Would you do all your banking on your mobile phone?

The one-day cheque clearing will involve a photographic image of the cheque being transmitted to the drawer’s branch for verification, possibly even the customer ‘posting’ the cheque to their account by sending a picture of it to their bank branch. And what happens to the original? Could it be presented again? I see arguments looming.

Just to illustrate the power of systems that have no delay for safety:

bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-24/bank-known-for-lehman-blunder-transfers-5-4-billion-in-error

” KfW, which on its website says it’s been awarded the title of the world’s safest bank by magazine Global Finance, isn’t the only lender to suffer a glitch. Deutsche Bank AG’s foreign exchange unit in June 2015 mistakenly sent $6 billion to a hedge fund client and recovered the sum a day later, a person familiar with the matter said at the time.”

You have to laugh otherwise you have to cry. A specialist body screws up for billions and we expect imperfect non-technical humans to master systems and then fine them for going overdrawn. And of course all this interaction based possibly on a single mobile which if lost or damaged presumably is fairly disastrous for the owner.

The problem you have Patrick Taylor is that probably Which doesn’t want the full details of all the major hacks on banks and other public organisations as it makes them look bad ,while the government tries to play up policies that tie in with globalization and big business . They want public confidence in subjects ,that ,behind the scenes are anything but secure . I have years of data stored having posted on security websites been on their forums, get emails from many as well as data from freedom websites that are never printed in the UK media . The technical ones are all high brow not low value websites well thought of worldwide but I know I could never post half the info here as it would be blocked so I stick to non-controversial ones that are common knowledge worldwide.

We have asked before that Which? publishes the survey questions and preferably the data derived so we can see for ourselves just how sensible they are. They don’t. There have been some very dubious survey results in the past. many people see “survey” and automatically think the outcome is therefore valid. Not necessarily so.

Which ties in nicely with this article on negative reports not being published or at least unlikely to be published. I had thought I posted it to Conversations previously but it seems to have failed to appear.

theconversation.com/cranberries-cant-cure-utis-and-other-good-reasons-to-publish-negative-research-results-68976

One can imagine that peddlers of cranberry juice place more cash with the media than researchers so it would seem logical for the myth to continue. It is surely consumer bodies like Which? who should assist in educating the public that the claims made for the juice are unproven.

On a more practical note the reputation of a consumer body that relies on dubious surveys for red-top headlines is surely going to undermine the more well-thought out and useful work. I may be more sensitive than the general public to survey opaqueness but IMO the average subscriber is more intelligent than the general public.

Thanks for that Alex, keep the information coming. The more we are able to process as bank customers and consumers the better.

Perhaps Which? could summarise what “Open banking” actually entails and what the benefits and risks are.

@awhittle , thanks Alex 🙂 My immediate conservative reaction to any scheme that requires me to share my information – particularly financial – with 3rd parties is to use great caution, as in don’t do it!S I would like to know exactly what “open banking” does, how it might benefit people, and what security issues might be involved. At the moment my online banking works very well under my control; why should I change? That’s the sort of thing I’d like to know; I wonder what others would like?

I admit I have not delved into this in any detail myself, so I’m being a bit lazy. But others may like the same information.

I’ve just looked at my Oct Which? mag and there is an article on “Future money: your bank is changing” with a few paragraphs on Open banking. This largely says something about what it might do, as in my banks’s letter, and says “Banks will be forced to let customers easily and securely share their own current account data with third-parties” and “Open banking should give you greater control over your money”. But nowhere does it explain why I might want to, and benefit, from handing secure details to a third-party.

I deposit money in my current account and tell my bank when to do something with it – whether direct debit, bank transfer, cheque payment, cash withdrawal for example. As far as I am concerned, other than not having a box full of cash under the bed, I have control over my money. I have what I would regard as control of my money. I don’t understand how giving 3rd parties access gives me “greater control”.

I’ve clearly missed something about open banking that everyone else knows about. Perhaps someone could explain?

Malcolm-This sounds like the article in Business Tech. While investigating South African banks who came out with exactly the same spiel of “protecting your confidentiality ” and then customers after transactions got third party emails by the dozen. All the banks “swore blind ” that they didn’t divulge customers data and blamed it on “dodgy ” employees . BUT if the banks have dealings with third parties they send a contract which the customers signs as regards the transaction and that includes consent to notify third parties .-in SMALL print .. Of course that’s all supposing the bank is up to scratch with the latest data spying techniques which are now vast. On another banking website-quote-However they can share your details with their international divisions like a savings account customer ciould be contacted for a line of credit and so on .done so that they can make “more business out of you ” USA website- Barclays to begin selling customer information to third parties : http://libertynews.com/2013/06/barclays-to-begin-selling-customer-information-to-third-party/ –I have more.

The forthcoming General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) will, I hope, ensure that organisations behave responsibly regarding what they do with our data.

I would like to see an end to requiring people to opt-out or un-tick boxes to avoid data sharing and receiving marketing information.

I have little confidence in anyone totally protecting our data; there are so many clever people out there wanting to get their hands on it, apart from the incompetence and negligence among those “looking after” it.

But the question I asked is, what real benefits would there be to me, and how does it give me better control of my money than I already have? In other words, what is the point?

On that first point I agree completely. Most companies leak like sieves, and a lot of that leaking stems from simple incompetence on the part of the users. Laptops left on taxis, buses, trains – and that’s just the MOD.

I used a German browser+search engine that seems to go where others come up with -error 404 . Sorry about that I will try to get it via a “normal ” browser using another URL Alex. Using Yandex I can get to http://www.pymnts.com but not that article . Got it using MIdori browser under the same URL /also got it using Firefox by inputting -100 banks hacked in the USA -try that.

I think this is the correct link:
https://www.pymnts.com/news/2015/how-100-banks-got-hacked-and-lost-900-million/

Thanks Wavechange.

Try adding an “s” to http Alex.

Rather ironic, that omission, Duncan 🙂