(Deleted..)

SnowTiger

2sides2everystory wrote: »

It's all a question of failed expectations if we are being generous.

The fact is that I have every reason to expect that if I can move money instantaneously into a bank I should be able to move it back instantaneously, no matter what day of the week or "bank holiday" it is. I should be able to expect standardisation between UK banks on this. We clearly do not have it.

I think we have conclusively shown this weekend that "working days" has very little to do with it.

We...

Is it we or I?

You appear to have been on your own on this one, so I guess it's I. :rotfl:

meer53

2sides2everystory wrote: »

Well in terms of whether I was defrauded or not I guess the jury is still out. Same as one still might be just a little bit pregnant for a while even if the doc says the tablet always work inside 72 hours, when in the old days it was pot luck that in the normal course the term says wait 9 months and by then you'll see!

On the question of whether the receiving bank may not have acknowledged the receipt until late I will allow that I may not have an example of the same (receiving) bank having instantaneously acknowledged a credit from a non-Santander sending bank. I'll try it now. I confidently expect it to work even though today is not a working day.

It's all a question of failed expectations if we are being generous.

The fact is that I have every reason to expect that if I can move money instantaneously into a bank I should be able to move it back instantaneously, no matter what day of the week or "bank holiday" it is. I should be able to expect standardisation between UK banks on this. We clearly do not have it.

I think we have conclusively shown this weekend that "working days" has very little to do with it.

We have seen that money gets recorded in and out on different dates by different receivers and senders (some banks show payments received days before sending banks say they sent it!) and that the transaction dates they show us as as relevant can and do include weekends and supposed bank holidays. It seems to me that in the space of a weekend like this one, the dates shown to us are also prone to get altered or 'updated' in interesting ways over time at both ends of the transactions. I always thought a 'statement' was sacrosanct piece of accounting. Clearly it is a moving feast when it comes to Faster Payments.

I think it is about time that all suggestion of "working days" as an excuse for delay in electronic banking transactions is dropped entirely. We all know the bank and interbank computers are on 24/7 366 hours a day and the money only lives in the computers. Let's all remember too whose money it is. If we instruct for money to be moved then it should be moved instantaneously or we should be notified of exactly why it hasn't been.

There should in 2012 be no maybe's, no small print "schedules" that work like Ryanair's "you have arrived on yet another ontime Ryanair flight and over 90% of our ... etc ..." when we know they have already factored in to their schedules the extra time needed to embark 4 wheelchair passengers and the extra flight time needed to deal with an 80 knot headwind, and we sure as hell know that if we arrive 20 minutes early they still won't let us off the plane if the ground crews aren't ready for us according to their own schedules!

No, electronic banking isn't like that - or is it?

Your expectations are too high. Until EVERY bank uses the same computer systems there will always be anomalies.

MoneyMagic01273

2sides2everystory wrote: »

It's all a question of failed expectations if we are being generous.

Ahhhh... in that case it would have been more appropriate to call the thread "are Santander planning to fail my expectations?" yes?

No? Not the right level of "drama" for you? Oh, OK then...;)

Paul_01

Is this guy still prattling on?

You seem to have answered your own question, no Santander haven't defrauded you this weekend.

It seems you have learned something though, they are generally seen as a pretty poor outfit.

Incidentally, are you prepared to apologise now that you've been proven wrong on more than one of your points?

pmduk

You've used this site for 18 months, surely you've realised that whilst Santander may be Europe's largest, they're also UK's worst. This doesn't amount to fraud however.

simplybest

2sides2everystory wrote: »

I moved some money to Santander around midday today by Faster Payments.

It arrived immediately. I was planning on putting it in a 2011/12 ISA but as I applied I realise I'd missed their deadline.

So I opened one with someone else instead and later on this afternoon I set about moving the money back from Santander.

