEO (considering that profit is not the motive for a credit union). -  young/old smart/dumb/average however s/he may be.

OTOH, if this debacle is not planned by Jelen, but is just a mistake committed by the management of which he is the CEO, then I'd imagine the buck needs to stop at his desk. Therefore the courageous thing for him to do will be to consider turning over his desk to - let's say - a smarter person.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #176
Interested to know you're standard of 'smart'. He took Toby out of the dumps, took it from the relic it was and re-invented it as Valor.
I don't know if you know, but you can bank with them in their lobby 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The place is like a bank don't get me wrong, but totally not a bank (if that makes sense) in an Apple-esque sense. They've had this CD around FORVER. I've been a member for over 17 years. 

I'll never know why they wanted this fee, but the real members of this credit union know this credit union and of a CEO that answers member calls and emails any day or night. I'll never find it anywhere else.

I know why he ended the fee; feedback, feedback, feedback. We're bombarded with requests for feedback from Toby. They constantly seek feedback. But I think it's from their day to day members, and not just CD members. We've had him for 3 years and the place has never been better. 

I think there's a divide between the members that are tuned into them and those that want the rate. If you bank with them in their offices, the place (in a good way) is like a cult.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #177
I agree. Attacking a CEO is a short road to nowhere.

He restored my trust in not just Valor, but credit unions for his action. I'm wordless as he did it without any intervention. Coupling that with a quick response to feedback is a WOW. 

Mr. Jelen: Well done as a great Credit Union leader. 
Member from CA USA
Member from CA USA (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #193
>> I'll never know why they wanted this fee, but the real members of this credit union know this credit union <<

>> But I think it's from their day to day members, and not just CD members. <<

I'm from California USA.  Over here we do not have a  class system for citizens, and neither for the members of a Credit Union.

Here we do not have second class citizens and first class citizens for the state/nation, and neither do we have any such thing like a "real member" and a "day-to-day member" and a "CD member" for Credit Unions.  Over here each member of a credit union is just that - a member. 

I. in turn will, be interested to know your standard of 'membership' in a credit union.

BTW in CA for criminals we have something like '3 strikes and you're out.

I consider the smartness of the CEO of the actions of the management s/he heads.  If the actions are dumb I consider that as a reflection of the intellect of the CEO, or lack thereof because I'm a firm believer of "actions speaking louder than the words".

1) Making a contract of limitless additional deposit (dumb)
2) Imposing a processing fees of 3% for additional deposits (dumber)
3) Rescinding the said processing fees, (dumbest)

These look like 3 strikes to me ... Wonder if the CEO is out ???
lou   |     |   Comment #194
Give it a rest. The guy did a good thing; he rescinded the fee. Let's hope it works out for the credit union.

I took a look at the financials and this credit union is functioning way better in the last few years since he took over. He has turned the company completely around. It was losing money just a few years ago; however; in 2014 the company made more money than it ever has. The loan underwriting has almost kept paced with the deposit growth with a very low percentage of loan losses. The credit union is in a much stronger position now. So far, this CEO is practically a miracle worker.

Besides transforming the credit union into a profitable enterprise, he has listened to the members and is trying to accommodate them. Just let it go and be thankful that for once a financial institution actually did the right thing.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #195
Right!  Are the Board members the same through out this "ordeal" that was readily available to be seen before recent events? (See change in CFO last year)  Who reports to whom?  If the same Board members are there now as before were they asleep at the wheel.  Remember the President reports to the Board and not the members!

Our contracts are with the organization and CU Boards specify rates and terms and conditions, i.e. it was the one that ratified the recent actions!

