Please delete my forum account delete delete delete delete delete delete hostage taker

quirkydeptless

Deleted_User said:

I was mistaken. Clearly I joined Abbey National Building Society when your mother was knee high to to a grasshopper. Yes, while you may have trouble distinguishing, I do know the difference between a bank and a Building Society. And it was Abbey National Building Society that I joined decades ago. If you don't believe me, feel free to ask one of your more knowledgable schoolmates.about the history of the Building Society I joined which is now merged into Santander Bank.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8wj5EdBsIM

colsten

quirkydeptless said:

Deleted_User said:

I was mistaken. Clearly I joined Abbey National Building Society when your mother was knee high to to a grasshopper. Yes, while you may have trouble distinguishing, I do know the difference between a bank and a Building Society. And it was Abbey National Building Society that I joined decades ago. If you don't believe me, feel free to ask one of your more knowledgable schoolmates.about the history of the Building Society I joined which is now merged into Santander Bank.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8wj5EdBsIM

It had been a bank for about 2 decades before Santander Group bought them.

masonic

Perhaps further squabbling about grasshoppers and ancient history could be had in another thread so discussion about the important issue of Confirmation of Payee can be resumed?

colsten

Deleted_User said:

colsten said:

Anyway, coming back to your vast Santander experience: I wonder how you did you ever survive with them for so many years without having a nickname for your payees. No need to explain though.

Have you actually read the heading to this thread? In case you missed it, it says:

New rules requiring "exact account name" to be supplied with payments

The new rules came into being in the last couple of months or so and I have explained the problems I've encountered with Santander's (lack of) implementation of the new rules. Santander (in the last couple of months) has caused me serious problems with identifying each new payee I generate with them and prevents me from taking advantage of the new.CoP (as others call it) system.

As already posted several times in this thread, the new rules include that you can continue to set up your payees as you have done for the last umpteen years.

masonic

colsten said:

Deleted_User said:

colsten said:

Anyway, coming back to your vast Santander experience: I wonder how you did you ever survive with them for so many years without having a nickname for your payees. No need to explain though.

Have you actually read the heading to this thread? In case you missed it, it says:

New rules requiring "exact account name" to be supplied with payments

The new rules came into being in the last couple of months or so and I have explained the problems I've encountered with Santander's (lack of) implementation of the new rules. Santander (in the last couple of months) has caused me serious problems with identifying each new payee I generate with them and prevents me from taking advantage of the new.CoP (as others call it) system.

As already posted several times in this thread, the new rules include that you can continue to set up your payees as you have done for the last umpteen years.

The difference is, early indications are that those who deliberately name their payees something different than the account name could have some additional hoops to jump through before initial payments to those accounts are authorised by the bank.

Uxb1

I was mistaken. Clearly I joined Abbey National Building Society when your mother was knee high to to a grasshopper. Yes, while you may have trouble distinguishing, I do know the difference between a bank and a Building Society. And it was Abbey National Building Society that I joined decades ago. If you don't believe me, feel free to ask one of your more knowledgable schoolmates.about the history of the Building Society I joined which is now merged into Santander Bank.

At risk of diverting the thread further
You should have talked to my grandmother who died in the early 1980's. She could remember when it was the  Abbey Road Building Society before it merged with the National in the 1940's to become the Abbey National  - in fact she always referred to them as the Abbey Road which unless you knew the history (in the days before the web and Wikipedia) you would have had no idea what on earth she was on about.

colsten

masonic said:

colsten said:

Deleted_User said:

colsten said:

Anyway, coming back to your vast Santander experience: I wonder how you did you ever survive with them for so many years without having a nickname for your payees. No need to explain though.

Have you actually read the heading to this thread? In case you missed it, it says:

New rules requiring "exact account name" to be supplied with payments

The new rules came into being in the last couple of months or so and I have explained the problems I've encountered with Santander's (lack of) implementation of the new rules. Santander (in the last couple of months) has caused me serious problems with identifying each new payee I generate with them and prevents me from taking advantage of the new.CoP (as others call it) system.

As already posted several times in this thread, the new rules include that you can continue to set up your payees as you have done for the last umpteen years.

The difference is, early indications are that those who deliberately name their payees something different than the account name could have some additional hoops to jump through before initial payments to those accounts are authorised by the bank.

I have set up 11 payees at Santander since they implemented the name check. One of them is a business and the name I typed was an exact match. As it was what I wanted to name it, I obviously left it at that. The other 10 are all for various accounts of mine, and I used the naming system that I have always used for my accounts. There will never be a match with the actual account names, and warning messages were produced accordingly - except for a Virgin Money account, which couldn't be matched as they don't participate yet in the matching, and a couple of other accounts with companies that are unlikely to ever participate in the matching (RCI and Monmouthshire).  The only hoops I had to jump through on the mismatches were to confirm that I would like to proceed regardless of the mismatch.  

I appreciate you had two different experiences. No idea why they picked on you.

NB. I am using the same naming system with all banks. I recently set up new payees at Halifax and Lloyds - again, same as with Santander, I got mismatch warning messages which I ignored. Ironically the only bank which ever wanted to know who my payees are were Al Rayan. They don't even participate [yet] in the name matching! After a short explanation from me, they were satisfied, and actually said this was a clever way to name the payees.

colsten

Deleted_User said:

colsten said:

As already posted several times in this thread, the new rules include that you can continue to set up your payees as you have done for the last umpteen years.

I've been waiting for a very long time for the "exact account name" check to be introduced so as to help ensure outgoing payments go to the correct account. I'm not prepared to stay in the dark ages by continuing with the old and insecure system. In order for the new system to work I need the ability to add a "nickname" field to my payees to describe them using my own words.

Then choose a bank that does what you want to have done. It's not as if anyone would force you to stay with Santander, especially since they don't appear to care about your request.

For people like myself, the "old and insecure" account naming system that has served tens of millions of current account holders well for a couple of decades already will do for a few more decades. If it ain't broken, don't fix it. 

As I have commented elsewhere on this forum before, the name matching system is a sledge hammer to crack a nut and it won't deter the serious fraudster. We have just seen one example of exactly that in  https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6166522/victim-of-app-scam-all-advice-welcome

Uxb1

Try this one for testing exact name match
"Prof AJ and Mrs P Jones Household a/c"
so how close does it have to be exact?   If there is a space between the initials AJ is that exact or not, or if 'household' does not have a capital letter?
It really is not easy.

colsten

Deleted_User said:

colsten said:

Then choose a bank that does what you want to have done. It's not as if anyone would force you to stay with Santander, especially since they don't appear to care about your request.

For people like myself, the "old and insecure" account naming system that has served tens of millions of current account holders well for a couple of decades already will do for a few more decades. If it ain't broken, don't fix it.

I think the regulators should make it mandatory that all banks and other financial institutions implement the "exact account name" system. No system is perfect, but it's certainly an improvement on the old "hope my payment will arrive in the right account" lottery. Since the "exact account name" is a new feature and, like all new systems, it will need time to iron out any wrinkles. Financial institutions should be given reasonable time to update their customer systems. Until Santander improves their insecure system I will not generate new payees.

Good God, first sending money was giving you nightmares. Now it's a lottery. Whatever next??? Russian Roulette perhaps?

BTW, Santander have implemented name matching, and they have explained to you how you can use it. You don't like their implementation. You are free to leave them and find another bank to moan at about something. 

I am out now, this discussion is becoming circular and has stopped being productive.