Appalling service from Zopa Biscuit a/c

Chief_of_Staffy

friolento said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

friolento said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

I had this last week due to some miserable payment to a tradesman. I suspect the reason was because the business had just changed bank providers and the account was new. That's not an excuse, however, as I have no way of opting out of these absurd interrogations under which I must prove I'm not an idiot and don't have dementia.

ColdIron said:

They are just trying to protect your money. Would you feel happy if they paid it and you couldn't get it back or would you be posting that they were reckless?

As above all banks, and Zopa are a bank, can pend payments. Certainly not worth getting angry about

These checks are solely to limit the financial liability of the bank. There is no benefit whatsoever to the account holder. I wish people would stop posting this canard.

There is another canard, namely that banks will not recover their expenses from customers.

I've not heard that one, likely because it represents an irrelevant sum. The money estimated to be prevented by APP fraud annually is in the low £hundreds of millions, far below a single percentage point of banking industry profit. Nobody when asked if they are willing to pay another 20p of bank charges every year in return for no more intrusions, no more interrogations, no more blocking the spend of their 'own money', no hours or days or weeks wasted proving that they are not a criminal, will respond, "No thanks."

It doesn't matter how much is attributed to APP fraud (which, as I am sure most forumites know, doesn't include to card transactions) or any other type of fraud the bank reimburses the victims for: in the end it is all paid by the customers. As is the profit a retail bank makes.

If you're stating that the money currently lost to fraud would be charged to the customer then of course it matters how much is lost. And the fact is that if the anti-fraud measures did not exist then the extra billed to customers for losses to fraud would be so small as to be not worth discussing.

friolento said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

TheBanker said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

I had this last week due to some miserable payment to a tradesman. I suspect the reason was because the business had just changed bank providers and the account was new. That's not an excuse, however, as I have no way of opting out of these absurd interrogations under which I must prove I'm not an idiot and don't have dementia.

ColdIron said:

They are just trying to protect your money. Would you feel happy if they paid it and you couldn't get it back or would you be posting that they were reckless?

As above all banks, and Zopa are a bank, can pend payments. Certainly not worth getting angry about

These checks are solely to limit the financial liability of the bank. There is no benefit whatsoever to the account holder. I wish people would stop posting this canard.

The bank I work for does these checks. A few weeks ago they prevented a customer with limited mental capacity (which the bank were not aware of) from paying £13k to a "builder" who'd knocked on the door and told him he needed new roof tiles. I suspect that customer, and the family member who is now arranging Power of Attourney, are grateful that the payment didn't go through... 

Really. Please explain why they are grateful the payment didn't go through, bearing in mind the legal framework within which the bank is mandated to operate in these situations and which, given your username, you'll be fully conversant.

I can think of countless reasons why they are grateful, starting from not having to engage in reclaiming the money, to having to deal with the consequences of the missing money (e.g. would the person with the limited capacity have been able to pay their rent / mortgage / food / medication etc whilst the case was being investigated), and ending with potentially having the claim refused. The APP refund scheme isn't a free-for-all, nor are the refunds instant.

Would that we all live in a perfect world. The minor inconveniences of a small subset of people who are not capable of managing their own money in the first place cannot, under any reasonable assessment, justify the staggering levels of scrutiny, disruption, stress and indeed destroyed businesses and livelihoods of people who are simply trying to earn an honest living.

TheBanker

Chief_of_Staffy said:

friolento said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

friolento said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

I had this last week due to some miserable payment to a tradesman. I suspect the reason was because the business had just changed bank providers and the account was new. That's not an excuse, however, as I have no way of opting out of these absurd interrogations under which I must prove I'm not an idiot and don't have dementia.

ColdIron said:

They are just trying to protect your money. Would you feel happy if they paid it and you couldn't get it back or would you be posting that they were reckless?

