Quality of savings apps / sites

boingy

Hehe. Some of you just have no vision. A single banking app would still connect to multiple banks, so if one bank went down you would still have access to the others. The beginnings of it are already there with Open Banking. It's clunky but it's a start.

It will happen and it will start with with the banking groups rationalising their apps. The NatWest and RBS apps are identical apart from the branding. It's only a matter of time before they merge into a single app.

A few years ago could you imagine banking on a phone app? And a few years before that did you imagine that online banking would be a thing? 

njm123

Only bank I'd avoid using their website is ICICI Bank (UK) - I had money with them under their HiSave Brand now matured and out fortunately as their website is painful to use.    You have to type a password in, no copying and pasting a strong password from a password manager, last time I used it no 2FA was available.

friolento

boingy said:

Hehe. Some of you just have no vision. A single banking app would still connect to multiple banks, so if one bank went down you would still have access to the others. 

We are talking about the app being down. #vision

boingy said:

A few years ago could you imagine banking on a phone app? And a few years before that did you imagine that online banking would be a thing? 

I have done banking on apps for quite a few years now.

Anyways. A single app for all banks isn't on the drawing board, not in any free country in the western world, for reasons including those already given.

masonic

boingy said:

Hehe. Some of you just have no vision. A single banking app would still connect to multiple banks, so if one bank went down you would still have access to the others. The beginnings of it are already there with Open Banking. It's clunky but it's a start.

It will happen and it will start with with the banking groups rationalising their apps. The NatWest and RBS apps are identical apart from the branding. It's only a matter of time before they merge into a single app.

You've highlighted a banking group that runs three different apps for its different brands. The same is true for Lloyds group. There is virtually no effort in simplifying down to a single app for all brands. Yet they continue to maintain the separate apps.

boingy said:

A few years ago could you imagine banking on a phone app? And a few years before that did you imagine that online banking would be a thing? 

Yes, but I didn't imagine the high tech solution to identity verification would be me pulling faces or reciting nonsense phrases on camera, nor that the technological solution to reconcile cheques with an internet banking age would be photographs of cheques. Plus ça change!

dont_use_vistaprint

Millyonare said:

dont_use_vistaprint said:

Does this affect your decision much?

Quality of savings apps / sites

Always amazed when people ask this question. It is the most basic principle of usability science. It's a given. The lower the quality of an app or website, the lower the usage. The higher the quality, the higher the usage.

Humans are (basically) lazy. The more clicks and downtime they have to endure, the more likely they are to scroll away elsewhere to an easier, faster or less-painful bank experience.

Offer me a 5% saver at (say) First Direct or Nationwide, and I'm going to First Direct every time. The quality of their app / site / helpline is way superior to the clunky / bland Nationwide system.

I worked many years in UX , familiar with all the Nielsen/ Adobe and Apple research  and one of the reasons I asked.

Usability science doesn’t always apply I think the replies here prove that, these are high value low frequency financial decisions not small frequent low risk transactions and UX doesn’t seem to bother a lot of people.

Most  people here don’t seem to equate UX to overall capability / maturity of a company or system.

dont_use_vistaprint

wmb194 said:

Millyonare said:

dont_use_vistaprint said:

Does this affect your decision much?

Quality of savings apps / sites

Always amazed when people ask this question. It is the most basic principle of usability science. It's a given. The lower the quality of an app or website, the lower the usage. The higher the quality, the higher the usage.

Humans are (basically) lazy. The more clicks and downtime they have to endure, the more likely they are to scroll away elsewhere to an easier, faster or less-painful bank experience.

Offer me a 5% saver at (say) First Direct or Nationwide, and I'm going to First Direct every time. The quality of their app / site / helpline is way superior to the clunky / bland Nationwide system.

I think you've missed the context, though. The OP is worrying that poor quality sites suggest that an institution may fail, that its security and data retention processes are poor and, because the FSCS must be useless because it's British, that it could mean ultimately losing their deposits 

No so much that the institution may fail, more that it’s processes may fail or make customers  more vulnerable to mistakes , fraud etc or that the back end security may fail.

And yes your assumption about FSCS is correct, anything remotely connected to the UK public sector i world worry about , having seen their inability to contract, procure , lead anything remotely technical or important.

I would be interested to know from anyone here examples when FSCS protections have actually been tested and what the experience for the consumer was like ? 

I’m currently watching the wellington claims and see they only compensated 5 out of 16 claims and seems these complaints go back 3 or more years , transferring visiblest money to a firm that collapsed on 2020

wmb194

dont_use_vistaprint said:

wmb194 said:

Millyonare said:

dont_use_vistaprint said:

Does this affect your decision much?

Quality of savings apps / sites

Always amazed when people ask this question. It is the most basic principle of usability science. It's a given. The lower the quality of an app or website, the lower the usage. The higher the quality, the higher the usage.

Humans are (basically) lazy. The more clicks and downtime they have to endure, the more likely they are to scroll away elsewhere to an easier, faster or less-painful bank experience.

Offer me a 5% saver at (say) First Direct or Nationwide, and I'm going to First Direct every time. The quality of their app / site / helpline is way superior to the clunky / bland Nationwide system.

I think you've missed the context, though. The OP is worrying that poor quality sites suggest that an institution may fail, that its security and data retention processes are poor and, because the FSCS must be useless because it's British, that it could mean ultimately losing their deposits 

No so much that the institution may fail, more that it’s processes may fail or make customers  more vulnerable to mistakes , fraud etc or that the back end security may fail.

And yes your assumption about FSCS is correct, anything remotely connected to the UK public sector i world worry about , having seen their inability to contract, procure , lead anything remotely technical or important.

I would be interested to know from anyone here examples when FSCS protections have actually been tested and what the experience for the consumer was like ? 

I’m currently watching the wellington claims and see they only compensated 5 out of 16 claims and seems these complaints go back 3 or more years , transferring visiblest money to a firm that collapsed on 2020

You don't remember the financial crisis? The FSCS has been tested multiple times and it's worked fine. In the banking space it has a trickle of claims to deal with every year, usually revolving around failed credit unions. You can find the data on its website.

If you're always so down on the UK you really shouldn't be looking to invest or deposit your money here.