I am pleased that Robert Maslac was "amused" ("Cancelled Checks Costly," Aug. 4) by my previous letter (July 4) deploring the bank practice of not returning cancelled checks--or "check safekeeping," to use their euphemism.
As Maslac explains, the banks have been forced to find "creative" ways of meeting "rising operating costs" such as postage--specifically, those costs above the base 22-cent rate--and the higher interest rates banks now "must" pay because of deregulation. (No mention of the higher interest rates banks now "must" charge on their loans).
Now if Maslac regards check safekeeping as a "creative" solution to rising operating costs, let me suggest another: ban all withdrawals. Surely if check safekeeping is "creative," then the banning of withdrawals would be nothing less than Mozartean.
Unfortunately for Maslac's attempt to defend the indefensible, the bank's current problems were not caused by the 22-cent stamp, but by 22-cent thinking of those bank executives who saw deregulation as a green light to take their banks into activities in which they never belonged in the first place.