Click to go to Forum Home Click to go to maXbimmer Home

Go Back   maXbimmer Forums > Misc > Off-topic
User Name
Password


Welcome to Maxbimmer.com!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 07-26-2009, 03:24 PM   #1
bmdbley'sBro
wouldu like some tinfoil?
 
bmdbley'sBro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in your attic!
Posts: 4,674
Canadian Banks now want urine and hair samples to obtain mortgage?



the 'if u have nothing to hide' crowd can go post elsewhere, please

Quote:
SASKATOON - It has become a first for Canadians and the implications can be astronomical, a massively large insurance firm; The CUMIS Group Limited Insurance who have been partnered along with thousands of 'credit unions' across North America for insurance requirements, has now accepted a policy of pre-screening drug tests & hair samples for the right to obtain home loan insurance, a necessity, if you’re going to purchase a home in Canada.

We first learned of this policy from a source who prefers to remain anonymous. The bank in question is called AFFINITY CREDIT UNION in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada; they are partnered with CUMIS insurance to offer home loan insurance.


This precedent setting policy from CUMIS & AFFINITY CREDIT UNION in Canada has now mandated that hair samples, urine drug testing, as well as a documented question and answer portion, (which our sources have indicated to be highly sensitive personal inquiries), will now be the norm for those apparently “high-risk” individuals.


We first learned of this story from a young man in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada. Our source was instructed to undergo a rigorous pre-screening procedure in order to obtain insurance for his new home.

Our source stated that; "the bank (Affinity credit union) said that I should use the insurance company they provide to make things smoother, I never thought anything of it." "I don't really care if I get tested; it's just a hassle with my work schedule" said our source. Additional information gathered showed that our sources’ home value was approximately $300,000 when he applied for the loan – slightly above the average cost of a home in Canada, sitting at $287,000.

University of Saskatchewan, Professor William Buschert from the Department of Philosophy and Political Studies, says he is “surprised it is happening in Canada,” he also noted “from an ethical standpoint, it’s disturbing”. “The United States Government, got rid of this mandate in 2008, precisely because of the legal, moral, and privacy implications it presents… not to mention the selective way of ‘insuring’ one group of people and not the other. However, from the stance of the insurance companies, this ensures that they don’t get the “wrong” type of people”.

Professor Buschert also mentioned, playing devil’s advocate at times, that having this practice banned may create an unfair burden on the insurance companies and will ultimately create higher premium rates for the clients they serve.

When asked about the attitude of the general public regarding this issue of insurance companies gaining biometric samples for home loans, when some would say ‘what’s the harm, I have nothing to hide’, Professor Buschert responded with the following, “regardless of whether someone may have a ‘nothing to hide, so what's the harm’ attitude, it is obvious that this is an encroachment of individual freedoms, not to mention the privacy issues herein”.

We also contacted Saskatchewan Government Insurance Canada for comments, (they are a government agency who provides various types of insurance for western & central Canada; it is to be noted that SGI Canada is entirely separate from CUMIS) SGI Canada stated that; "we do not have a policy for drug testing for home insurance purposes."

We also reached the bank in question, AFFINITY CREDIT UNION in Saskatoon, sk, Canada. They commented that "High Risk" individuals may include those who purchase a home above 300,000 dollars".

When asked if AFFINITY CREDIT UNION were aware of their partner CUMIS, performing drug screening, hair samples, and a multitude of highly personal information for ‘high risk’ individuals seeking home insurance, they responded with the following, “CUMIS does conduct the necessary screening procedure for homes above 300,000 dollars.” And does that include hair samples and urine samples? “yes”.

When reached for comment a CUMIS representative stated that; “it is our policy to conduct drug screening for homes loans above 300,000 dollars, so we can protect that money somehow” they also stated that even if you answer ‘no’ to any questions on the health questionnaire you will still have to “provide a urine sample”. Interviewer: Are you aware of an executive order from Bush in 2008, disallowed CUMIS INS from gathering hair and urine samples, in the USA? They responded by saying. “well, were not in the states are we”. Indeed we are not, but the question remains, is it still ethically responsible, regardless of the location?



Upon further investigation, we have concluded that this issue has raised more questions than answers.
How long has this been going on? Are other insurance companies practicing this policy? Is this being documented? What is done with the biometric samples? Legal issues? Are the samples allowed to be sold to other insurance companies? Why is this not being reported in the mainstream media? Is the government going to do anything about it?