Organizational culture issue!  Changing the name does not make a new organization
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #154
Those 3.3% brokered CD's never looked so good...in the rear view mirror.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #155
After this event, a junk bond even begins to look better.
Ratesaver   |     |   Comment #157
The people , Ken , all others on this site have spoken and have achieved what going forward is rewarding... Valor has given in and thank goodness to all those push forward with comments. I believe it will be over for now and think the credit union itself will be a better place in the future.... I hope
mcandrewsm   |     |   Comment #159
And once again, this is why I love Credit Unions. The people spoke and Mr. Jelen answered! Try getting that from the likes of Jamie Dimon at Chase....
valor member
valor member (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #160
To those who have recently transferred "Trust" back to Valor:

If/when Valor tries new trick to put an end to additional deposits then will you transfer the Trust out of Valor once again?  I take it that there is hardly any longevity or permanency for the trust you place or do not place. 

(On the lighter side - if your spouse cheats on you, and then makes a commitment that the present affair has ended, then I am sure you'll start trusting your spouse again - until of course the next affair begins !!!)
CA member
CA member (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #196
If Valor would have charged fees per member for transferring "trust" out, then they would have made a tidy sum.  Its not too late actually, They should redo the sort of trick, and charge every member who initiates transfer-out process for the "trust".

I am sure Valor will find sufficient members who are naive, and willing to keep doing process of transfer-trust-out, and then transfer-trust-in, and out and then in, over and over.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #161
Just as a point of information, and nothing more:

Here once again is the link to the Valor fee schedule:


As I write this, the 3% "processing" fee is still there.
dave9354   |     |   Comment #162
I received an email from the CEO and he stated they have removed the 3% fee. The email came this morning. They probably need time to change the website.
dave9354   |     |   Comment #163
The new fee schedule is posted on their website. The 3% fee has been removed. The inactive share account fee is still there.
Gm (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #164
At least u can add $1 every 6 months to savings  then within next 6 months after transferring to cd so no inactive fee
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #165
Wow, I've posted this before. They only charge an inactive fee if you don't have another product or service with them. I've called and checked several times from several people. Since we have the CD, we don't get charged. 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #166
I need to take a little responsibility on this.  I originally posted here about the six month inactivity fee thing, complaining loudly.  I was WRONG.  You are correct.  Thank you for correcting me.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #167
Link?  Because the link posted at #161 continues to show the 3% processing fee!
dave9354   |     |   Comment #168
Old link! Go to their website. At the bottom of page click fee schedule. A new one will come up.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #169
Just went to their home page as per your instructions.  Clicked on "fee schedule".  Up came the same fee schedule linked in #161.  The processing fee is STILL THERE!!

Words are cheap.  Either post a link to the new fee schedule or shut up.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #171
You are correct.  Sorry about that.  I appreciate your post.

My browser was loading the page from cache, even when I clicked on their home page link the browser did that.  All I had to do was to click "reload" and the problem disappeared as the browser finally went out to the net for a fresh copy of the fee schedule.  I agree with you now that the fee is gone.  Need to dummy up.  I should have thought of that cache problem earlier.  
dave9354   |     |   Comment #183
I really did not appreciate being told to "shut up" when  I was only trying to help!
Sylvia   |     |   Comment #172
#167, The only fee schedule I see, using both link above and fee schedule button per dave9354, is one dated 2/1/2015 which shows no processing fee.  Because of date, I wouldn't expect otherwise.  If you continue to see a schedule showing 3% fee, try clearing your browsing history. 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #173
Yes, you're correct.  Our posts crossed.  I actually reloaded the page before you posted.  That fixed my dilemma.  There was no need to clear browsing history, BTW.  That's something different.  My problem, which I finally identified on my own after seeing Dave's post #170, was a cache problem.  
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #174
I had a great email dialogue with their CEO today. He's a **** intelligent guy and very tuned into the banking industry and his membership. I saw a post earlier that you can email the guy so I tried it out. We exchanged a half-dozen emails, and they looked like they were from his IPhone. I really ended up liking  guy. He was pretty straight forward that they were confident about the fee and was never concerned about implementing it. His motive to charge it was a multi-million dollar flood of new deposits which they were anticipating but not until April-July. Coupled with their "low" season for lending, they wanted to slow the tide for a little while until later in the spring. 

