Result: Check dated next day (7–22) postmarked 7–29 arrived on 7–30 with a nice statement. But the 1099B was attached… not something the average investor would think to save ‘til April 1999 and a poor practice, in our opinion.

Result: First we received a statement (postmark illegible) showing a sale as of 7–23 (a Thursday) with a settlement date of 7–28 (T+3) and the notation, "Check sent separate." (Hey B–E, there is room to print the proper adverb).
The check arrived on 8–3 (in an envelope without a postmark; very bad practice, we say) and with the 1099B enclosed (a practice we dislike and one we guarantee will cost them more money in the long run, as taxpayers call in a panic for a duplicate – either because it’s April 1999 and they’re filing or because they’ve been picked up as non–filers.

We couldn’t find a toll–free number on the DRP statement, so we tore off the form to sell a few shares and mailed it, but the envelope rested behind the toaster ‘til Friday, the 24^th.

Result: On August 3^rd, we got a statement showing a sale on 7–31 with the "Check sent separate" message. The check itself – bearing a 7–30 date arrived the same day, along with a 1099B showing the date of sale as 7–28 (a not terribly important discrepancy, we’d guess)

After a one–minute wait, and a recorded message, plus another 25 seconds of financial news, the aptly named Joy assured that we could indeed sell via phone. After telling us we were on a recorded line she verified our TIN and street address. After we asked, she quoted the fee and commission rate. "We’ll sell within 1–5 days," she said and we could expect the proceeds in 10–13 days. ("Not very fast", we commented. "We need to allow time to verify the sale and for time in the mail", she said.) Then a glitch: The joint tenant would need to verify. "She’ll need to call back or sign a fax to OK the transaction" Joy advised, and gave us a transaction number to refer to. Deviously, we were thinking of masquerading as Pat or of signing her name ourselves (who would really know?) when Pat walked in and OK’d the deal. (Duh!)

Result: Share were sold as of 7–28 and a statement to that effect was postmarked that day and received on 7–29. But the check arrived – dated 7–28, with no postmark on the envelope (very bad practice, as we’ve noted) on August 5^th.

When we called ChaseMellon’s toll–free number to Chase a recording told us they were experiencing heavy phone volumes, that the estimated wait would be greater than 5 minutes, but that we could fax questions or instructions to them, so we did.

Result: A statement dated 7–27 showed the sale was made on 7–29 (whoops!) while the check, which again trailed behind, under separate cover, arrived (sans postmark) on August 12^th.
*Guess we got what we paid for, on balance.

Similar experience to above; 5+ minute "expected wait time;" faxed instructions.

Result: Received a statement showing sale on 7–29 while the check (dated 8–3) arrived on 8–6.
*For this fee we could have used a discount broker and gotten our proceeds within five business days (i.e. 2 days after T + 3).

DQE serves as its own Plan Agent. Called their phone center and were told we’d have to request the sale in writing. Wrote the letter on Tuesday, 7–21, but forgot to mail it until Friday, the 24th.

Result: They must have received the letter by Monday because the transaction statement was dated July 28^th, indicating a settlement date of July 31^st. The check was dated July 31^st and mailed on July 30^th (excellent business practice, we’d say) and it was received on July 31^st! For all this we paid a mere $3.50.

So we tried PHILIP MORRIS, another 1^st Chicago client, where the message predicted a three–minute wait, but where our call went through after one minute and forty seconds (good psychology, we’d say). Happily, we were able to piggyback the IBM transaction on the same call.

Result: Somewhat to our surprise, given the bad start we got off to, both checks were in the mail on the 23^rd, and both were received on the 24^th… only two business days after our call. Real fast service if you don’t count the phone time, but the First Chicago fees were among the highest we encountered.

Welcomed us on two rings to their "shareholder service helpline" and gave us a choice of English or Spanish. We pretended to be "calling from a rotary phone" (as we usually do, because it’s usually the fastest way to get a person. If you foolishly press 1 to indicate pushbuttonability, you’re often confronted with a flock of new buttons to push). "You must authorize the sale in writing" we were told. "But can we fax it to you?" we asked. Indeed we could, so we faxed away.

Result: We received a statement – printed on 7–25 and showing a sale on 7–23 – on the 30th. The check had arrived the day before. This was the best value – in terms of price, speed and service – received from a bank agent in our test, although, as with most of the bank reps we spoke with, some coaching was necessary.

TEXACO serves as its own Plan Agent. Their toll–free number was answered by a real person within 14 seconds, and their personable rep quickly gave us the info we needed, with little or no prompting. "Yes, you can fax your instructions to sell; in fact, tomorrow is the cut–off date if you wish to sell this week."

Result: The sale was made on the 22^nd and the check, which arrived on Monday the 27^th was postmarked the 23^rd. It came with a crystal–clear transaction advice and a postage–paid survey, inviting us to rate the service we received… which was the best of our 11 tries, by far. We especially liked the way they report gross proceeds, which is all a seller need to report… even though it disguised to a degree the highly favorable costs of selling shares through the plan; a very investor friendly $.04 per share.