MSE News: MPs call for return of cheque guarantee cards

JuicyJesus

A_Flock_Of_Sheep wrote: »

If the Cheque Guarantee Card comes back everyone that doesnt write many cheques will be able to start again. Especially if retailers accept them.

Yippee. What a great thing that would be. /sarcasm

In fact if people start offering them to retailers and when they decline the shoppers simply walk away leaving trolleys full of groceries for the staff to sort out they will soon change their minds.

This will not get cheque acceptance reinstated. All you'll do is p*ss off some low-paid supermarket workers, who will not give a toss about your "protest". Bear in mind also that accepting a cheque at this point is a risk for the shop, not to mention costly, and as such they'd much rather not bother.

Why are you so fascinated by cheques? Do they make you feel big and important or something? That seems to be the only reason some people want to use them... there seems to be this attitude that cheques are amazing and everyone should use them for everything, even in the absence of any notable benefit.

rb10

Kyresa wrote: »

I write one cheque every week to pay for my son's nursery school fees.

Next year I'll need to write a cheque once a term for his music lessons.

I may also have to write a cheque to the school to cover trip fees etc.

Just because "YOU lot' don't use cheques, there IS still a need for them. Look a bit further than just "shops"

And if your son's nursery, music teacher and school were a little more forward thinking, then there is no reason why they should not be able to accept card and/or BACS payments.

Kyresa

rb10 wrote: »

And if your son's nursery, music teacher and school were a little more forward thinking, then there is no reason why they should not be able to accept card and/or BACS payments.

Please tell me how exactly the music teacher will take card? Will he/she carry a little machine around with them?

The fact is, for them, cheque is convenient, even if for YOU, it isn't

NFH

Kyresa wrote: »

The fact is, for them, cheque is convenient, even if for YOU, it isn't

No, the cheque is not as convenient for the payee as a FPS or BACS payment. What does the payee do with the cheque? They pay it into a bank account, and have to make a trip to the bank to do so. Therefore instead of you giving an onerous piece of paper to the payee, the payee could give you their sort code and account number, and then you could remit the payment straight into their bank account.

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

I don't know whay people are so down on cheques.

At the end of the day if you choose not to use them - fine. That's up to you. If you prefer to use a Debit Card or BACS that is your choice. It is all about personal choice at the end of the day and people shouldn't really slag off people's choice. People choose Vauxhall cars, Ford Cars, Large Cars, Small Cars at the end of the day they all do the same thing. At the end of the day cards, cheques, cash all do the same thing. They pay people.

NFH

A_Flock_Of_Sheep wrote: »

At the end of the day if you choose not to use them - fine. That's up to you. If you prefer to use a Debit Card or BACS that is your choice. It is all about personal choice at the end of the day

This is where you're wrong. If someone sends you a cheque in settlement of a debt, then you don't have the choice. The debtor puts the onus on you to waste your time going to the bank because they can't be bothered to do a simple FPS/BACS payment straight into your account. Cheques are used by lazy debtors who don't care about wasting the payee's time. Cheques don't exist in many other countries where cheques' redundancy was recognised years or decades ago.

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

NFH wrote: »

This is where you're wrong. If someone sends you a cheque in settlement of a debt, then you don't have the choice. The debtor puts the onus on you to waste your time going to the bank because they can't be bothered to do a simple FPS/BACS payment straight into your account. Cheques are used by lazy debtors who don't care about wasting the payee's time. Cheques don't exist in many other countries where cheques' redundancy was recognised years or decades ago.

You can post the cheque to your bank. Or they could go back to uncrossed cheques you can cash at a bank branch. Anyway think of the employment you are maintaining by taking your cheque to a human cashier to process for you.

James

It's quite obvious from the above posting that 'Cheques' suit many individuals and traders, while many others disagree.

Why remove a payment system that still suits a large number of individuals?

The UK Payments Association has clearly had to look a payment by cheque again.

They (UKPA) were on Radio 4 this week reminding consumers that they can obtain Chip & Signature Cards vice Chip & PIN. Why? Because for whatever reason, many people just can't handle a PIN.

It could be you in future that doesn't have Internet Access, and maybe housebound. In this situation payment by cheque is the most convenient solution.

NFH

A_Flock_Of_Sheep wrote: »

You can post the cheque to your bank. Or they could go back to uncrossed cheques you can cash at a bank branch.

That's ridiculous. In either case, it means a trip somewhere, e.g. to the bank or to the post office (to buy a stamp and envelope). In either case, it's an unnecessary waste of my valuable time.

A_Flock_Of_Sheep wrote: »

Anyway think of the employment you are maintaining by taking your cheque to a human cashier to process for you.

That's even more ridiculous. Using bank staff to process unnecessary pieces of paper is a wasteful use of human resources who could be better deployed on generating revenue for the bank. If consumers want to use cheques (writing them or depositing them), they should pay a fee to cover the human resources that are necessary to process this costly and archaic method of payment.

Kyresa

NFH wrote: »

No, the cheque is not as convenient for the payee as a FPS or BACS payment. What does the payee do with the cheque? They pay it into a bank account, and have to make a trip to the bank to do so. Therefore instead of you giving an onerous piece of paper to the payee, the payee could give you their sort code and account number, and then you could remit the payment straight into their bank account.

The payee knows that they have the payment in their hands, they can cross it off their books, and pay it in when they chose. If it bounces, the bank lets them know, then there's the embarrassment for the payer of having to deal with it.

With BACS they have to check their statements daily, check for reference numbers, marry them up, chase individuals "oh but I sent it, maybe to the wrong account number, I'll have to chase the bank up.. " etc etc. There's more work for the payee trying to marry up bacs payments than just simply receiving a cheque and paying it in, usually with a host of other cheques. so no real time lost there.


You can use the same positives and negatives for both systems to be honest. As others have said, whilst you do not see the need for cheques, there clearly IS still a need for them.