As above all banks, and Zopa are a bank, can pend payments. Certainly not worth getting angry about

These checks are solely to limit the financial liability of the bank. There is no benefit whatsoever to the account holder. I wish people would stop posting this canard.

There is another canard, namely that banks will not recover their expenses from customers.

I've not heard that one, likely because it represents an irrelevant sum. The money estimated to be prevented by APP fraud annually is in the low £hundreds of millions, far below a single percentage point of banking industry profit. Nobody when asked if they are willing to pay another 20p of bank charges every year in return for no more intrusions, no more interrogations, no more blocking the spend of their 'own money', no hours or days or weeks wasted proving that they are not a criminal, will respond, "No thanks."

It doesn't matter how much is attributed to APP fraud (which, as I am sure most forumites know, doesn't include to card transactions) or any other type of fraud the bank reimburses the victims for: in the end it is all paid by the customers. As is the profit a retail bank makes.

If you're stating that the money currently lost to fraud would be charged to the customer then of course it matters how much is lost. And the fact is that if the anti-fraud measures did not exist then the extra billed to customers for losses to fraud would be so small as to be not worth discussing.

friolento said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

TheBanker said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

I had this last week due to some miserable payment to a tradesman. I suspect the reason was because the business had just changed bank providers and the account was new. That's not an excuse, however, as I have no way of opting out of these absurd interrogations under which I must prove I'm not an idiot and don't have dementia.

ColdIron said:

They are just trying to protect your money. Would you feel happy if they paid it and you couldn't get it back or would you be posting that they were reckless?

As above all banks, and Zopa are a bank, can pend payments. Certainly not worth getting angry about

These checks are solely to limit the financial liability of the bank. There is no benefit whatsoever to the account holder. I wish people would stop posting this canard.

The bank I work for does these checks. A few weeks ago they prevented a customer with limited mental capacity (which the bank were not aware of) from paying £13k to a "builder" who'd knocked on the door and told him he needed new roof tiles. I suspect that customer, and the family member who is now arranging Power of Attourney, are grateful that the payment didn't go through... 

Really. Please explain why they are grateful the payment didn't go through, bearing in mind the legal framework within which the bank is mandated to operate in these situations and which, given your username, you'll be fully conversant.

I can think of countless reasons why they are grateful, starting from not having to engage in reclaiming the money, to having to deal with the consequences of the missing money (e.g. would the person with the limited capacity have been able to pay their rent / mortgage / food / medication etc whilst the case was being investigated), and ending with potentially having the claim refused. The APP refund scheme isn't a free-for-all, nor are the refunds instant.

Would that we all live in a perfect world. The minor inconveniences of a small subset of people who are not capable of managing their own money in the first place cannot, under any reasonable assessment, justify the staggering levels of scrutiny, disruption, stress and indeed destroyed businesses and livelihoods of people who are simply trying to earn an honest living.

Who has had their business of livelihood destroyd by a fraud check on a payment? Honestly, people would think the bank had taken the money from your account and refused to give it back.

We have a system, driven by politicians we voted for, that made the banks liable. I know we are not allowed to be political on here, but the banks are simply protecting their interests and doing what the regulators and quasi-regulator (FOS) have forced them to do.

Ballard

confederated said:

friolento said:

It doesn't matter how much is attributed to APP fraud (which, as I am sure most forumites know, doesn't include to card transactions) or any other type of fraud the bank reimburses the victims for: in the end it is all paid by the customers. As is the profit a retail bank makes.

Given my current accounts are free of any charges how exactly do I pay for APP or any other fraud?

Lower rates of credit interest?

Chief_of_Staffy

TheBanker said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

friolento said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

friolento said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

I had this last week due to some miserable payment to a tradesman. I suspect the reason was because the business had just changed bank providers and the account was new. That's not an excuse, however, as I have no way of opting out of these absurd interrogations under which I must prove I'm not an idiot and don't have dementia.

ColdIron said:

They are just trying to protect your money. Would you feel happy if they paid it and you couldn't get it back or would you be posting that they were reckless?

