MSE Blog: How to get what you want from your bank – some insider tips

grumbler

JuicyJesus wrote: »

I'm not sure why this is so difficult for you to grasp.

As I have already explained, this is because the DPA is being permanently abused (mainly) by incompetent bank employees, and I don't take anyone's word for it any more.

You can probably say that I have to find the Act and to read it, but I think it will be much easier for a competent person just to find the relevant part and to quote it.

opinions4u wrote: »

The DPA has exceptions, but I'm not aware that the DPA has an exception that says "It's ok to let any Tom, !!!!!!, Harry, spouse or daughter know about an account that a bank customer wishes to keep private".

I'd expect from the DPA to concentrate mainly on what isn't OK rather then on what is.

JuicyJesus

Why do you need a citation? A banking relationship is confidential information. The DPA prohibits disclosure of such.

i agree with o4u. You're being obtuse.

YorkshireBoy

grumbler wrote: »

ATM we are discussing revealing just the existence of some account. I don't remember any stories at MSE about compensations for such 'offense'.

I'm on record on here reporting that I was paid £150 by one of my banks for revealing the mere existence of a sole account to someone else. To paraphrase...

Dear Mr & Mrs YB

As you're not using the O/D facility on your joint account, it will be cut from £x,xxx to £x,xxx on xx/xx/xx, unless we hear from you that you wish to keep the original facility in place.

Please note that the O/D facility on Mr YB's sole account with us will remain unaffected by this decision.

Yours sincerely
Incompetent Bank!

grumbler

JuicyJesus wrote: »

Why do you need a citation? A banking relationship is confidential information. The DPA prohibits disclosure of such.

i agree with o4u. You're being obtuse.

OK, I rest my case.

opinions4u

JuicyJesus wrote: »

Disclosure of a business relationship is a breach of the DPA. If you supply someone's name and address and they pay into an account in that name they are confirming a relationship exists, ergo breach.

Thanks for that. Significantly fewer words to clarify the point!

Archi_Bald

grumbler wrote: »

Theoretically, a receipt can be issued without the sort code and the account number on it if the person making the deposit doesn't specify these details.

Don't be ridiculous.

The next thing we'd hear then is that people paid £xxx into "their" (or "someone's") account but it never got credited to the account, and the bank 'stole' their money.

Anyway, the banking system lives and dies with account numbers or roll numbers, and your theory will never put into practice.

grumbler

Archi_Bald wrote: »

Don't be ridiculous.

The next thing we'd hear then is that people paid £xxx into "their" (or "someone's") account but it never got credited to the account, and the bank 'stole' their money.

Absolutely not. A bank's copy of the receipt (or a computer record) can have the full information. If the money gets missing, the recipient can get the receipt from the depositor and contact the bank to trace the money.

opinions4u

grumbler wrote: »

Absolutely not. A bank's copy of the receipt (or a computer record) can have the full information. If the money is missing the recipient can get the receipt from the depositor and contact the bank to trace the money.

How would the customer copy of the receipt prove intent to deposit in to a specific account?

A customer depositing in to a friend's account could return and say:

"I wanted to pay it in to my account and you've credited that of my friend. My friend has spent it. I want you to give me my money back".

Seems a tad open to fraud.

grumbler

opinions4u wrote: »

How would the customer copy of the receipt prove intent to deposit in to a specific account?

It contains the name and the address - if this combination was sufficient for identifying the account. As I said, it was purely theoretical.

a customer depositing in to a friend's account could return and say:

"I wanted to pay it in to my account and you've credited that of my friend. My friend has spent it. I want you to give me my money back".

This is theoretical too, but pretty unrealistic IMO. If you deposit a cheque to your own account I don't think you can come back and to get the cheque back.

Seems a tad open to fraud.

I disagree, but this is OOT.

JuicyJesus

Grumbler is I think on his hobby horse about DPA being "abused" and as such now won't believe that things that are plainly and clearly breaches are breaches in case bank staff "hide behind them", whatever that means.

Either way, we're off the main point here - this article is moronic.