What makes this case interesting is that this was not an abnormally large mortgage value, and there were no indications that this individual was singled out for any reason. We are led to believe that this will be the norm from now on, until the public makes a fuss, we will all be forced to give up our freedoms for the greed of major corporations like Cumis Group Limited.



http://thenorthwestherald.blogspot.c...-and-hair.html
yes its mostly an opinion piece, but theres Facts in there..

oh u have a pre-existing condition sorry no mortgage for u!

thoughts?
__________________
bmdbley'sBro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2009, 05:49 PM   #2
344i
5th Gear Member
 
344i's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: .
Posts: 1,122
absolutely retarded. This is exactly in line with all the other crap insurance companies try too pull. Shameful
344i is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2009, 06:00 PM   #3
TheLoneVR!
戦うために住み、住む戦い
 
TheLoneVR!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Home
Posts: 4,110
omg this is just absolutely rediculuous!!!
No one has privacy anymore!!!!
TheLoneVR! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2009, 07:49 PM   #4
Deep 3.2TL
6th Gear Member
 
Deep 3.2TL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Milton
Posts: 3,230
Deal with a real bank and you'll be fine...
Deep 3.2TL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2009, 08:29 PM   #5
saix
rawr
 
saix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: under a bridge
Posts: 2,270
Send a message via AIM to saix
I think the only drug test that should be allowed is a Saliva Drug Test which would actually rule out all the high risk hard drug addicts.
saix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 09:50 AM   #6
chromius
6th Gear Member
 
chromius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,006
LOL, That's just funny. for one, if you're stupid enough to actually allow them to take the samples, then you're either a) desperate, and no one else will give you a mortgage, and this is your last resort or b) just plain stupid and probably shouldn't be getting a mortgage anyway.

They're a private company, and if they want to push customers away by doing that then they have every right to, as consumers we have a choice to go to another bank if we really don't want to give samples.

The market will dictate if they continue to do that. The simple fact is that it's the bank's money, and they should have the right to put whatever criteria they want on who they give it to.

It's not like you have a "right" to their money or a mortgage. If you don't like their policy, then move on to another company.
__________________
Photobucket
chromius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 10:28 AM   #7
Deep 3.2TL
6th Gear Member
 
Deep 3.2TL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Milton
Posts: 3,230
^^^ Agreed.

Hopefully the market will smack them enough to make a positive change in their policy.
Deep 3.2TL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 02:11 PM   #8
MiroE36
6th Gear Member
 
MiroE36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,896
i think this idea is great...
























































NOT!
__________________
1992 325i / Briliant rot - SOLD @ 301,000km
1998 318is / Arktic silber - SOLD @ 207,000km
2007 335i / Jet Black - CURRENT @ 28,000 km

MiroE36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 03:04 PM   #9
Fel
Not Banned
 
Fel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Schomberg
Posts: 4,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by chromius View Post
LOL, That's just funny. for one, if you're stupid enough to actually allow them to take the samples, then you're either a) desperate, and no one else will give you a mortgage, and this is your last resort or b) just plain stupid and probably shouldn't be getting a mortgage anyway.

They're a private company, and if they want to push customers away by doing that then they have every right to, as consumers we have a choice to go to another bank if we really don't want to give samples.

The market will dictate if they continue to do that. The simple fact is that it's the bank's money, and they should have the right to put whatever criteria they want on who they give it to.

It's not like you have a "right" to their money or a mortgage. If you don't like their policy, then move on to another company.

That about sums it up..... they are cutting down on undesirable clientelle.

The same thing happens in the car insurance business, just not by the same means. "We don't want to insure males under 24.... what do we do? Skyrocket the rates for that group of people. If they don't like it, they'll go somewhere else. If they're stupid enough to pay such a premium, then fine we'll take 'em"

If they want to cut down on drug addicts taking out mortgages and then going broke on them, they can do so.... access to a mortgage is not a basic human right... we don't set those rules. They give us money, they can set the terms. If the consumer rejects their approach, they go bankrupt. That's how business works.
__________________
Fel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 03:46 PM   #10
sirex
King Sirex
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 9,846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fel View Post
That about sums it up..... they are cutting down on undesirable clientelle.

The same thing happens in the car insurance business, just not by the same means. "We don't want to insure males under 24.... what do we do? Skyrocket the rates for that group of people. If they don't like it, they'll go somewhere else. If they're stupid enough to pay such a premium, then fine we'll take 'em"

If they want to cut down on drug addicts taking out mortgages and then going broke on them, they can do so.... access to a mortgage is not a basic human right... we don't set those rules. They give us money, they can set the terms. If the consumer rejects their approach, they go bankrupt. That's how business works.
Maybe when they set the terms of: No Ethnic Minorities allowed, will we then smarten up as a society?]

