Cashplus

MaryTaylor1971

Cashplus are becoming a proper bank, does this mean that their card accounts will appear on credit files?

Ben8282

Not the prepaid cards because they are not extending credit.

MaryTaylor1971

This is what confuses me, I have a proper bank account with no credit, i.e no overdraft etc, so why does it appear on credit reports ?

DCFC79

MaryTaylor1971 wrote: »

This is what confuses me, I have a proper bank account with no credit, i.e no overdraft etc, so why does it appear on credit reports ?

What kind of check is it ?

[Deleted User]

MaryTaylor1971 wrote: »

This is what confuses me, I have a proper bank account with no credit, i.e no overdraft etc, so why does it appear on credit reports ?

The main reason is financial surveillance. The State and its agencies have taken it upon themselves to have a central record of all bank accounts. This is mostly for the benefit of the police and security services.

Blackpool_Saver

johnsmith1890 wrote: »

The main reason is financial surveillance. The State and its agencies have taken it upon themselves to have a central record of all bank accounts. This is mostly for the benefit of the police and security services.

:rotfl:



..............................

MaryTaylor1971

But why aren't these cards monitored, as they operate like a bank account

[Deleted User]

Blackpool_Saver wrote: »

:rotfl:



..............................

Naïve in the extreme. Having access to a database of accounts through which money can flow is a vital investigative tool. If the CRAs didn't maintain this list, fraud and serious crime investigations would be hampered.

jonesMUFCforever

Cashplus are getting a lot of flack at the moment because a lot of scammers seem to be using them.
If they become a proper bank they will have to tighten their know your customer data considerably.

eskbanker

johnsmith1890 wrote: »

The main reason is financial surveillance. The State and its agencies have taken it upon themselves to have a central record of all bank accounts. This is mostly for the benefit of the police and security services.

johnsmith1890 wrote: »

Naïve in the extreme. Having access to a database of accounts through which money can flow is a vital investigative tool. If the CRAs didn't maintain this list, fraud and serious crime investigations would be hampered.

Priceless - you had me going for a moment there, it looked like you were being serious!

Loving the notion that police and security services would have access to CRA data but not that held by the banks themselves, so all fraudsters would need to do to combat this bombproof scheme would be to route money through savings accounts, prepaid cards, basic bank accounts without overdraft capabilities, etc, that aren't recorded by CRAs because, er, they don't involve credit.

Obviously the police and security services won't have time for all this anyway as they'll be too busy bumping off princesses and presidents while assisting with the ongoing massive establishment cover-up about the fictitious moon landings and the truth about 9/11.

Time for you to go back to watching James Bond movies with your tinfoil hat on, methinks....

P.S. For Mary's benefit, the real reason why full proper bank accounts without arranged overdraft facilities are reported to CRAs is that they can still offer credit via unarranged overdrafts (unlike prepaid cards) so the facility is there even if never used.

[Deleted User]

eskbanker wrote: »

Priceless - you had me going for a moment there, it looked like you were being serious!

Loving the notion that police and security services would have access to CRA data but not that held by the banks themselves, so all fraudsters would need to do to combat this bombproof scheme would be to route money through savings accounts, prepaid cards, basic bank accounts without overdraft capabilities, etc, that aren't recorded by CRAs because, er, they don't involve credit.

Obviously the police and security services won't have time for all this anyway as they'll be too busy bumping off princesses and presidents while assisting with the ongoing massive establishment cover-up about the fictitious moon landings and the truth about 9/11.

Time for you to go back to watching James Bond movies with your tinfoil hat on, methinks....

P.S. For Mary's benefit, the real reason why full proper bank accounts without arranged overdraft facilities are reported to CRAs is that they can still offer credit via unarranged overdrafts (unlike prepaid cards) so the facility is there even if never used.

I wish people would do some basic research before pontificating on things they obviously know nothing about. First point - you now need a current account linked to the vast majority - if not all - savings and investment products. So it's very difficult to move money around and have access to it without a current account. You think the government, police, local councils and so on don't have unlimited access to CRA data? Hilarious. Consider the situation of the police urgently wanting to track down someone - I don't know, maybe someone who's told a joke that someone else found offensive - one of the easiest ways of doing this is to look out for credit card and debit card transactions. How does the State know which financial institution(s) the wanted joker is using? Maybe they contact each and every one of the hundreds, or is it thousands, of financial institutions, or maybe the just mosey on over to the CRA databases, where a comprehensive record of address data and all accounts is held?


As for the ability to get an overdraft on a non-overdraft account. Yes, but not on a regular basis, nor anything large. So it's hardly worth reporting these accounts. But there they all are, listed by the CRAs, updated every month with zero balances. Why isn't it the case that these types of account are only reported if they do actually go into overdraft? On that basis, very many accounts would never be reported. That would potentially make it really difficult for the State to use financial transactions to locate a wanted joker. Just saying ….