Entity Doesn’t Exist | Neo Financial | Discussion forum

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —




— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

No permission to create posts
sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
Entity Doesn’t Exist
April 10, 2021
9:56 pm
Vatox
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 875
Member Since:
October 29, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

This institution name does not exist and the title needs to be changed before reports start circling that this site doesn’t list proper information.

EDIT: I see the category has been changed to”Brand” and Neo Financial isn’t a brand either.

April 11, 2021
2:10 am
Loonie
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 7044
Member Since:
October 21, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Neo Financial does exist. This is the name it has given itself on its website (see signature at bottom).

But it is NOT a bank, trust company, credit union, investment dealer or broker, insurance company, deposit broker, or any other kind of financial institution.

April 11, 2021
6:15 am
Bill
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2368
Member Since:
September 11, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

On its site it says it's a technology company. It says it has partnered with some financial institutions to help us save and spend. It has similar partnerships with other retailers. I agree it's not a brand name of Concentra, it's a separate corporation with various activities.

April 11, 2021
9:12 am
Vatox
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 875
Member Since:
October 29, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

It shouldn’t be on the list. People coming to this site expect to see a list of real financial institutions that are banks or credit unions or entities owned by either. Neo, as they call themselves, isn’t a financial institution. Having it in the list makes this site look foolish and unprofessional.
When I say it doesn’t exist, I mean it’s not an actual financial entity that is recognized. It structures the digital savings account but doesn’t stand behind your money. I think most every person coming to this site wants to know the name of the entity standing behind their money. If the Neo name is desired, then you also need another category showing the actual registered institution backing the money. And then of course CDIC backs that entity in turn. CDIC doesn’t back Neo, so having the name standing alone is misinforming.

EDIT: this site does claim that all listings are insured, so Concentra needs to be inserted alongside Neo to satisfy that or else you risk being labeled as misleading. Newcomers need to see the real financial entity behind their money, that’s very important information and it’s not professional to make them dig to find that out.

April 11, 2021
9:57 am
smayer97
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 331
Member Since:
September 29, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

So, even if Neo is not exclusively partnered with Concentra, the labelling still fits under Brand/FI if listed as Neo Savings/Concentra. I would expect that some seeing that listed as such should easily conclude that at the very least Neo Savings is being offered via Concentra and that Concentra is implicated in the insurance coverage.

And should Neo end up with another product with another bank, then it would get listed as Neo Savings /Bank X, connoting the same information with Bank X now being the implicated bank from an insurance coverage.

IMO this format would work to cover all bases without being overly complicated, cumbersome or confusing.

April 11, 2021
10:03 am
Vatox
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 875
Member Since:
October 29, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

smayer97 said
So, even if Neo is not exclusively partnered with Concentra, the labelling still fits under Brand/FI if listed as Neo Savings/Concentra. I would expect that some seeing that listed as such should easily conclude that at the very least Neo Savings is being offered via Concentra and that Concentra is implicated in the insurance coverage.

And should Neo end up with another product with another bank, then it would get listed as Neo Savings /Bank X, connoting the same information with Bank X now being the implicated bank from an insurance coverage.

IMO this format would work to cover all bases without being overly complicated, cumbersome or confusing.  

Yes, I like your suggested format! People need to see, upfront, who is backing the money.

April 11, 2021
10:08 am
Dean
Valhalla Mountains, British Columbia
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 610
Member Since:
January 12, 2019
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

sf-cool " Live Long And Prosper " sf-cool

April 11, 2021
10:14 am
LK
British Columbia, Canada
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 85
Member Since:
July 9, 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I've weighed in on past threads ... my view is that because Neo Financial Technologies, Inc is only providing the access to Concentra's account, Neo is a tech service provider, not a bank or credit union, and should not be listed as having a profile on this site (https://www.highinterestsavings.ca/profile/neo-financial/). That profile should be deleted. Concentra is already listed as having a profile.

The HISA page provides more options, and as above and on prior threads, there appear to be a range of views as to how best to describe the arrangement between Concentra and Neo. Again, my view is that Concentra is the bank (that is what the legal agreement says), and the name of the account is the Neo Savings Account. "Neo Financial" is nothing more than a tech company facilitating access between the customer and Concentra, made more confusing by the name of the account being "Neo Savings Account".

The easiest is:

BANK > ACCOUNT
Concentra > Neo Savings Account * [changes suggested in the asterix; see underlining]
* The Neo Savings Account is provided by Concentra but is advertised on Neo Financial Technologies' web-site. Neo Financial Technologies provides a mobile app to access Concentra's Neo Savings Account but has no browser-based online banking portal.

April 11, 2021
10:28 am
LK
British Columbia, Canada
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 85
Member Since:
July 9, 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

smayer97 said
And should Neo end up with another product with another bank, then it would get listed as Neo Savings /Bank X, connoting the same information with Bank X now being the implicated bank from an insurance coverage.
 

