Confirmation of Payee - is it as poor for everyone else?

EssexExile

colsten said:

EssexExile said:

It's wonderful! I've been distributing my late father's money around the family and I find it very reassuring when sending tens of thousands to know it's going to the right place. Sometimes the account name isn't exactly as told to me but I know that if I have Miss M. Smith and Santander tells me it should be Mary Smith then I have the right place.

You could have sent a one pound test payment to each of the recipients, and waited for their confirmation that they have received the money, if you didn't trust yourself to type the sort code and account number correctly, or if you didn't trust the recipients to be able to give you their correct sort code and account number. This method has been available for a couple of decades already.

My sister doesn't do remote banking so asking her to check she's received a pound is not going to get me anywhere. Anyway using CoP is much simpler. I honestly can't see the problem, you put in what you think the account name is, the bank tells you what it thinks it is, if the two are obviously the same you go ahead, if they're not you go back and check.

colsten

EssexExile said:

.... you put in what you think the account name is, the bank tells you what it thinks it is, if the two are obviously the same you go ahead, if they're not you go back and check.

Actually, the bank does NOT always tell you what it thinks the name is. Unless you get at least an approximate match, the bank will not reveal the name they have found for the sort code and account number. Probably for privacy reasons, to stop people from snooping.

That is, if the recipient institution is part of CoP to start with, and uniquely identifies a person's account with a sort code and account number.

Thrugelmir

dahj said:

Fingerbobs said:

BrownTrout said:

it only doesnt work with building society accounts where the accounts are one sort code and account number (so using a reference number)

It (sometimes) does work if you select the option for paying a "business" rather than an "individual" (or equivalent terminology) and enter the name of the Building Society as the recipient name.

It doesn't really help identify the end recipient as the account will be 'XYZ Building Society' where a roll/reference number is used. 

Building societies aren't clearing banks. 

colsten

Thrugelmir said:

dahj said:

Fingerbobs said:

BrownTrout said:

it only doesnt work with building society accounts where the accounts are one sort code and account number (so using a reference number)

It (sometimes) does work if you select the option for paying a "business" rather than an "individual" (or equivalent terminology) and enter the name of the Building Society as the recipient name.

It doesn't really help identify the end recipient as the account will be 'XYZ Building Society' where a roll/reference number is used. 

Building societies aren't clearing banks. 

Are you saying CoP only works with clearing banks? That would make it even more pointless than I think it already is.

schiff

Today I've done a FP from Santander to my new Virgin HBC. The destination I put as Virgin HBC 3 (for my own purposes to differentiate it from the other Virgin HBC for future payments). Entered the sort code and my account number. It came up Virgin Bank so I knew I was on the right lines. Next page told me name not recognised and/or wasn't in the system so I carefully checked that I'd got the numbers right, overrode and sent the payment. It's the way I've been setting up new FPs and SOs since the start of CoP.

robatwork

schiff said:

Today I've done a FP from Santander to my new Virgin HBC. The destination I put as Virgin HBC 3 (for my own purposes to differentiate it from the other Virgin HBC for future payments). Entered the sort code and my account number. It came up Virgin Bank so I knew I was on the right lines. Next page told me name not recognised and/or wasn't in the system so I carefully checked that I'd got the numbers right, overrode and sent the payment. It's the way I've been setting up new FPs and SOs since the start of CoP.

The thing is, that isn't telling you any more than you've been able to find out for years on many websites. For example

https://www.data-8.co.uk/data-validation/bank-validation/  tells you if the account/code is valid and which bank it is.

Peter999_2

I've used COP quite a few times over the last few months using Santander and Lloyds.   I've never had a single problem with them at all and as far as I'm concerned I think it's a very useful tool.

naedanger

colsten said:

robatwork said:

Still not sure if it's the way Santander have implemented it that has meant I have never had one match or even the option that says "it's close but no cigar".  For it not to work with the country's biggest businesses is, as Private Eye may say, pisspoor.

... as the main purpose of CoP is to exempt banks from any liability if the customer sends money to a wrong account.

Are banks liable if a customer sends money to the wrong account when CoP is not present? 

eskbanker

naedanger said:

colsten said:

robatwork said:

Still not sure if it's the way Santander have implemented it that has meant I have never had one match or even the option that says "it's close but no cigar".  For it not to work with the country's biggest businesses is, as Private Eye may say, pisspoor.

... as the main purpose of CoP is to exempt banks from any liability if the customer sends money to a wrong account.

Are banks liable if a customer sends money to the wrong account when CoP is not present? 

Depends on the circumstances - if the customer simply makes a typo then the bank won't be responsible for that, but if it's an authorised push payment scam, under which the customer has been misled into paying a fraudster when thinking they're paying a legitimate company, then most major banks signed up to a voluntary code accepting liability for this in 2019:

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/2020/02/funding-to-refund-money-transfer-scam-victims-extended-to-the-en/

naedanger

eskbanker said:

naedanger said:

colsten said:

robatwork said:

Still not sure if it's the way Santander have implemented it that has meant I have never had one match or even the option that says "it's close but no cigar".  For it not to work with the country's biggest businesses is, as Private Eye may say, pisspoor.

... as the main purpose of CoP is to exempt banks from any liability if the customer sends money to a wrong account.

Are banks liable if a customer sends money to the wrong account when CoP is not present? 

Depends on the circumstances - if the customer simply makes a typo then the bank won't be responsible for that, but if it's an authorised push payment scam, under which the customer has been misled into paying a fraudster when thinking they're paying a legitimate company, then most major banks signed up to a voluntary code accepting liability for this in 2019:

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/2020/02/funding-to-refund-money-transfer-scam-victims-extended-to-the-en/

In that case it is hard to see why someone would conclude CoP's main purpose is to exempt banks from liability if the customer sends money to the wrong account. (The banks are already exempt for that liability except if they have failed to follow properly industry fraud prevention practices.)

It seems what COP should achieve, once fully and properly implemented, is to reduce the instances where customers make typos. Personally I have always thought the lack of check digits is a significant design failure on a system that relies on customers not making typing mistakes. Make banks liable for this design failure and they will find soon find a solution.