Thinking aloud more, this guy actually has a link to talk to him. He responds in minutes. And listens to feedback. I saw someone say he's 33. All I can think is that this guy has to have some very serious brains and brawn to have taken Valor to where it is. I took a look at their financials and the place was a sinking ship. But last year, they outperformed their peers by almost 3-4 times in most of their categories. 

He doesn't just get my respect, he deserves it. Wish the guys that are twice his age running banks 10x the size of Valor would have the passion that he has. 
h_meister   |     |   Comment #179
Why would you have such respect for an individual who directs his organization to effectively break the terms of the CD agreement?  Are you comfortable dealing with a  business that does not honor their agreements? From a disinterested viewpoint, I guess you can look at Jelen and somehow view him as a hard charging aggressive manager if could get away with the 3% add on fee.  Unfortunately, I'm not disinterested, he's not trustworthy and he clearly reached way to far since he backed off so quickly.  I've always liked the Clint Eastwood maxim "a man got to know his limitations"  I think Mr. Jelen needs to work on that a bit.                                  
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #180
This was nothing but a sneaky attempt to slow deposits by charging customers for the privilege of loaning the CU money. You do realize an add-on $100,000 deposit would have been worth about $97,000 the moment after it was deposited IF the 3% fee had been imposed. Think about that very carefully. Of course they will argue, "no, you still have $100K", to which I will say, "yes, but you DENIED me $3000 interest for 12 months!." Instead of $103,000 at the end of 12 months I have $100,000. Ok, so I really began the year with $97,087.37 and earned 3% for the year to get back to my $100K. Do the math for yourself.

In any case, the guy broke trust which most likely results in fewer add-on deposits from CD holders. From his point of view: problem solved. What was the problem, you ask? He failed to anticipate deposit levels, probably thought rates were going up, got trapped and decided to quietly fleece depositors to make it all better. This forum, however, ruled the day.
Sylvia   |     |   Comment #182
#179 and #180, I agree.  Compare the way the 3% fee was communicated with the number of glossy mailings and related communiques we received last year about the name change to Valor, a change for which I see no economic impact on us, the membership.  The difference suggests poor management  judgement at best, dishonorable intentions at worst.  In either case, I believe it betrays an organization that’s focused on themselves, not us.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #188
But when the ceo said  - he was pretty straight forward that they were confident about the fee and was never concerned about implementing it -  didn't that concern you? He wasn't concerned about severely changing the terms? I agree with another poster who said the ceo made a bet that interest rates would rise sooner rather than later. That  didn't happen (at least yet) so he decided to transfer his losing bet to members. That seems like something I'd worry about. 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #192
Thumbs up.   Totally spot on!
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #178
I just got a response from Valor as follows: "Thank you for your inquiry. I would like to inform you that this transfer fee was rescinded this past week and no longer in effect. We appreciate your inquiry and if you need any further assistance on this or any other matter please don’t hesitate to contact us again."  So glad they listened to their members.  I just hope they are able to handle the inflow of funds from those of us who opened these CDs.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #181
I'm really not feeling any impetus to send money to Valor now.  At this point it remains an over six year CD paying only 3% interest.  Ken is daily posting, right here on his blog, five year CD offerings paying 2.5% interest;  and you likely can even withdraw your interest periodically without penalty with those 2.5% accounts.  Money you give to Valor goes into a lockbox, right along with your interest.

