Santander Branches to close

[Bletchleyite]

There's a limit to the amount, so I think the banks have decided that it's worth the risk for smallish amounts.

The entire clearing system is switching, over time, to image based clearing. Banks will accept your cheque and then shred it. Nobody will be posting cheques around any more.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Neither, in my opinion, is contactless which I also refuse to use or accept a contactless card but that is another subject.

Why? Liability for contactless is on the retailer, not the customer. If you report the card stolen, it will just get charged back.

As all contactless use requires an online authorisation (other than "transit mode" for the likes of TfL), if you use a modern bank like Monzo as soon as you realise it's missing and see a notification for a bad transaction, you open the app and block the card. Then there can be no more than £30 to bother about reclaiming.

 

[cactustwirly]

The entire clearing system is switching, over time, to image based clearing. Banks will accept your cheque and then shred it. Nobody will be posting cheques around any more.

No they won't, especially for large amounts, where £500 could be easily altered to £1500 for example.
It's too open to fraud, however with the original paper cheque, this can be detected very easily!

 

[Bletchleyite]

No they won't, especially for large amounts, where £500 could be easily altered to £1500 for example.
It's too open to fraud, however with the original paper cheque, this can be detected very easily!

Yes, they categorically will. The costs of operating massive paper cheque clearing centres well exceeds having to repay a bit of fraud, even a couple of grand.

They may retain the paper cheque at the depositing bank for a period of time for it to be recalled as necessary, a bit like they used to with signed credit card slips. However, they absolutely will not be keeping the paper cheque clearing system running.

In any case you can't alter a £500 cheque to £1500 because the amount is also in words. Putting a ^ and "one thousand" above the start of the amount in words is so obvious that it would certainly get caught if a high value cheque flagged for attention.

 

[cactustwirly]

Yes, they categorically will. The costs of operating massive paper cheque clearing centres well exceeds having to repay a bit of fraud, even a couple of grand.

They may retain the paper cheque at the depositing bank for a period of time for it to be recalled as necessary, a bit like they used to with signed credit card slips. However, they absolutely will not be keeping the paper cheque clearing system running.

In any case you can't alter a £500 cheque to £1500 because the amount is also in words. Putting a ^ and "one thousand" above the start of the amount in words is so obvious that it would certainly get caught if a high value cheque flagged for attention.

You can, for example you can add 'teen' to the end of 'Four' in 'Four hundred pounds'
You can also change the name etc.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You can, for example you can add 'teen' to the end of 'Four' in 'Four hundred pounds'
You can also change the name etc.

You can do none of those things if the person writing the cheque has properly written it such that there is no space to do it without it being obviously an amendment, which if it's not initialled will get picked up on a high value cheque.

I also fail to see why you'd be more likely to detect that on a paper cheque than on a high-resolution image which can be zoomed and processed.

 

[Killingworth]

40+ years ago near Sheffield University there was only one cashpoint machine inside one bank branch. Then all the banks were there, possibly 5 or 6 of them. You could tell the writing was on the wall for staff in branches that long ago. The queue for that one primitive machine at lunch times stretched out the door even though those at the counter probably waited less time to cash a cheque. Today I think Santander still has an office inside the Students Union - that's it.

Young people learn and adapt fast. Regular service users learn fastest of all and it's they who save the providers most labour and cost.

There's a lesson here for the railway, and they've got it. I travelled on XC last weekend and all 4 of us across the carriage produced tickets on phones. In the other direction only I did, but the one next to me saw how easy it was and may soon be converted.

I do share the fears of most regarding the security and practicality of all this electronic stuff when things go wrong.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I do share the fears of most regarding the security and practicality of all this electronic stuff when things go wrong.

I have concerns about the railway's competence to do it at times, which is why I don't presently use m-tickets. However, I have never had a tech-related issue with a bank - they seem to be a grade higher in terms of testing etc.

 

[cactustwirly]

You can do none of those things if the person writing the cheque has properly written it such that there is no space to do it without it being obviously an amendment, which if it's not initialled will get picked up on a high value cheque.

I also fail to see why you'd be more likely to detect that on a paper cheque than on a high-resolution image which can be zoomed and processed.

But not everyone writes cheques in that way....

Because you can't measure the transmission and absorbance of light from an image....

 

[Bertie the bus]

Complete load of drivel. I have paid several grand by debit card for a car on three occasions now. In the most recent of the three it was 5 figures, in the other two it was high 4 figures.