As above all banks, and Zopa are a bank, can pend payments. Certainly not worth getting angry about

These checks are solely to limit the financial liability of the bank. There is no benefit whatsoever to the account holder. I wish people would stop posting this canard.

There is another canard, namely that banks will not recover their expenses from customers.

I've not heard that one, likely because it represents an irrelevant sum. The money estimated to be prevented by APP fraud annually is in the low £hundreds of millions, far below a single percentage point of banking industry profit. Nobody when asked if they are willing to pay another 20p of bank charges every year in return for no more intrusions, no more interrogations, no more blocking the spend of their 'own money', no hours or days or weeks wasted proving that they are not a criminal, will respond, "No thanks."

It doesn't matter how much is attributed to APP fraud (which, as I am sure most forumites know, doesn't include to card transactions) or any other type of fraud the bank reimburses the victims for: in the end it is all paid by the customers. As is the profit a retail bank makes.

If you're stating that the money currently lost to fraud would be charged to the customer then of course it matters how much is lost. And the fact is that if the anti-fraud measures did not exist then the extra billed to customers for losses to fraud would be so small as to be not worth discussing.

friolento said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

TheBanker said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

I had this last week due to some miserable payment to a tradesman. I suspect the reason was because the business had just changed bank providers and the account was new. That's not an excuse, however, as I have no way of opting out of these absurd interrogations under which I must prove I'm not an idiot and don't have dementia.

ColdIron said:

They are just trying to protect your money. Would you feel happy if they paid it and you couldn't get it back or would you be posting that they were reckless?

As above all banks, and Zopa are a bank, can pend payments. Certainly not worth getting angry about

These checks are solely to limit the financial liability of the bank. There is no benefit whatsoever to the account holder. I wish people would stop posting this canard.

The bank I work for does these checks. A few weeks ago they prevented a customer with limited mental capacity (which the bank were not aware of) from paying £13k to a "builder" who'd knocked on the door and told him he needed new roof tiles. I suspect that customer, and the family member who is now arranging Power of Attourney, are grateful that the payment didn't go through... 

Really. Please explain why they are grateful the payment didn't go through, bearing in mind the legal framework within which the bank is mandated to operate in these situations and which, given your username, you'll be fully conversant.

I can think of countless reasons why they are grateful, starting from not having to engage in reclaiming the money, to having to deal with the consequences of the missing money (e.g. would the person with the limited capacity have been able to pay their rent / mortgage / food / medication etc whilst the case was being investigated), and ending with potentially having the claim refused. The APP refund scheme isn't a free-for-all, nor are the refunds instant.

Would that we all live in a perfect world. The minor inconveniences of a small subset of people who are not capable of managing their own money in the first place cannot, under any reasonable assessment, justify the staggering levels of scrutiny, disruption, stress and indeed destroyed businesses and livelihoods of people who are simply trying to earn an honest living.

Who has had their business of livelihood destroyd by a fraud check on a payment?

Thousands of people, as you well know.

confederated

Ballard said:

Lower rates of credit interest?

But the only current account I have which pays interest on credit balances is LHV @ 4%. My main account with RBS pays nothing and, as far as I know, never has. Are you suggesting it might, were RBS able to guarantee no susceptibility to APP fraud or suchlike? And that LHV might even pay more? I somehow doubt it. In the UK most of us pay nothing for our current accounts - overseas the situation is often very different.

ZeroSum

Virgin are quite bad for this, when moving money into fixed accounts with other banks, whereby if youre doing multiple transfers for different time frames, theyll block the 2nd one as its done too quickly. And even though you do it a fair amount & you tell them its not dodgy, they still do it & take no responsibility, and refuse to pay lost interest on the missing days. So no longer use them for transfers 

Eco_Miser

confederated said:

Ballard said:

Lower rates of credit interest?