First their website crashed after I had submitted the payment details and I'd waited about 30 secs or more for the details to be confirmed back to me. I sat there forced to watch a lame browser status message saying "... waiting for retail.santander.co.uk", and then a completely blank webpage opened with URL https://retail.santander.co.uk/EBAN_Payees_ENS/channel.ssobto?dse_contextRoot=true

Anyway I checked the other account to make sure nothing had arrived and checked the Santander balance to make sure nothing had left and tried again. This time apparent success, but nothing moved.

So I went out and now I am back here well over 4 hours later wondering if Santander have set out to defraud me of my money's worth over the holiday weekend because the money is still not where it is supposed to be.

What do we think?

Nothing surprises me with Santander losing money electronically is their speciality, trust me.

MoneyMagic01273

2sides2everystory wrote: »

Oh come on meer53, have you not heard of standardised industry electronic messaging and agreed API specifications?

API's only dictate the standardised layouts and protocols used for messaging services between potentially very different systems. Most proprietary banking systems - even legacy ones - can be updated these days to leverage industry standardised message services. That has no bearing whatsoever on any other processing that may take place on a specific bank's platform in relation to these payments prior to them being sent from one platform to another.

The APIs may well be common but neither the up-stream handling/processing of a payment nor speed of a banks processing is dictated by the fact they may use standard interfaces with one another.

MonkeyMad

API defines the interface, so as MoneyMagic says, what happens beyond that is entirely at the system designers discretion within the design intent. There is no intrinsic reason at all that Santanders internal systems should be anything like RBS' for instance and therefore no reason that they should have the same performance.

Since all the PCs in my house use a common protocol to talk to each other does that therefore mean that the i7 behemoth running Windows 7 that I am using now should be expected to behave in exactly the same as my 10 year old Duron machine running Windows ME? Or my nettop running Linux?

Or are all the systems different with their own limitations?

All cars tend to have a fairly common API in their accelerator pedal, yet I seem to notice they are all different too.

MonkeyMad

I think you adequately demonstrate you don't know much about systems design/integration and the link to real-life. I am likening an API to the interface a user accesses to work anything ie what specific things need to be done for the system in question to understand the request.

In the example, the API is the pedal since this is the interface that accepts the acceleration command. You press it since that is the convention for sending a signal for the car to accelerate. This is the same in (almost) all cars; they share an API.

The linkage to the throttle body or ECU or whatever else that mechanically or electronically puts more fuel in is not part of the API and is specific to the make and model, and will give varying response. I would not expect a Morris Minor with direct links to accelerate in the same way as a MSport BMW with traction control, since their infrastructures ie the engines and engine management controls are completely different and will have various time constants attached to them affecting the response time of the system. All I expect is that, as I depress the pedal, each car will have some acceleration, at a differing rate, to different a level of performance, within the parameters set by the overall design.

I also demonstrated reality by the example of all PCs within a network using the same protocols to communicate, yet are all different and will take different amounts of time to do the same thing, but I expect you will tell us this is make-believe too.

This is an overly detailed way of explaining why it is foolish to assume that an industry standard API will give exactly the same results across all banking infrastruture and banks, and hence why transactions take differing amounts of time to appear depending on the bank.

talana

OP, having read my way through this thread and a few others of yours in the past, I've concluded you're an idiot.

Every post of yours is generally along the following lines:
- I'm right
- everyone else is wrong
- the banks are out to get me, con me, rip me off at evey turn
- the bank is always in the wrong, I'm always the victim

Persist in your delusion if you like, or alternatively get an life and stop seeing conspiracies and foul-play at every turn.
- very often you're wrong and show it clearly to an unbiased reader
- if it's you on one side of the argument and dozens of posters on the other side, chances are they're right not you.
- banks are certainly sometimes in the wrong but to say they are 100% of the time without balanced argument is just pathetic and stupid and self-defeating, ie it distracts from the times when you might actually have a point.
- if the banks wind you up that much keep your money under the mattress. Or whatever works for you....but quit whining..

Oh and change your username to something more apt, like "biased-self-righteous-bore".
That's all. Have a nice day.