LBG paper statement "issues"

Katiehound

Well Lloyds fixed the problem in that I think only one paper statement was missing- it automatically reverted back to paper. This was not the case with Halifax: I had to go online & remove the paperless option.

MattMattMattUK

Section62 said:

Nasqueron said:

GTR_King said:

Why you think that? 

I know paper copies can be intercepted but rarely happens unless I am wrong!

With digital copies what if the servers go down etc 

I trust paper copies more! 

Just my opinion 

I am not saying you should do statements the way I prefer, it is your choice. I am simply pointing out that it's undeniable that a paper statement, sent through the post, is a much bigger security risk than a digital copy that you get through a secure login. If access is your concern, you can download them and store on backups both local and cloud so there is no issue of losing visibility - though in this age, even having PDFs of statements is largely redundant as apps and websites show all the transactions in real time. A paper copy can be stolen (particularly for people with shared mailboxes), put through the wrong letter box, sent to an old address if you move or even if someone burgles your house, take the statements. A hard copy of any document is simply not safe and it's an entirely redundant process these days to print and post paper to you, I would 100% support banks charging for this option.

So if there's a risk of someone burgling your house to steal paper bank statements then what is stopping them also stealing the device you are using to store your downloaded digital copies locally?

Whilst one cannot stop them stealing the physical device that does not give them access to the document, any device would be password protected, the drive itself would be encrypted, multiple backups would be encrypted and/or password protected as well. Stealing the physical device would not give them any access to the data contained on the device and neither would it mean I no longer had the data. 

Section62 said:

I'd suggest someone taking the risk of breaking into a house is more likely to be stealing a device which might have some sell-on value in addition to (or instead of) the data contained therein, rather than a pile of paper which is only valuable for the data.

Stealing a device is in most cases pretty pointless these days, most laptops are locked after initial activation, mine certainly are, so even if someone had the laptop or phone they would not be able to use it anyway, which is why laptop and phone thefts have declined significantly now, most thefts are unlocked devices in use and are stolen for very specific use (they have watched the user input a banking password and are stealing the unlocked device to use that access code to transfer money).

Section62 said:

I didn't start this thread with the intention of it becoming a discussion about the pros and cons of paper vs digital, but if that discussion is being had then people need to keep it real and not over exagerate the risks either way.  If paper statements were "simply not safe" then I find it odd that the banks were quite happy sending them out without even a suggestion of risk, until the time came that they wanted people to switch to paperless to save them money.  And if the postal system is so dangerous, why do they still send cards, PINs and other correspondence out by that method? One might conclude the risks (when it comes to paper statements) are being somewhat overstated.

The postal system is inherently insecure, which is why nearly all banks have stopped sending PINs via post. Cards are sent via post because it is impossible to send a physical item via electronic transfer, but in cards also require activation and potentially the PIN before they become functional anyway. Alternatively card providers can actually send a new card's details directly to Google Pay and Apple Pay, which is likely where things will progress to in a few more years. Sending paper statements via the postal system is increasing the risk over a secure digital system, how one views that risk is dependant on a range of factors, but it is certainly not zero risk and it is an additional risk over and above a digital transfer. One might conclude that it is inherently irrational to introduce an additional risk for something which is in not needed, others might conclude that they will accept that risk to satisfy a desire for paper bank statements printed by a third party. 

WillPS

MattMattMattUK said:

The postal system is inherently insecure, which is why nearly all banks have stopped sending PINs via post.

Challenge. Which banks have stopped sending PINs by post please?

In the last 18 months my wife and I have received PINs in the post from:

• Natwest Group (RBS and Natwest)
  
• Lloyds Banking Group (Bank of Scotland, Halifax and Lloyds)
  
• Barclays
• TSB
• Santander
• Nationwide
  
• First Direct
• Co-operative Bank
  

'Nearly all' is, I suggest, an exaggeration.

GTR_King

I don’t think I ever received PIN number via text email etc always via post 

seatbeltnoob

Section62 said:

fatbelly said:

At 75p for second class postage, you can see where they are coming from

Very unlikely they pay as much as 75p postage.

they will get discounts, but discounts arent that big. Royal Mail is just pricing themselves out of irrelevance. Just a year ago I started my ecommerce business. The cost of 1st class large letter went from £1.45 to £1.95. In one tax year it went from 1.65 to 1.95 (so two price rises in one year).

You can see how businesses like banks who send hundreds of thousnads of letters out (if not millions) each month take a massive hit whenever there are price rises. If they really push to move customers to online statements it will seriously take a hit to their revenues.

I do wonder if price rises are worth it, because there will be massive drop offs from letters being sent out. I beleive local councils are prime target for cutting down the number of letters. They do send out A LOT of unnecessary letters. If they built a decent IT system they could cut down a lot of their letters by just emailing their residents.

Also NHS is a prime target for that.

molerat

seatbeltnoob said:

I do wonder if price rises are worth it, because there will be massive drop offs from letters being sent out. I beleive local councils are prime target for cutting down the number of letters. They do send out A LOT of unnecessary letters. If they built a decent IT system they could cut down a lot of their letters by just emailing their residents.

Also NHS is a prime target for that.

We have had letters from both the NHS and council to inform us that we would soon be receiving letters about ............ 

dealyboy

Thank you for your points @molerat in regard to physical letter communications from public bodies.

I am contemplating how to respond and will do shortly.
Yours Forumite.