Woman gets her daisy-chain SOs wrong

YorkshireBoy

masonic wrote: »

(for whatever amount meets the funding requirements of all accounts):

In the woman's case, and going the way you've described, all transfers would need to be for £1.5K (to cover Lloyds Club). Had there been a HSBC Advance in the mix this figure would be increased to £1,750.

Personally I group internally wherever possible, ie 3 BoS Vantage feed each other, as do 2 x Tesco and my TSB Plus accounts...all via SO.

Club Lloyds, Nationwide FlexDirect, and YB Current Account Direct are all fed from, and return to, Santander 1-2-3...again via SO.

3 of my Halifax Rewards (and Nationwide FlexAccount) are funded from my 4th Halifax Reward account on payday via manual payments, taking a couple of minutes max.

It works for me.

Roseanne1

My mum done that with her first direct account. One of the amounts was meant to go in the day before but this fell on a weekend, the payment out was meant to come out the next day, which fell on the bank holiday. Instead the payment coming out was processed first on the Tuesday rendering her account overdrawn with the payment in coming in later. Fortunately, it was paid in by the cut off for clearing the overdraft and there was no charge. A lesson well and truly learned there. If SOs are coming out every calendar month, it is impossible to avoid some of them falling on the weekend but we always double check now to ensure everything is running smoothly.

msallen

IanManc wrote: »

Seeing you're so superior would you like to explain to us all why on earth you would want to pay a standing order twice in a month every sixteen months?
:beer:

Have you actually read this thread ? It would be keep the "SO day" away from a Friday, Saturday, Sunday or Monday. I don't do it personally but I can see the reasoning.

By the way it would be once a year not 16 months :beer:

SeduLOUs

IanManc wrote: »

Four weeks from the second payment would not fall within the following month in a Leap Year where Easter Sunday falls on March 30th, if the first payment in February was on Friday 1st, followed by a second payment in February on Friday 29th. The next four weekly payment would be due on Friday 28 March, which would be the Good Friday Bank Holiday, and the next working day on which the standing order payment would be made would be Tuesday 1st April, so there would be no payment at all in March. Unless you bank with Tesco ........

:beer:

That's why he said to do it on a Wednesday, thereby avoiding the majority of the pesky bank holidays.

The only bank holidays that 'might' fall on a Wednesday are the Christmas ones and any additional 'special' ones like a Royal Wedding, so fairly minimal checking required.

SuperHan

IanManc wrote: »

But so what? You could make these transfers on every single working day of the year, still meeting the terms of the recipient accounts, resulting in no costs, no loss of interest and no disqualification from meeting the account terms. But why would you want to pay more than once a month? When the terms require one monthly payment, even though paying in more than once a month every sixteen months isn't a problem, what's the point?


Isn't it just simpler to have the payments being made on a fixed date each month, then the payments don't move around, you're doing what you need to, and you're only making the payments that are required, and not unnecessary extra ones?


I'm asking because I'm genuinely puzzled. You contribute a lot of good stuff to the forums, and I enjoy reading it, and I don't get where you're coming from on this topic.

Surely the point is so you don't end up like the woman in the news story?

If you make the payments 4 weekly, you avoid the issue with bank holidays but make 1 additional payment.

If you make the payments monthly, one may fall on weekend and you will fall foul of the different banks using different systems for weekend payments.

For me, 4 weekly makes more sense, as I don't care how many times the money shuffles, I just want to make sure I never miss a month's interest, and 4 weekly does this for me.

Beano123

The one reason four weekly payments make most sense to me is that I get paid four weekly wages go in, money sets off and money returns - hopefully before it needs to be spent!

I could guarantee enough money in my account to cover the SO's that have been set up, but I think its better to have the money in alternative high interest accounts for the moment.

Four Weekly Pay is great in some ways but a pain in the neck in others!

Contemplating cancelling all the SO's and just having a bit of paper with what needs to go where and doing manual transfers tbh.

[Deleted User]

masonic wrote: »

No, four weeks from 30th October is 28th November.

No it's not. It'd be the 27th November.

Calendar: http://www.printfree.com/Calendar_files/YearlyDecorativeCalendars/PlainWhite/2015.gif

masonic

IanManc wrote: »

But so what? You could make these transfers on every single working day of the year, still meeting the terms of the recipient accounts, resulting in no costs, no loss of interest and no disqualification from meeting the account terms. But why would you want to pay more than once a month? When the terms require one monthly payment, even though paying in more than once a month every sixteen months isn't a problem, what's the point?

Why would one want to? Because it reduces the risk of getting into the situation of the woman in the article.* You stated paying twice in the same month would be a problem. I don't think it is. I asked why you thought it was a problem. You have so far failed to answer. So, why do you think it is a problem?

Edit: * Just to be absolutely clear on this, the problem is summarised in this quote from the article: "Ms Fay, who is retired and lives in West Sussex, has one major gripe: that Lloyds does not process standing orders at weekends, meaning that every time the 12th of the month falls at the weekend (four times this year) she will be charged by Tesco for failing to have enough funds in her account to make the outgoing payment. Over the year, these charges would amount to £20.".

Ms Fay set her payments up for the 12th of the month, but it doesn't matter which day of the month you set up your standing order, weekends will be a problem. The solution is to come up with a payment scheme that avoids payments being made at the weekend when banks may process them differently.

Isn't it just simpler to have the payments being made on a fixed date each month, then the payments don't move around, you're doing what you need to, and you're only making the payments that are required, and not unnecessary extra ones?

Why is it simpler to have payments made on a fixed day of the month rather than a fixed day of the week? It takes the same length of time to set up the standing orders, and the running costs are identical (nothing). What is the downside of an occasional unnecessary extra payment?

I'm asking because I'm genuinely puzzled. You contribute a lot of good stuff to the forums, and I enjoy reading it, and I don't get where you're coming from on this topic.

I'm equally confused by why you are anti-four weekly standing orders. If there are no material downsides and it solves a problem that exists with monthly standing orders, then what is the harm?

Katgrit

Just to lighten the mood because you lot seem to be getting a bit nowty between yourselves.........

....is no-one else still sniggering at the OP saying this lady messed up her daisy-chaining??

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=daisy+chaining