The Top Easy Access Savings Discussion Area

RG2015

d63 said:

i really, really, do wish these people would not insist on this minimum £1000 first deposit business!! surely they must appreciate that not a few people would be unhappy to fire off such a large sum into the ether without some reassurance they have keyed in all the relevant numbers correctly? it was much the same story with a west bromwich easy access account which i managed to open last week just before it was pulled the next day and had a similar minimum £1k requirement, but i sent them a £10 test transfer anyway ---- and promptly got an email back refusing to accept it, which did at least prove they did receive it ok, (though curiously the £10 took a while longer to be returned!!)

At least NS&I allowed me to deposit my initial minimum £500 to their Income Bond by debit card.

accorian

RG2015 said:

At least NS&I allowed me to deposit my initial minimum £500 to their Income Bond by debit card.

Careful, RG2015. You're running the risk of being told by the massed ranks on this thread of fanbois (and possible employees) of the Newcastle Building Society that the society's outstanding professionalism and amazing technological expertise is reflected in everything it does, and that anything less than uncritical avowal of its saintly status is very, very bad.

Primrose

You would think these financial institutions would realise that people these days are trying  to be extra careful about not being scammed and many people are still very nervous about internet banking.    It,s surely beyond the bounds of invention for the software guys to set up a £10 test deposit option for prospective customers to double check the system is robust first.  Doing this might I fact increase confidence In internet banking. Then any follow up deposit could be made within say 48 hours.  Having had one heart stopping moment in the past in opening a new online savings account I would welcome such a move. 

Consumerist

Primrose said:

. . . It,s surely [not] beyond the bounds of invention for the software guys to set up a £10 test deposit option for prospective customers to double check the system is robust first.

The problem with test deposits, in my experience, is that the sending bank blocks the subsequent transfer on the grounds that it could be a fraudster trying to empty your account.

But yes, banks could do better; particularly if you are funding a deposit from a number of different accounts. It seems to me that they could allow, say 14 days, to accumulate the funds but then they might have to return them all to several different banks.

polymaff

Consumerist said:

Primrose said:

. . . It,s surely [not] beyond the bounds of invention for the software guys to set up a £10 test deposit option for prospective customers to double check the system is robust first.

The problem with test deposits, in my experience, is that the sending bank blocks the subsequent transfer on the grounds that it could be a fraudster trying to empty your account.

But yes, banks could do better; particularly if you are funding a deposit from a number of different accounts. It seems to me that they could allow, say 14 days, to accumulate the funds but then they might have to return them all to several different banks.

I've been aware of this concern but have never found that multiple payments have been blocked.

Many savings institutions already operate a funding window. Overwhelmingly, the "challenger" types.

Many, when asked, are only too willing to accept an initial £10 and then confirm its receipt, without this affecting further deposits that day, or, throughout the funding window.

IME. ...

greatcrested

So I rang again and my £1K arrived safely. At least Newcastle accept Faster Payments where some BSs funds go via a clearing bank and take 24 hours.

I also asked for my feedback re the inability to send a test amount (eg £10) to be highlighted up to management, and the CS Adviser agreed it was sensible and said she'd forward the comment.

But two 25 minute phonecalls to confirm is time wasted - though thankfully a 0800 number at least!

murphydavid

I can understand the worries about being scammed but I would warn against thinking that depositing a small amount followed by a large amount is any protection. Spammers do that as well. It's called being sucked in.
If you were to deposit a small amount with a spammer they would be very quick to tell you all was well and reassure you to pay more. Spammers will even let you appear to withdraw funds by sending a small amount back to your bank if they thought they could catch a big fish. 
When I am setting up a new payee (For savings I am the new payee) I put the numbers in forwards say 45667125 then remember them backwards 52176654 and check it reads correct that way round; if you see what I mean. This usually eliminates any tendency to get a digit wrong.
As for avoiding spammers. There is much guidance out there. Never respond to anyone contacting you (cold calls or unsolicited mail). Never click on a link (even from someone you trust) always double or triple check you can reach that page via another trusted source.  I find the MSE "are your savings safe article" and the what bank is owned by who tool to be quite useful in this respect,
But as I said IMO paying a small amount followed by a larger one because you had been reassured by the source you paid the small amount to is not a way to  be safe.

colsten

murphydavid said:

If you were to deposit a large amount with a genuine Bank or BS and get the sort code wrong your bank will check the sort code against the name and not send it. 

That is absolutely not true.

Whilst the COP (confirmation of payee) exists for some banks and building societies, you can ignore any warning messages about mismatches and send the money anyway.

For many savings accounts, the COP doesn't actually work at all, either because the recipient organisation has not implemented Open Banking, or because the payee's account number is actually specified in the Reference field. The Reference field isn't checked by the COP process.

murphydavid

colsten said:

murphydavid said:

If you were to deposit a large amount with a genuine Bank or BS and get the sort code wrong your bank will check the sort code against the name and not send it. 

That is absolutely not true.

Whilst the COP (confirmation of payee) exists for some banks and building societies, you can ignore any warning messages about mismatches and send the money anyway.

For many savings accounts, the COP doesn't actually work at all, either because the recipient organisation has not implemented Open Banking, or because the payee's account number is actually specified in the Reference field. The Reference field isn't checked by the COP process.

OK I removed it. Thanks.

Mr._H_2

murphydavid said:

I can understand the worries about being scammed but I would warn against thinking that depositing a small amount followed by a large amount is any protection.

Agreed. However, I don't think that (being scammed) is the main concern that is being address by small deposit -> big deposit. It's just protection against putting in the account number wrong. I do this all the time when setting up new accounts. I transfer £1, verify via online banking that it's gone through, then transfer larger amounts. Several years ago this did cause me issues a couple of times where the sending bank thought this behaviour was "suspicious" and stopped the second transfer, but since the advent of additional security checks such as two-factor authentication, that doesn't happen to me any more.