There is a reasonable chance of it referring for manual authorisation, but that isn't a problem per-se.

It was nothing to do with authorisation. It was on the paperwork they supplied me and clearly stated their limit for card payments (£500) and that it was due to EU anti money laundering legislation. As I said, my bank disputed the legislation exists but it was exactly as stated.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It was nothing to do with authorisation. It was on the paperwork they supplied me and clearly stated their limit for card payments (£500) and that it was due to EU anti money laundering legislation. As I said, my bank disputed the legislation exists but it was exactly as stated.

No, I was stating that the car dealership was talking a complete load of drivel, not that you were. The bank (who should know such things, unlike a dodgy car dealership[1]) are correct that there is no such legislation. There might well be limits on accepting cash, but there are no money-laundering grounds for not accepting a fully traceable electronic payment such as a debit card.

[1] Is there any other type?

 

[Bletchleyite]

But not everyone writes cheques in that way....

Then they are a fool, and will find, image-based clearing or not, that at some point they have the faff and hassle of disputing a fraudulent transaction which would be completely avoided by doing it properly.

Because you can't measure the transmission and absorbance of light from an image....

Why would that tell you if a cheque had been altered but something like closely analysing the colour of pen used (something a computer can do far, far more effectively than the human eye) for each word wouldn't?

 

[Killingworth]

Cheques were going to be phased out by 2018. They were granted a reprieve, and the copying of cheques is a result of that, but their days are inevitably numbered.

The latest statistics show cheque numbers and values are falling very rapidly.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Cheques were going to be phased out by 2018. They were granted a reprieve, and the copying of cheques is a result of that, but their days are inevitably numbered.

The latest statistics show cheque numbers and values are falling very rapidly.

Younger people don't use them. They'll die out over time as those who use them willingly do. Hence the need to move to a cheaper image based clearing system so smaller volumes can be processed economically - the "scan in an app" feature is just a happy side effect, a bit like HS2 is about providing capacity on the south WCML and it being 10 minutes quicker to Birmingham is just a happy side effect.

 

[gswindale]

Cheques have been scanned in for a number of years now.

Having seen a few scans of fraudulent cheques, it is normally extremely obvious when it is a fraud.

If handwritten, then it is quite difficult to accurately match the handwriting.

Computer cheques are harder, but more noticeable due to the numbers used not matching the currently used range.

The big bonus of cheques being scanned was when we were still paying suppliers by cheque and the wonderful utility companies couldn't allocate them correctly - account refs and amounts on the back were great proofs of payment - was much harder when you had to contact the bank and wait for them to fax a copy to you.

 

[Qwerty133]

Cheque processing is currently undergoing a major overhaul and as the systems transition large level fraud is becoming apparent in some areas and it seems that the current level of training of the new teams of people dealing with cheque processing currently have inadequate knowledge to prevent fraudulent cheques being paid according to a family member who works in a part of the industry that issues a large volume of cheques (many of which have been the subject of fraud or wrongly refused to due wrongly suspected fraud). however this is mostly occurring on cheques being paid in in person and relates to cheques being issued by large companies through the post. For these reasons any service that uses the post to cash cheques is seen as unacceptable to most of the mainstream banks and is certainly considered less secure than payment by app due to the chance of a third party intercepting the cheque.
There have also been additional features added to many cheques that only the people dealing with cheque clearing have been informed about as part of the process of changing how cheques are dealt with by banks.

 

[krus_aragon]

There's a lesson here for the railway, and they've got it. I travelled on XC last weekend and all 4 of us across the carriage produced tickets on phones. In the other direction only I did, but the one next to me saw how easy it was and may soon be converted.

When a fellow passenger held out her phone-based ticket to the guard to be scanned, and then had to switch apps to show her railcard, I got the opposite impression: glad I had my three pieces of paper arranged in a wallet and ready to show in an instant. But, hey, horses for courses...

 

[radamfi]

Cheques were going to be phased out by 2018. They were granted a reprieve, and the copying of cheques is a result of that, but their days are inevitably numbered.

The latest statistics show cheque numbers and values are falling very rapidly.

What I am surprised at is how even financial institutions are still using cheques. I recently had a fixed term regular savings account with a small building society and they insisted on posting a cheque when it matured, even though it was for a substantial amount of money. I would have much preferred a bank transfer.

 

[whhistle]

Call me a cynic but I suspect that the branch staff have for years been shooting themselves in the foot by their approaching people entering the branch to "help them" with the help usually being to encourage people to use the machines rather than cashiers.