Afterall it is their business, its not like they have to serve Black, Brown, or Yellow people, amiright? Discrimination against race is cool because black people are 95% less likely to get a good paying job - I mean the stats talk for themselves right?

Insurance for people under 25 is high in Urban areas. Young drivers are not as experience as their older ones. Thats a fact. The same holds true for a young professional starting out in his career, he is less likely to hold his job then a person who has a solid root in the business. These are facts and stats. Charging higher premiums based on experience, is one thing, charging higher premiums based on Race, Religion, or drug use from your passed is retarded.
So what if you smoke dope every now and then? If you can afford the house and have the bank account and the job to prove it, you shouldn't be penalized.
__________________

Last edited by sirex; 07-27-2009 at 03:51 PM.
sirex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 03:47 PM   #11
Deep 3.2TL
6th Gear Member
 
Deep 3.2TL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Milton
Posts: 3,230
^^^^^

Not even close to the same thing - They are discriminating based on race in your scenario.

Drug testing doesn't play the race card...
Deep 3.2TL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 03:54 PM   #12
sirex
King Sirex
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 9,846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deep 3.2TL View Post
^^^^^

Not even close to the same thing - They are discriminating based on race in your scenario.

Drug testing doesn't play the race card...

Oh you dont think so?

Show me how many white people, with a good bank account and a stable job are going to get turned down that smoke dope.

Then show me how many Black/Brown/Native people that smoke dope with the same money/job get turned down.
__________________
sirex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 04:12 PM   #13
Deep 3.2TL
6th Gear Member
 
Deep 3.2TL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Milton
Posts: 3,230
Still not the same thing - Yea the minorities you listed have a higher incidence of drugs, but guess what? No one made them do it. I'm a minority - Have TONS of credit (not used up, just available to me) Top credit scores.

Just cuz you are a minority doesn't mean you are doing drugs. IE you could be white trash and turned down...

Your argument doesn't hold water - you are arguing that "no ethnic minorities allowed" is the same as if you do drugs and you are an ethnic minority. Not even close.
Deep 3.2TL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 04:21 PM   #14
Fel
Not Banned
 
Fel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Schomberg
Posts: 4,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirex View Post
Maybe when they set the terms of: No Ethnic Minorities allowed, will we then smarten up as a society?]

Afterall it is their business, its not like they have to serve Black, Brown, or Yellow people, amiright? Discrimination against race is cool because black people are 95% less likely to get a good paying job - I mean the stats talk for themselves right?

Insurance for people under 25 is high in Urban areas. Young drivers are not as experience as their older ones. Thats a fact. The same holds true for a young professional starting out in his career, he is less likely to hold his job then a person who has a solid root in the business. These are facts and stats. Charging higher premiums based on experience, is one thing, charging higher premiums based on Race, Religion, or drug use from your passed is retarded.
So what if you smoke dope every now and then? If you can afford the house and have the bank account and the job to prove it, you shouldn't be penalized.
I didn't say a word about race, this has nothing to do with that.

it also isn't limited to weed. What about the white 27 year old who just so happens to be a heroin addict? Do you think he's more likely to spend his paycheck on his mortgage, or on another dose?

And yes, car insurance rates are based on statistics, but only to a point. A company still has a say in what kind of clients it wants. I fit into exactly the same statistical category no matter what company looks at me... my age, gender, and car won't change depending on which company I go to..... but each one of them will give me a different rate.

Another note is that this policy, as far as I can tell, is only for "high-risk" mortgages.... those would be any mortgage where the downpayment is less than 20%, any mortgage where the value is over $300K, etc. This does not apply to everyone, just those people who are a higher risk (that's why they're referred to as "high-risk")
__________________
Fel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 04:24 PM   #15
Fel
Not Banned
 
Fel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Schomberg
Posts: 4,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirex View Post
Maybe when they set the terms of: No Ethnic Minorities allowed, will we then smarten up as a society?]

Afterall it is their business, its not like they have to serve Black, Brown, or Yellow people, amiright? Discrimination against race is cool because black people are 95% less likely to get a good paying job - I mean the stats talk for themselves right?
Insurance for people under 25 is high in Urban areas. Young drivers are not as experience as their older ones. Thats a fact. The same holds true for a young professional starting out in his career, he is less likely to hold his job then a person who has a solid root in the business. These are facts and stats. Charging higher premiums based on experience, is one thing, charging higher premiums based on Race, Religion, or drug use from your passed is retarded.
So what if you smoke dope every now and then? If you can afford the house and have the bank account and the job to prove it, you shouldn't be penalized.
Sorry, I also had to highlight these points, as I found them humerous.
__________________
Fel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Maxbimmer Copyright 2001 - 2015