New Cheque Clearance Rules

llandaff

Mikeyorks wrote: »

Not quite sure you're doing too well either.
Did you work in any bank at that time? It might help you if you could find someone who did then at least you could get some background. Of course you are not sure, because you do not appear to have any facts.


The catalyst .... was simply the urge to computerise, because the benefits were suddenly obvious. Decimalisation was an issue, certainly not a catalyst - as most computer systems in the run - up to Feb 1971 were unbelievably basic, totally unstable and trained programmers were at a premium. Few Banks had anything other than embryonic systems, often using plug boards and with data on punched cards or paper tape
Never mind how basic they certainly were before the 70s they were definitely up to the job well before decimalisation for the banks to use them; however I am satisfied that decimalisation was the catalyst for the banks to computerise, even though they may well have preferred to wait for better systems to become available. Again I suggest you find a former bank employee from that period, especially anyone from their computer centres.

Anyone with a large accounting system did not 'operate' on 15th Feb 1971 .... they were all too busy manually converting records. Despite most had started the conversion process weeks in advance - the main thrust had to be over the weekend preceding Mon 15th - and for the moratorium that had been declared over the ensuing few days. But there was a counter service as, of course, notes / coins had been in dual circulation for months. None 'went to the wall' - so it was hailed as an unqualified success. But few of the conversions - right across UK business - were on 'computer systems'
I'm not talking about other organisations, just banks. They did and were computerised for decimalisation and avoided manual conversion. Why start clouding the issue with coins and counter service? Those of us old enough to well remember what happened know all that as we were all a part of it.


I'm afraid that's where you really let yourself down. Banks don't have compatible systems - they're all unique and the reason for so many posts saying 'who's got the best online system' etc etc. They're only 'compatible' at the interfaces where they receive / despatch files in prescribed formats from /to BACS / IBDE etc. So they write programs to receive/ send those interface files - and integrate / extract them to /from their own unique systems.
Wrong again. Try talking to their computer centres. They have HAD to become compatible and as there are so few manufacturers of mainframes and IBM is still the leader the decisions of what to get became easier. You seem to be confusing compatibility with how each bank works internally, but even then the need to become more and more in line has impacted upon all their decisions at the top levels.
There was a large Govt inspired study on conversion to Euro a few years ago. Just one of the threads that looked at, was the lessons that could be learned from the 1971 decimalisation conversion. The net effect was ... that the date of 15th Feb was a real runner .... if the financial institutions were the determining factor in a conversion date. As it was, and remains, about the quietest date in the financial processing calendar. The other positive was that the operation of dual currency for a period before - and after - the cut over date ... was mandatory.
What is all this for? It has nothing to do with this thread, except you've acknowledged that the banks had it all up and working. It was not dual currency but dual coins.

But the unequivocal evaluation on 'computer systems' was that the Euro conversion, which will overwhelmingly be driven by electronic data conversion ........ had nothing whatsoever to learn from decimalisation, where virtually no electronic data existed

So what? Nothing to do with this thread.:eek:

Biggles

There seems to a lot of paranoia about this subject, which usually seems to run: "the bank aren't clearing my cheque for x days in order that they can keep the interest. They could implement immeditae clearing if if suited them".

If they could, they would already have done so: it would have saved them a fortune over the years to have cheques electronically cleared. If you write a cheque, where can the payee take it? Only to another bank, of course. Interest lost by the paying bank as a result of instant clearing would be interest gained by the receiving bank. There's no incentive for banks generally to slow the clearing process.

llandaff

Mikeyorks wrote: »

Wrong, on a fundamental, again I'm afraid.
You seem determined to cloud the issue. Yes, it does cover ALL cheques, but every one of those cheques has to enter the banking system for any payment to be effective. You are simply trying to avoid the obvious and introduce anything you can based upon very little knowledge or understanding. I did not exclude cheques drawn payable to businesses or any other organisation so why try so hard to trip me up? I do not accept that I have put forward any 'flawed argument' and nothing you have said supports that. What on earth are you on about? Surely this thread is an attempt to throw some light on the murky world of banking and how it affects us, the customers. It is to help all those members who are interested/what to know a bit more for their own purposes. You do not appear to be the least interested in that.
The thread is about the new Cheque Clearance system introduced 30th Nov. It covers the clearance of all cheques - not just those paid over a Bank counter by an individual. So it equally covers cheques paid to businesses. You can't exempt them simply because it's makes your flawed argument easier.



- quote from post #1 ..... which clarifies why this thread exists.

So? Does that preclude directly related information? Or is it just that you want to argue, never mind the facts or the actual history?

llandaff

Biggles wrote: »

There seems to a lot of paranoia about this subject, which usually seems to run: "the bank aren't clearing my cheque for x days in order that they can keep the interest. They could implement immeditae clearing if if suited them".
Not so much paranoia, just the need for many customers to know just what their bank is up to.
Yes, you are right they could now effect immediate clearance for funds, but they are clinging on to the old clearing delay because during that period whilst you the customer does not benefit from the credit they do by placing funds on the overnight market. With immediate clearance neither bank gets any advantage and the funds they place on the overnight market from this would dry up.
If they could, they would already have done so: it would have saved them a fortune over the years to have cheques electronically cleared. If you write a cheque, where can the payee take it? Only to another bank, of course. Interest lost by the paying bank as a result of instant clearing would be interest gained by the receiving bank. There's no incentive for banks generally to slow the clearing process.

