We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Help please!!! transferred £300 into the wrong account.
Comments
-
No, but why would I do it?bengal-stripe wrote: »Yes, you have to hover with your cursor above the question mark. Is that too difficult?
This was news to me, because I never have."It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0 -
Now you're getting itThey want a system where they can happily bash away at the keyboard, make as many mistakes as they like, and then have someone else take care of the details for them."It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0 -
In the days before CVVs, I had other people's mobile top-ups charged to my accounts when they miskeyed their debit card numbers.I've never had a problem since I started using internet banking in 1998.
"Check your statement", they say. Against what? When you find a payment you don't have a separate record of, how are you supposed to be certain it isn't something you did and forgot about?
Nowadays I don't get too fussy about checking my own debit card details because if I get them wrong they get caught.
With FPs, I don't think I've ever mistyped an account number, but I'm religious about that since I realised how bad the system was. I've been known to get sort codes wrong and have them caught by validity checks. And I've been known to pick the wrong payee from a menu.
I've also discovered that younger people know nothing about what happens to you when you get older. Loss of short-term memory isn't only about not remembering what you went upstairs for. Also, the tendency to see what you expect to see becomes more pronounced."It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0 -
Some people simply shouldn't be allowed near computers!“You can please some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you can never please all of the people all of the time.”0
-
What are they supposed to do then?~Chameleon~ wrote: »Some people simply shouldn't be allowed near computers!
How about the machines being slaves to us instead of us being slaves to them?"It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0 -
What are they supposed to do then?
How about the machines being slaves to us instead of us being slaves to them?
I can't imagine the slaves in ancient Egypt being asked to check the pyramid designers calculations for them every time they were told to lay a stone.• The rich buy assets.
• The poor only have expenses.
• The middle class buy liabilities they think are assets.0 -
In the days when computor was an occupation, a lot of computors were in fact slaves.I can't imagine the slaves in ancient Egypt being asked to check the pyramid designers calculations for them every time they were told to lay a stone."It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0 -
Precisely. People make mistakes all the time. People do stupid things all the time. I did one yesterday. Can't believe I did it.
But people can't afford to lose hundreds of pounds every time they make a silly mistake. We need systems that make it possible to correct expensive mistakes, or almost impossible to make them.
Just saying "be careful" doesn't cut it.
You and I are talking at cross purposes because I think saying "be careful" does (and has to) cut it, as there's no other way of dealing with these erroneous transactions without significantly changing the way payments are sent, which costs money. In a country that is fragile financially. Not going to happen.
I just think the banks should make it abundantly clear which information is used so that people can exercise the appropriate level of caution.What will your verse be?
R.I.P Robin Williams.0 -
I am willing to concede "fundamentally flawed" might have been over-stating the case. I am not willing to accept the on-line payment system is perfectly fine and the only problem is with certain slapdash users!
It may well be that the percentage of transactions that end up in the wrong account is small but that does not make it unreasonable to expect the banks to be continually improving the design and operation of their systems to ensure the error rate is reduced still further.
Already in this thread it's been agreed there is a need for a clear and prominent message saying the payee's name is not used and the transfer is done solely on the basis of Sort Code and Ac No. (Halifax for one don't do this.)
Other improvements which seem obvious to me are:
1. Include in the message the need to ensure the ac no and sc are acquired by a secure means.
2. Change the order in which the ac information is requested to remove the prominence given to the payee's name.
3. Break down the ac no in a similar fashion to how we are used to seeing sort codes or credit/debit card numbers.
4. Incorporate a check to at least ensure the ac no and sc are valid. (I believe a previous poster has mentioned how straightforward this is to do.)
5. Give the customer the option of sending a £1 test payment. Perhaps this is as good as checking ac payee name. (Again all infallible MSE members needn't bother with this.)0 -
BlindLeadingTheBlind wrote: »5. Give the customer the option of sending a £1 test payment. Perhaps this is as good as checking ac payee name. (Again all infallible MSE members needn't bother with this.)
You can already do this - just enter £1 as the amount to send.
Even if I check the sort code/account number twenty times I still send a £1 payment before sending any large amounts.
I do this even for payees I've already set up and sent money to in the past. I may be paranoid, but I've never sent money to the wrong account.
What will your verse be?
R.I.P Robin Williams.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards