Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Graywisdom
    • By Graywisdom 9th Aug 18, 4:10 PM
    • 6Posts
    • 1Thanks
    Graywisdom
    Rules to protect customes from bank scams.
    • #1
    • 9th Aug 18, 4:10 PM
    Rules to protect customes from bank scams. 9th Aug 18 at 4:10 PM
    My bank has just sent me details of changes which will be effective in October to seemingly protect customers from scams.
    So one of the new terms states.... 'currently we only check that the account number and sort code you provide matches the account you're paying.(?). In future, we may also ask you for the name of the account holder so it can be confirmed.
    "WE MAY ..... ASK FOR THE NAME OF THE ACCOUNT HOLDER".!!
    "MAY"???. It should be part of the basic transfer of monies.
    So if they dont ask then surely the banks will have to be entirely responsible for any scam!
Page 1
    • eskbanker
    • By eskbanker 9th Aug 18, 4:24 PM
    • 8,707 Posts
    • 9,940 Thanks
    eskbanker
    • #2
    • 9th Aug 18, 4:24 PM
    • #2
    • 9th Aug 18, 4:24 PM
    So one of the new terms states.... 'currently we only check that the account number and sort code you provide matches the account you're paying.(?). In future, we may also ask you for the name of the account holder so it can be confirmed.
    "WE MAY ..... ASK FOR THE NAME OF THE ACCOUNT HOLDER".!!
    "MAY"???. It should be part of the basic transfer of monies.
    Originally posted by Graywisdom
    That's the point though - it hasn't been up to now but they're letting you know that this change is being introduced.

    So if they dont ask then surely the banks will have to be entirely responsible for any scam!
    Originally posted by Graywisdom
    The word 'scam' gets bandied around ridiculously often on here, but in this case my understanding is that the change relates to additional validation of the recipient's details entered by customers when making bank transfers - under what circumstances do you believe that miskeying such details would qualify as a 'scam'?
    • JuicyJesus
    • By JuicyJesus 9th Aug 18, 4:25 PM
    • 3,374 Posts
    • 3,768 Thanks
    JuicyJesus
    • #3
    • 9th Aug 18, 4:25 PM
    • #3
    • 9th Aug 18, 4:25 PM
    My bank has just sent me details of changes which will be effective in October to seemingly protect customers from scams.
    So one of the new terms states.... 'currently we only check that the account number and sort code you provide matches the account you're paying.(?). In future, we may also ask you for the name of the account holder so it can be confirmed.
    "WE MAY ..... ASK FOR THE NAME OF THE ACCOUNT HOLDER".!!
    "MAY"???. It should be part of the basic transfer of monies.
    So if they dont ask then surely the banks will have to be entirely responsible for any scam!
    Originally posted by Graywisdom
    They already do ask. This provides the ability for them to check.

    And no, this will not make the banks entirely responsible for any scam. It will simply make it so that scams adapt and change to meet the new rules; same as they always have. The responsibility lies with the scammer and, I'd argue, the person who receives a phone call asking them to transfer money somewhere and who then transfers it.
    urs sinserly,
    ~~joosy jeezus~~
    • mije1983
    • By mije1983 9th Aug 18, 4:26 PM
    • 3,553 Posts
    • 20,283 Thanks
    mije1983
    • #4
    • 9th Aug 18, 4:26 PM
    • #4
    • 9th Aug 18, 4:26 PM
    The word 'scam' gets bandied around ridiculously often on here
    Originally posted by eskbanker

    And I've yet to ever see a thread with 'scam' in the title, in any part of the forum, turning out to be an actual scam.


    I live in hope.

    • Uxb
    • By Uxb 9th Aug 18, 4:28 PM
    • 1,269 Posts
    • 1,415 Thanks
    Uxb
    • #5
    • 9th Aug 18, 4:28 PM
    • #5
    • 9th Aug 18, 4:28 PM
    Well that is going to be fun if the account holder name is something like
    "Prof AJ and Mrs P Jones Household Account"
    I wonder what variations on that mouthful is going to be acceptable to the computer and what is not. and in essence this has always been the problem over account name checking - how far out in description the payee gives is acceptable. Is Prof and Mrs Jones in my example OK or not?

    Its going to be fun to watch - from a distance.
    • Asghar
    • By Asghar 9th Aug 18, 4:52 PM
    • 216 Posts
    • 142 Thanks
    Asghar
    • #6
    • 9th Aug 18, 4:52 PM
    • #6
    • 9th Aug 18, 4:52 PM
    The word 'scam' gets bandied around ridiculously often on here, but in this case my understanding is that the change relates to additional validation of the recipient's details entered by customers when making bank transfers - under what circumstances do you believe that miskeying such details would qualify as a 'scam'?
    Originally posted by eskbanker
    Totally agree, it seems more to do with when people make back transfers and enter the account number incorrectly and the money ends up in someone else's account. If a name is also required then it is a validation check.
    • mije1983
    • By mije1983 9th Aug 18, 4:54 PM
    • 3,553 Posts
    • 20,283 Thanks
    mije1983
    • #7
    • 9th Aug 18, 4:54 PM
    • #7
    • 9th Aug 18, 4:54 PM
    Well that is going to be fun if the account holder name is something like
    "Prof AJ and Mrs P Jones Household Account"
    I wonder what variations on that mouthful is going to be acceptable to the computer and what is not. and in essence this has always been the problem over account name checking - how far out in description the payee gives is acceptable. Is Prof and Mrs Jones in my example OK or not?

    Its going to be fun to watch - from a distance.
    Originally posted by Uxb

    And this could well be where it falls down and you get the 'computer says no' response which will frustrate more people than it helps!

    In even simpler terms than your example you could have:

    John Doe
    J Doe
    John Fred Doe
    John F Doe
    J F Doe

    And then all the above with the relevant honorific in front.


    Common sense would hopefully be used when it is done face to face with a bank worker, but online/phone banking could be the big issue if it's too strict. But then if it's too lax what's the point?
    Last edited by mije1983; 09-08-2018 at 4:57 PM.

    • eskbanker
    • By eskbanker 9th Aug 18, 4:56 PM
    • 8,707 Posts
    • 9,940 Thanks
    eskbanker
    • #8
    • 9th Aug 18, 4:56 PM
    • #8
    • 9th Aug 18, 4:56 PM
    The (golf) European Tour must be a bunch of scammers

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/golf/45125735
    • Vortigern
    • By Vortigern 9th Aug 18, 4:59 PM
    • 2,622 Posts
    • 1,812 Thanks
    Vortigern
    • #9
    • 9th Aug 18, 4:59 PM
    • #9
    • 9th Aug 18, 4:59 PM
    Well that is going to be fun if the account holder name is something like
    "Prof AJ and Mrs P Jones Household Account"
    Originally posted by Uxb
    Another problem may arise for people who have multiple accounts and regularly move money around to satisfy the terms of the account

    Where currently my payee names might be:
    • Tesco1
    • Tesco2
    • TSB1
    • TSB2
    • Barclays etc.

    Will they all need to be the same - Mr Firstname Lastname ?
    • Westie983
    • By Westie983 9th Aug 18, 5:54 PM
    • 4,633 Posts
    • 15,168 Thanks
    Westie983
    Another problem may arise for people who have multiple accounts and regularly move money around to satisfy the terms of the account

    Where currently my payee names might be:
    • Tesco1
    • Tesco2
    • TSB1
    • TSB2
    • Barclays etc.

    Will they all need to be the same - Mr Firstname Lastname ?
    Originally posted by Vortigern
    Payee will change to Mr/Mrs Firstname LastName with the bank name as a reference.

    Westie983
    Save 12k in 2019 #10 Total (16000)+0/12000 = 0.0%
    Sealed Pot Challenge ~ 12 #97 Total (450)+1/500 = 0.20% ( x 11)
    Xmas 2018 1 a Day #2 Total (165)+0/365 = 0.00%
    Virtual Sealed Pot #1 Total (1300)+0/1000 = 0.00%
    2 Savers Club 2018 #16 Total (1030)+0/2000 = 0.0%

    Total 1.00/15865 = 2.00%
    I'm a Board Guide on Budgeting & Bank Accounts, Debt-Free Wannabe, Disability Money Matters, and Savings & Investments. I'm a volunteer helping the boards run smoothly, but I'm not a moderator, and do not read all posts. If you see an inappropriate/illegal post then email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com
    • tempus_fugit
    • By tempus_fugit 9th Aug 18, 10:21 PM
    • 545 Posts
    • 488 Thanks
    tempus_fugit
    A lot of these fields for the names are limited to 18 characters, which is not long enough to get my name into. I think there will be problems unless they update their systems.
    Retired at age 56 after having "light bulb moment" due to reading MSE and its forums. Have been converted to the "budget to zero" concept and use YNAB for all monthly budgeting and long term goals.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

339Posts Today

1,492Users online

Martin's Twitter