Add to the above that it is questionable to place trust in Valor today, in the wake of this fee debacle.  Right now, much better alternatives exist for our CD funds.  
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #190
(Ignoring the TROLL poster, of course). While the CD can indeed be used as a "foot in the door" in case things go bad, or if you have a huge wad of cash maturing elsewhere (in which case you'll have to decide if it's worth the long term & severe EWP), to me personally, the CD's best feature is that it allows anyone to add SMALL amounts here and there as you have them... to sock away for the future, and get a very respectable rate. If I have $150 extra this month or $300 next month or $45 the following month, this is a great way to sock that away for 6-odd years from now. Like everyone else here, I was dismayed at Valor as an institution, for trying to change the terms midstream, but Valor has reversed course, and let's see what happens from here on out.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #191
(Ignoring the TROLL poster) While the CD can indeed be used as a foot-in-the-door in case times go bad, or if you have a large wad of money maturing elsewhere (in which case you'll have to decide if the 3% rate as rates go up and the severe EWP is worth it for you), I personally found this CD's best feature to be the fact that you can sock away SMALL amounts of money: an extra $125 this month, an extra $240 next month, and extra $45 the following month, etc.... sock away at a decent rate any money you don't need now for the future 6-odd years from now -- of which the newly imposed fee would have made me, as a Toby/Valor member, have to unilaterally have my money locked away for years into a changed-midstream, now-useless CD. I, like everyone else here it seems, was more than disappointed at Valor as an institution. However I am glad to hear they have listened to their members and reversed course. I've liked Valor (Toby) for a while, and no one wants it to succeed more than me. But going forward I'd like it to succeed as an honorable institution that serves its members (it's a credit union after all). They definitely stumbled with this, but I was glad to see them change back to do what's right, and honor the original terms and spirit of the CD. As we all look forward and see what happens in the future, I very much hope to continue being a Toby/Valor customer for many more years to come.
concerned (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #197
Thanks to everyone who wrote to valor on this matter
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #198
I just came across this post after stumbling on their CD offering and have some things to share: 

- Valor's ceo sewed his oats on Wall Street in addition to a few very large banks in NYC when he was just a young pup. (Google)

- He worked under quite a few of the big names on Wall St. probably thanks to his entitled and politically-connected NYC family. (Google) Daddy was a Navy commander amd then a defense contractor and his grandfather made a fortune in NYC real estate and his massive funeral business in NY and NJ. (Google) He probably inherited millions. 

- He abandoned NYC for Credit Unions and sort of dropped off the banking radar for a while and made a big name for himself at a huge NYC credit union. (Google)

i have to come to his defense in some respect. He left the land of Wall St easy money and chose the not for profit path. Some points to him there. Is he "quietly" turning Valor into a bank? Why??? He probably would have made a second fortune over and above his daddys money if he didn't move to credit unions if he stayed. 

I give ive credit where it's due. Doesn't seem he's working for money. Def not working for free I guarantee. He grew up with a silver spoon in his ***. Yet, he left the family firm of making fortunes. 

Strange guy to try to pin down, but it seems like a guy who's a very sharp character and knows exactly what he's doing. I bank with several credit unions and his education and background is rare. I hope for a college degree most of the times, but he's got quite the pedigree. 

The boy might be a boy, but his background indicates to me he's no fool nor a tool for a bunch of incompetents. 

**** a stupid CD fee, I'd bank on this guy IPO'ing the place. Worth a few bucks given a background like his in credit unions?? Really, a Wall St boy in scranton taking over what was a **** hole??? Cranking up the deposits? Maintaining profitability? Increasing his assets?? Numbers show a well run shop. Worth a shot. 

I'm planting a few bucks to see if this NYC boy is going back his roots. 
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #199
Thanks good and helpful comment and analysis.  Still too early for me seriously to commit at Valor, for reasons having nothing whatsoever to do with this gentleman.  Barring something unforeseen, twenty months from now is the earliest I can envision making a decision.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #200
Thanks for the analysis. 

It it makes me think that there's more to this than meets a blind eye. A Harvard MBA, Wall St banker moves to Scranton PA to turn around a lazy and defunct credit union? This makes anyone with common sense wonder what's cooking at Valor. Could be a potential conversion. Doubt it though, haven't seen a CU to bank conversion in a while. 