I respectfully disagree. If Neo ends up with partnering with another bank, it will still be as a tech provider (Neo Financial Technologies, Inc.). My view is that this would only change if Neo actually became a regulated bank or credit union, and not just a tech company. Further, in relation to any other account where Neo is providing tech access, the account would still be provided by the applicable bank or credit union, under an applicable account name, regardless of what company is providing the tech back-end.

April 11, 2021
11:29 am
smayer97
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 331
Member Since:
September 29, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Actually, I do not think we are really disagreeing... but I do think you might be getting too hung up on what Neo is or is not. The fact still remains that Neo is making available a product in cooperation/concert/via Concentra Bank.

I think we both are in agreement that we want to make sure that Neo is NOT seen as a FI nor having any insurance backing of its own but rather is relying wholly on Concentra for these distinctions. So, the tie between Neo and Concentra needs to be represented in a meaningful yet simple way to make that easy to discern from the table.

After all, what is now clear is that Neo Savings is a brand and Concentra is the bank providing the means for this branded product to be delivered and through which insurance backing is being made available.

But I think whether or not Neo Financial has its own profile is secondary to the issues above. If a separate profile is maintained then the description should clearly delineate all the points you bring up about it being a tech company enabling products through its bank partnerships, and those be identified.

April 11, 2021
11:43 am
Bill
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2368
Member Since:
September 11, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Oaken Financial doesn't even exist (at least Neo does), it's just a trademark of Home Bank, and it's on the list. The profile even says it and Home Trust are "part" of Home Bank, which isn't true as Home Bank is a subsidiary of Home Trust (i.e. they are separate legal entities) and Oaken doesn't exist so it can't a part of anything.

At the top of the HISA chart list it indicates "Always be sure to check the specific banks’ / financial insitutions’ websites and do your research about a bank account!", so I guess that's kind of an indication to casual or new users to this site, though it might be a good idea to update the verbiage to more clearly cover the increasing Neo, etc type accounts that are likely to come to market as traditional ways of banking are augmented by technology, urban hipster marketing arrangements, etc.

April 11, 2021
12:14 pm
Dean
Valhalla Mountains, British Columbia
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 610
Member Since:
January 12, 2019
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Bill said

Oaken Financial doesn't even exist (at least Neo does), it's just a trademark of Home Bank, and it's on the list. The profile even says it and Home Trust are "part" of Home Bank, which isn't true as Home Bank is a subsidiary of Home Trust (i.e. they are separate legal entities) and Oaken doesn't exist so it can't a part of anything.

At the top of the HISA chart list it indicates "Always be sure to check the specific banks’ / financial insitutions’ websites and do your research about a bank account!", so I guess that's kind of an indication to casual or new users to this site, though it might be a good idea to update the verbiage to more clearly cover the increasing Neo, etc type accounts that are likely to come to market as traditional ways of banking are augmented by technology, urban hipster marketing arrangements, etc.  

    Well said, Bill ❗

And thanks for that last line ... it made my day. LOL sf-laugh

      Dean

sf-cool " Live Long And Prosper " sf-cool

April 11, 2021
1:18 pm
Vatox
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 875
Member Since:
October 29, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Bill said
Oaken Financial doesn't even exist (at least Neo does), it's just a trademark of Home Bank, and it's on the list. The profile even says it and Home Trust are "part" of Home Bank, which isn't true as Home Bank is a subsidiary of Home Trust (i.e. they are separate legal entities) and Oaken doesn't exist so it can't a part of anything.

At the top of the HISA chart list it indicates "Always be sure to check the specific banks’ / financial insitutions’ websites and do your research about a bank account!", so I guess that's kind of an indication to casual or new users to this site, though it might be a good idea to update the verbiage to more clearly cover the increasing Neo, etc type accounts that are likely to come to market as traditional ways of banking are augmented by technology, urban hipster marketing arrangements, etc.  

Oaken does exist and it’s even listed on the CDIC site under both Home Bank and Home Trust. Where is Neo? It’s not there anywhere! It’s not under Concentra Bank or Concentra Trust because it isn’t a financial institution nor is it a brand name of Concentra. It needs to point to Concentra so people know who is backing their money. It’s poor ethics not to and the top disclaimer even states to check the bank or FI yourself. Well, what FI is for Neo Financial? It needs to be shown on the chart.

April 11, 2021
1:29 pm
Vatox
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 875
Member Since:
October 29, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

It is also ultra misleading to display the name “Neo Financial” as I’m quite sure that any new people coming to the site will assume it’s a Canadian financial institution and it isn’t.

April 11, 2021
2:08 pm
LK
British Columbia, Canada
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 85
Member Since:
July 9, 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

My replies in relation to posts above.