They will have to give this up at some future point but not until they are forced to; this new set of rules shows that they are determined to hang on. It even extends part of the former timing for clearing - even when the paper was moved around all over the country cheques were normally cleared in three days by the clearing banks i.e. all those who were members of the old CLCB which has been replaced by APACS.

mushypeaman

Just been notified of the new T & Cs for my NatWest Current account. Here's an extract. The bit that worries me I've put in bold.

4.2 Cheques
4.2.1 The following terms apply when a UK Sterling cheque, which is issued
by and deposited with us or another UK bank, is paid into your account:
(a) If the cheque is paid in over the counter at the branch where you
have your account, the money will be added to your balance by
the next business day. In any other case, the money will be
added to your balance by the next business day following the day
on which we receive it or (if we receive it on a day which is not
a business day) by the second business day after the day we
receive it.
(b) The money will be credited to your account for interest purposes
no later than two business days after it is added to your balance.
(c) The money will be available for you to use no later than four
business days after it is added to your balance. . . . . . . etc etc

Since I often pay in (at NatWest) not at my 'home' branch, this really concerns me, and it certainly hasn't been made clear in all the vaunting publicity. How am I supposed to know when the cheque reaches my own branch. It's all pretty muddy isn't it?

Alfie_E

mushypeaman wrote: »

How am I supposed to know when the cheque reaches my own branch.

Fortunately, that’s not what the new T&Cs say. The ‘we’ in “on which we receive it” doesn’t mean your home branch.

Introduction
(i) These Terms and Conditions (the “Conditions”) form part of the contract between you and us, the National Westminster Bank Plc (“NatWest”).

So, when you hand it over at any NatWest branch, you’ve fulfilled the any-other-case part of 4.2.1(a).

If you post NatWest a cheque, the clock should start ticking from the day they receive your envelope. I suspect that if you put your cheque into a cash machine in one of those special envelopes, the clock only starts when someone decides to empty the machine and process the envelopes, which could be many days away.

It still doesn’t feel like it matches what was promised. Adding in an extra day in before it’s added to your balance and then counting the days from that point seems to turn 2-4-6 into 3-5-7. However, I notice that the clause doesn’t include the usual 3.30pm cut-off point used elsewhere in the terms and conditions and used in the original NatWest announcement on cheque processing. There, you would have had to have added on an extra day when paying in a cheque after 3.30pm, even at your home branch. This doesn’t appear to be the case now. I guess all this shouldn’t be too much of a surprise; even the Cheque & Credit Clearing Company state that banks and building societies get to define what “receive” means.

journ

My sister has a Halifax basic account and the CH was from Tosco's pensions she was told it will cost her £12 and they would post it the same day Just ST class as a normal letter , and it has to go to Tosca HS BC bank 13/12/2007 , But the staff was so rude because my sister needed to know how long will it take because she has to put a deposit down on a car and if it will take a long time she will just hold off , They told her 4 days and they will phone her.
So Day paid CH in 13/12/2007
I have had some great help on this forum it has meant so much to me and my family.

Day 2, 3,4,5 no phone call and when i phoned them they told me to phone PM PM PM again all of these days the staff was so rude and i got wrong for phoning but after the rude phone calls and the worry about the lost CH i told her there is no need to talk to me in this way , After this call i phoned the Halifax phone number i got off the web site and this person phoned this branch and they were rude to her , She told her line manger and she had to make a note of it on the computer

Same story on Day 6, 7 staff sounded sick of me and i pointed this out to her but they just didn't care

I had to phone Tosca and they had to put a stop to this CH but the will have to check that none has cashed it and it will take 3 week for the other CHQ.

journ

As for the car the deposit hold the car till the end of the month and they have to get the balance at the end of the month, i was told the price will change and i would have to pay a new deposit.

So please be careful when you pay in your CHQ because there is noway we can track this CHQ down, And after a week of this worry we are very upset and what makes things worse its Christmas

journ

Biggles wrote: »

I hope that they are, as stated, 'protected from any loss' and that it's only actual participants in a fraud who are not. I just hope you won't have to argue that point with your bank every time a scammer stops a cheque to you.

My sister paid in a CHQ on the 13/12/2007 was told she has to use this service and it will cost her £12 .
So its now 10 days the CHQ was just posted like a normal letter but this was for a large CHQ .
The bank was very rude and they don't care about the CHQ being lost and the bank paid back the £12 but that all they will do , They said its not down to them .
So please take care because i don't want this to happen to anybody else

jonesMUFCforever

Journ please calm down.
What this thread is about bears no resemblance whatsoever to what happened to your sister's cheque.

This topic is discussing how long after a cheque is paid in can it be later debited back from the account if unpaid - what happened with your sister was that it never was paid in because the cheque was sent as a special presentation and lost in the post - something completely different.