I think he got exactly what he wanted. Announce the fee, cast doubt in the minds of who would be putting more $ in and then he saves the day by retracting it. In the end, he wins big time either way. No flack from the members because he retracted the fee and no flack from the questionable legality of it. Truly a brilliant strategic maneuver, and now knowing his pedigree from Anonomous, a certainly plausible conclusion to this.  
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #201
Who's thanking whom...yourself?
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #202
Thanking myself and taking the credit for the research. 

What at irks me is the focus on a highly restrictive, absurdly long-term CD rate. ANY novice investor could have obtained the total yield at maturity on this product in any well balanced large cap fund in 2014. And had their funds back in hand.

The other thing that irks me is irritating this CEO. Everything I'm seeing shows a pending IPO. He took a mutual public in the late 90s and made the depositors a bundle. It seems he's taking the first steps again toward that. Why would any reasonable investor **** with this? 

I just wish people would look out further from a 3% rate and use their intelligence to see a possible bigger picture with someone who's not going to back down because of kickback. 

All I'm saying is that the product offering, coupled with the background of their CEO lead me to believe that there's a chance for a very nice payday well over and above a BS 3% rate. 
Francis (anonymous)   |     |   Comment #203
Just received an email from Tobyhanna fcu. Don't know if the 3% processing fee had anything to do with it but the CEO of Toby is out. Text of email:
Dear Member,
I am writing to inform you that as of August 19, 2015 Sean Jelen is no longer President/CEO at Valor Credit Union. The Valor Board of Directors is actively searching for an interim CEO and we expect to be able to name that individual in a matter of days.
We do not anticipate any disruption whatsoever to our normal business operations, due to this organizational change. Since 1954, Valor Credit Union has served the good people of Northeastern Pennsylvania with pride and excellence. That commitment to our valued members is unwavering.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Thank you for your continued business at Valor Credit Union.
Kara L. Badyrka Chair Board of Directors
lou   |     |   Comment #204
I also received the email from Valor. It would appear Mr. Jelen did not leave voluntarily.

I took a look at the NCUA call reports and noticed a $286,000 loss for the first 6 months of the year compared to $73,000 for the first quarter. Interestingly, the increase in income interest and fees increased far more rapidly than the interest expense from their deposits. So the prime certificates (although they increased by $3 million in the 2nd quarter) do not seem to be the problem. What does seem to be a problem is the increase in non-interest expense for the year, meaning their overhead, including salaries and office expense, has increased in excess of the growth of their net interest income.  The new CEO will have to reduce overhead in order to stem the losses.

The other metric that may be a problematic is that the total amount of delinquent loans increased by $2 million or by 70% in the second quarter. I'm not sure how much of a problem this is as it only represents slightly more than 1% of all their loans
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #205
Earlier posts on this thread highlighted why the CFO left recently and why no change in the Board...who hired whom?  The members need to go to annual meetings and "speak up."
pearlbrown   |     |   Comment #206
Information on the CEO departure from the Scranton TimesTribune published 9/10/15:
Valor CEO departs amid credit union's losses piling up "...in the middle of one of its worst years in recent memory".but at least the credit union eventually got its company car back (see this) from 10/3/15 - although in not too favorable circumstances for the former CEO.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #207
That's good stuff, pearlbrown.  Thank you for posting.  Glad we Valor members finally got back our stolen Mercedes.  Sort of figured it might, instead, show up abandoned in some parking lot out in the Hamptons.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #208
I wonder if this bank is just going to go under.  It is amazing how they hide the fact about the add on feature that they can take away any time they want.  Maybe somone can call the consumer protection services and get the add on feature back!
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #209
"The" answer is Sen Liz Warren...she would probably like to hear about these "things."  And, send a cc to the financial institution.
Anonymous   |     |   Comment #210
PS...does anyone (really) think that the NCUA didn't approve the action of the cu?