Post #10: smayer97 - I agree very much with your post. One minor point. You state "After all, what is now clear is that Neo Savings is a brand and Concentra is the bank providing the means for this branded product to be delivered and through which insurance backing is being made available."

Neo Savings is not a brand, but the name of the account. (Brands and accounts are listed separately on the HISA chart.) This is why in a prior thread, I thought that the best option was BANK > BRAND > ACCOUNT, but that got a lot of thumbs-down votes from others, so above I mentioned the simpler option of BANK > ACCOUNT.

If the former then:
CONCENTRA > NEO FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGIES > NEO SAVINGS ACCOUNT (I think any references to Neo should state Neo Financial Technologies, not "Neo Financial" for the reasons Vatox mentions.)

If the latter then:
CONCENTRA > NEO SAVINGS ACCOUNT

Post #11: Bill - Like Vatox, I am of the view that Oaken and Neo are different. I've covered that in a prior thread, but to repeat here -- Oaken is a trade name wholly owned by Home Bank / Home Trust Company. Each of Home Bank and Home Trust Company are listed independently on CDIC, and the CDIC states that Oaken Financial is "a trade name used by Home Bank and Home Trust Company. Eligible deposits made under the Oaken Financial trade name would be held either at Home Bank and/or Home Trust Company, both CDIC Members, and therefore are eligible for deposit protection up to $100,000 per each Member Institution, per category." Neo is not listed on CDIC because it is just a technology company providing the interface.

Oaken is a "brand" of HB/HTC, whereas Neo Financial Technologies is not a "brand" of Concentra -- it is a technology service provider. The account name is really what is key here, not Neo.

Oaken exists as a tradename owned by HB/HTC, though not as a separate legal entity, correct. Basically, it is a division of HB, so it is the same legal entity as HB. It exists are part of the legal entity that is HB. That is not the case with Neo Financial Technologies. Neo is neither a division of Concentra (brand), nor a subsidiary of Concentra.

However, I see your point regarding the profile page, and the similarities in that regard re Oaken and Neo, in that they're both connected (in some way, differing ways) to the actual legal bank. Thus, if Neo continues to have a profile page on this site, I recommend that it be listed as "Neo Financial Technologies" to avoid the inference that it is a FI when it is not.

April 11, 2021
2:31 pm
LK
British Columbia, Canada
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 85
Member Since:
July 9, 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Bill said
.... though it might be a good idea to update the verbiage to more clearly cover the increasing Neo, etc type accounts that are likely to come to market as traditional ways of banking are augmented by technology, urban hipster marketing arrangements, etc.  

Excellent point, Bill. With the federal government's recent "review into the merits of open banking", which they are now calling "consumer-directed finance", formal changes are likely coming. However, there are not yet any approvals re such nor a regulatory regime in place. If/when same are approved, we shall likely see an expanded role for "fin-techs" (financial technology companies that act as a service provider for FIs) and ever-more confusing structural arrangements. This site will need to make decisions as to how to describe such if/as things progress. For now, no fin-techs are approved by the federal government to act as FIs, and that includes Neo Financial Technologies. Who knows what will come in future?! sf-laugh

April 11, 2021
2:55 pm
Dean
Valhalla Mountains, British Columbia
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 610
Member Since:
January 12, 2019
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

.
In the end, it's 'Much To-Do' about very little. I think some here (including myself) have too much time on their hands today.

Maybe it's time for All of us to 'Take A Hike In The Park' ... LOL sf-laugh

    Dean

sf-cool " Live Long And Prosper " sf-cool

April 11, 2021
4:09 pm
Vatox
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 875
Member Since:
October 29, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Dean said
.
In the end, it's 'Much To-Do' about very little. I think some here (including myself) have too much time on their hands today.

Maybe it's time for All of us to 'Take A Hike In The Park' ... LOL sf-laugh

    Dean

  

yes, this is true and I have nothing more to say about it.

April 11, 2021
5:22 pm
Bill
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2368
Member Since:
September 11, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I agree, it's really not that complicated, and that as long as CDIC's criterion is that it be a trade name of the fi then Neo will not appear there. On my own summary spreadsheet I list such accounts as CIBC (Simplii), Home Bank (Oaken), Home Trust (Oaken), Cambrian CU (Achieva), etc, (it would be Concentra (Neo)), that works for me and keeps the CDIC, etc coverage clear to me. And (if I've read human nature right in my life) if I have any money left I'm pretty confident my executor/heirs will find the motivation to hunt down exactly where it's all at.

April 11, 2021
7:29 pm
Loonie
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 7044
Member Since:
October 21, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I think I must have missed a step some time ago as I wasn't interested in Neo earlier (and still not planning on getting an account with them).
Do we have verification that Concentra is behind this account and that it is thus CDIC protected? I could find nothing to this effect on the Concentra site, so am wondering.
I'd appreciate it if someone could point me to where Concentra verifies this.

No permission to create posts

Please write your comments in the forum.