But the only current account I have which pays interest on credit balances is LHV @ 4%. My main account with RBS pays nothing and, as far as I know, never has. Are you suggesting it might, were RBS able to guarantee no susceptibility to APP fraud or suchlike? And that LHV might even pay more? I somehow doubt it. In the UK most of us pay nothing for our current accounts - overseas the situation is often very different.

Well, Lloyds used to pay 4 or 5% on my current accounts, but now it's 1.5%. I can't remember what some of my other current accounts paid, but it was worth leaving thousands in the account.

Can't say the change was directly linked to APP Fraud, but there was much less of it then.

GeoffTF

Some banks are better than others. From the bank's point of view, some customers are better than others. We seem to have a skewed population here with an excess of trouble magnets with troublesome banks. Thankfully, I am not having any problems.

friolento

Chief_of_Staffy said:

TheBanker said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

friolento said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

friolento said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

I had this last week due to some miserable payment to a tradesman. I suspect the reason was because the business had just changed bank providers and the account was new. That's not an excuse, however, as I have no way of opting out of these absurd interrogations under which I must prove I'm not an idiot and don't have dementia.

ColdIron said:

They are just trying to protect your money. Would you feel happy if they paid it and you couldn't get it back or would you be posting that they were reckless?

As above all banks, and Zopa are a bank, can pend payments. Certainly not worth getting angry about

These checks are solely to limit the financial liability of the bank. There is no benefit whatsoever to the account holder. I wish people would stop posting this canard.

There is another canard, namely that banks will not recover their expenses from customers.

I've not heard that one, likely because it represents an irrelevant sum. The money estimated to be prevented by APP fraud annually is in the low £hundreds of millions, far below a single percentage point of banking industry profit. Nobody when asked if they are willing to pay another 20p of bank charges every year in return for no more intrusions, no more interrogations, no more blocking the spend of their 'own money', no hours or days or weeks wasted proving that they are not a criminal, will respond, "No thanks."

It doesn't matter how much is attributed to APP fraud (which, as I am sure most forumites know, doesn't include to card transactions) or any other type of fraud the bank reimburses the victims for: in the end it is all paid by the customers. As is the profit a retail bank makes.

If you're stating that the money currently lost to fraud would be charged to the customer then of course it matters how much is lost. And the fact is that if the anti-fraud measures did not exist then the extra billed to customers for losses to fraud would be so small as to be not worth discussing.

friolento said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

TheBanker said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

I had this last week due to some miserable payment to a tradesman. I suspect the reason was because the business had just changed bank providers and the account was new. That's not an excuse, however, as I have no way of opting out of these absurd interrogations under which I must prove I'm not an idiot and don't have dementia.

ColdIron said:

They are just trying to protect your money. Would you feel happy if they paid it and you couldn't get it back or would you be posting that they were reckless?

As above all banks, and Zopa are a bank, can pend payments. Certainly not worth getting angry about

These checks are solely to limit the financial liability of the bank. There is no benefit whatsoever to the account holder. I wish people would stop posting this canard.

The bank I work for does these checks. A few weeks ago they prevented a customer with limited mental capacity (which the bank were not aware of) from paying £13k to a "builder" who'd knocked on the door and told him he needed new roof tiles. I suspect that customer, and the family member who is now arranging Power of Attourney, are grateful that the payment didn't go through... 

Really. Please explain why they are grateful the payment didn't go through, bearing in mind the legal framework within which the bank is mandated to operate in these situations and which, given your username, you'll be fully conversant.

I can think of countless reasons why they are grateful, starting from not having to engage in reclaiming the money, to having to deal with the consequences of the missing money (e.g. would the person with the limited capacity have been able to pay their rent / mortgage / food / medication etc whilst the case was being investigated), and ending with potentially having the claim refused. The APP refund scheme isn't a free-for-all, nor are the refunds instant.

