Bank took standing order late

Mikeyorks

You mean like the Banks whose systems don't know weekends / Bank Holidays exist? And therefore tie up your funds for days in advance because they consider the day after 30th Dec is the 3rd January!

Gromitt

Isn't a DD a batched payment method?

If the bank can process the DD the day before (2nd) then why can't process the SO at the same time, so they both arrive at the account on the same day? If the SO came from a different bank, then fair enough, but if its the same bank then they already have the capability of running batches on the 2nd.

Otherwise I'd expect the requirement for the DD would be that the money needed to be there by the 30th December for payments on the 3rd January?

stclair

The standing order may have not been sent by FP it could have been sent by D+1

jonesMUFCforever

I have read this thread with interest and only have one question to ask the OP - why not have the direct debits go out of the same account that the wages go into to save all this hassle?

jennifernil

WHY are there various versions of FPs? And is it reasonable to expect that the public know about this? Personally, to me a FP is a FP and arrives in 2 hours!

I was quite surprised to see our DDs for up to and including the 3rd ( only 4 small ones) showing on the account late on the 30th, but dated the 3rd. And reducing our balance. Fortunately our pensions due on the 1st had been credited on the 30th, so there was no problem, but still pretty disconcerting!

Is this only happening with Halifax since the switch to the Lloyds system?

After the switch in September, I nearly got caught out by the, to me, weird Lloyds system which, unlike the previous Halifax system, does not send internal SOs on weekends.

I have had to cancel my SOs sending the £1000 round our Reward accounts as a result, which is a real pain to us as we are often away for 3-4 months with very limited access to internet banking.

YorkshireBoy

jennifernil wrote: »

WHY are there various versions of FPs?

Well 'immediate' speaks for itself.

'Future dated' also speaks for itself.

And 'Standing Order' requires a different cancellation notification period to the other 2 above.

This, from the help pages of RBS, may clarify...

http://www.rbs.co.uk/personal/ms/faster-payments/faq.ashx#8

http://www.rbs.co.uk/personal/ms/faster-payments/faq.ashx#10

And is it reasonable to expect that the public know about this?

Probably only if they read their account T&Cs and the help pages available to them.

I was quite surprised to see our DDs for up to and including the 3rd ( only 4 small ones) showing on the account late on the 30th, but dated the 3rd. And reducing our balance.

Slight correction...they acted to reduce your 'available' balance. Because the cash wasn't physically removed you were still earning interest on it, or not paying debit interest on it. It's just that, because you couldn't replenish any funds until the next working day you couldn't actually spend it...hence the 'available' balance term.

Mikeyorks

jennifernil wrote: »

I was quite surprised to see our DDs for up to and including the 3rd ( only 4 small ones) showing on the account late on the 30th, but dated the 3rd. And reducing our balance. Fortunately our pensions due on the 1st had been credited on the 30th, so there was no problem, but still pretty disconcerting!

Is this only happening with Halifax since the switch to the Lloyds system?

.

Never - ever - happens with our Halifax accounts. Either before or after the platform change to Lloyds.

They don't (usually) pre-process in that manner - which is why they usually, for weekends, run Batch from early Sunday evening. Perhaps they decided on a different stance for the New Year break - hence why no processing the night of the 2nd Jan. And, therefore, the reason for this thread.

On the subject of the different types of FP. A brief description here of how it's been since inception (other than the 'Corporate Bulk') :

http://www.fasterpayments.org.uk/faster_payments/how_to_use_the_faster_payments_service_new/-/page/1947/

jamesd

NFH wrote: »

Similarly to the OP, I have a separate accounts for direct debits, just to prevent DD payees from having access to main accounts, and I deliberately told my bank to remove any overdraft facility on it. If my bank had failed to pay a standing order into my direct debits account, I would be furious.

You're the person with the contractual obligation to the payees to make sure those happen, not your bank. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me for you to increase the chance that you'll fail to meet your obligations to third parties.

NFH wrote: »

The OP has every right to complain to Lloyds for not following his instructions and to ask for consequential losses to be reimbursed.

I agree. And the third parties he had an obligation to pay on time have every right to report on his credit report that that didn't happen, regardless of the reason.

It's fine to expect the bank to take care of the costs but we do need to remember that it's us who have the obligation to pay, not our banks. If they make a habit of getting things wrong we can do things like changing bank to help us increase our reliability as a payer. Even if the bank was responsible we're still imposing costs on those we're required to pay to deal with the mess that we could have avoided by being more prudent. Part of our responsibility is to see that those simply happen, like clockwork, even in the face of occasional mistakes and failures.

Personally I also like to have a full month of in credit balance as well as what will be required, so things can go wrong for thee full months before I fail to meet my obligations. Though even that can fail due to things like blocks on accounts due to fraud checks and such.

jennifernil

YorkshireBoy wrote: »

Well 'immediate' speaks for itself.

'Future dated' also speaks for itself.

And 'Standing Order' requires a different cancellation notification period to the other 2 above.

This, from the help pages of RBS, may clarify...

http://www.rbs.co.uk/personal/ms/faster-payments/faq.ashx#8

http://www.rbs.co.uk/personal/ms/faster-payments/faq.ashx#10Probably only if they read their account T&Cs and the help pages available to them.Slight correction...they acted to reduce your 'available' balance. Because the cash wasn't physically removed you were still earning interest on it, or not paying debit interest on it. It's just that, because you couldn't replenish any funds until the next working day you couldn't actually spend it...hence the 'available' balance term.

OK, I didn't phrase that too well.

I know they are different according to how they are set up, what I meant was why might the different types of payment be treated differently, as in not arriving the day they were sent for example?

Or even not being sent as a FP at all. What is this D+1?

Will there be a point at which all payments are faster payments?

Halifax insist on telling me that SOs are not sent by FP, is this correct?

Will there ever be the same conditions/limits operating in every bank?

Gromitt

D+0 = Same day. CHAPS.
D+1 = Next working day. The new PSD rule.
D+3 = BACS. (No longer allowed)
etc.

SOs must be sent by D+1.

FPs are normally 2 hours, but only guarantee D+1.