Would that we all live in a perfect world. The minor inconveniences of a small subset of people who are not capable of managing their own money in the first place cannot, under any reasonable assessment, justify the staggering levels of scrutiny, disruption, stress and indeed destroyed businesses and livelihoods of people who are simply trying to earn an honest living.

Who has had their business of livelihood destroyd by a fraud check on a payment?

Thousands of people, as you well know.

That sounds a vast exaggeration to me but perhaps I have missed the reports in credible media about it. 

Chief_of_Staffy

friolento said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

TheBanker said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

friolento said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

friolento said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

I had this last week due to some miserable payment to a tradesman. I suspect the reason was because the business had just changed bank providers and the account was new. That's not an excuse, however, as I have no way of opting out of these absurd interrogations under which I must prove I'm not an idiot and don't have dementia.

ColdIron said:

They are just trying to protect your money. Would you feel happy if they paid it and you couldn't get it back or would you be posting that they were reckless?

As above all banks, and Zopa are a bank, can pend payments. Certainly not worth getting angry about

These checks are solely to limit the financial liability of the bank. There is no benefit whatsoever to the account holder. I wish people would stop posting this canard.

There is another canard, namely that banks will not recover their expenses from customers.

I've not heard that one, likely because it represents an irrelevant sum. The money estimated to be prevented by APP fraud annually is in the low £hundreds of millions, far below a single percentage point of banking industry profit. Nobody when asked if they are willing to pay another 20p of bank charges every year in return for no more intrusions, no more interrogations, no more blocking the spend of their 'own money', no hours or days or weeks wasted proving that they are not a criminal, will respond, "No thanks."

It doesn't matter how much is attributed to APP fraud (which, as I am sure most forumites know, doesn't include to card transactions) or any other type of fraud the bank reimburses the victims for: in the end it is all paid by the customers. As is the profit a retail bank makes.

If you're stating that the money currently lost to fraud would be charged to the customer then of course it matters how much is lost. And the fact is that if the anti-fraud measures did not exist then the extra billed to customers for losses to fraud would be so small as to be not worth discussing.

friolento said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

TheBanker said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

I had this last week due to some miserable payment to a tradesman. I suspect the reason was because the business had just changed bank providers and the account was new. That's not an excuse, however, as I have no way of opting out of these absurd interrogations under which I must prove I'm not an idiot and don't have dementia.

ColdIron said:

They are just trying to protect your money. Would you feel happy if they paid it and you couldn't get it back or would you be posting that they were reckless?

As above all banks, and Zopa are a bank, can pend payments. Certainly not worth getting angry about

These checks are solely to limit the financial liability of the bank. There is no benefit whatsoever to the account holder. I wish people would stop posting this canard.

The bank I work for does these checks. A few weeks ago they prevented a customer with limited mental capacity (which the bank were not aware of) from paying £13k to a "builder" who'd knocked on the door and told him he needed new roof tiles. I suspect that customer, and the family member who is now arranging Power of Attourney, are grateful that the payment didn't go through... 

Really. Please explain why they are grateful the payment didn't go through, bearing in mind the legal framework within which the bank is mandated to operate in these situations and which, given your username, you'll be fully conversant.

I can think of countless reasons why they are grateful, starting from not having to engage in reclaiming the money, to having to deal with the consequences of the missing money (e.g. would the person with the limited capacity have been able to pay their rent / mortgage / food / medication etc whilst the case was being investigated), and ending with potentially having the claim refused. The APP refund scheme isn't a free-for-all, nor are the refunds instant.

Would that we all live in a perfect world. The minor inconveniences of a small subset of people who are not capable of managing their own money in the first place cannot, under any reasonable assessment, justify the staggering levels of scrutiny, disruption, stress and indeed destroyed businesses and livelihoods of people who are simply trying to earn an honest living.

Who has had their business of livelihood destroyd by a fraud check on a payment?

Thousands of people, as you well know.

That sounds a vast exaggeration to me but perhaps I have missed the reports in credible media about it. 

It sounds like it.