I don't really think it's the branch's fault if the staff are told to help people use the machines.
Whether you like it or not, a company will press ahead with it's plans. Instead of being all "we shall not, we shall not be moved" about it, find out how you will survive it.

Errr because most things can be done online now (including opening up a new Account)

Unless you bank with Lloyds.
They still require you to go in, waste 30 mins, watch an 8 minute video about safety and sign a piece of paper.

To pay in a cheque on Monzo all you need to do is write your account number (not even sort code) on the back of it...

I wonder if this is because there are no branches, so everyone has the same sort code?

The likes of the high-street bank will allocate you a sort code that is the closest branch to the address you use to sign up.

I wonder if sort codes almost hark back to days gone by when cheques and things were sent for processing at the individual bank branch, hence take "a few days" to clear.
Banking seems to involve a lot of old mechanics that only in the last few years are they beginning to embrace technology.

 

[The_Train]

Call me a cynic but I suspect that the branch staff have for years been shooting themselves in the foot by their approaching people entering the branch to "help them" with the help usually being to encourage people to use the machines rather than cashiers.
Add to this fewer cashier points being staffed no wonder people are making less use of the branches.

Wages are a large part of a Bank's costs.

Same as people being urged to self service in supermarkets.

Self service = poorer service since there are fewer staff

I can see your point as when I opened my account with Santander the employee was very keen to advise me of everything that was great with their online/mobile banking. Also, on my few visits to the bank to cash cheques I used to queue as I'm quite old fashioned in the sense that I prefer to do this and actually engage with a human during the transaction but each time I was reminded that I can cash cheques using the machines ' to save time' (not sure if it was my time or their time they were thinking about).

That said, this sort of attitude of forcing people towards technology probably stems from management type people as it then offers justification for shutting branches

 

[underbank]

I can't actually remember the last time I went inside a bank. Maybe as far back as 2008 when I was sorting out my mother's estate as they insisted I went to a branch to hand deliver the death certificate (which I ended up giving to some disinterested teenage girl who must have lost it as the bereavement dept in Halifax never received it! and finally deemed to accept me posting one to them!).

I run a business. At least 95% of our customers pay by BACS now, and for the few who send cheques, I just post them to the bank using freepost envelopes. We don't handle cash. One of my clients is a convenience store who handle lots of cash - he banks with CoOp but they don't have local branches, so he pays the cash into the local post office instead. So he never goes to a physical branch of his bank either.

Just don't really see why banks need branches anymore. All they need is maybe one bank per town or a post office, as somewhere for people to pay in cash if they need to. Even ten years ago, banks didn't seem to have "proper" staff in them, just counter clerks. The days are long gone when there was a proper bank manager in each branch who made decisions on loans and mortgages etc - that's all done centrally these days.

 

[whhistle]

Despite what some say, closing branches is not in customers' interests in the slightest. Neither, in my opinion, is contactless which I also refuse to use or accept a contactless card but that is another subject.

But your opinion is one that is dwindling.
I guess you're over 45?
That means you're one of a dwindling number of customers that don't want to embrance new technology and thus, you will be left behind.
Banks need to be "with the times" to attract new (young) customers. I'd be surprised if anyone under the age of 16 even knows what a cheque is!

Contactless is changing peoples lives.
Worried about people "skimming" your card? There's solutions:
1) If it was happening all the time, there would be reports in the papers all the time - you'd hear reports from friends/facebook, hell even on here. But you don't, because it simply doesn't seem to happen on a wide scale.

2) If it wasn't you, the bank will refund you. The bank can look into who took the money/what account. If it's unusual, it's all on the bank to sort out.

3) Get an account like Monzo or Starling. Any time any money is taken, it'll notify you straight away. The other "high street" banks will catch up with this, but they're all busy implimenting being able to freeze your card into their apps.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The likes of the high-street bank will allocate you a sort code that is the closest branch to the address you use to sign up.

Yes, correct. Nothing of course stopping other banks offering the same service but with the need to write 6 additional numbers on the cheque

 

[Bletchleyite]

3) Get an account like Monzo or Starling. Any time any money is taken, it'll notify you straight away. The other "high street" banks will catch up with this, but they're all busy implimenting being able to freeze your card into their apps.

Indeed. And why are they doing that? Because it saves them a whackload of money from paying out for fraud. With that feature, most astute people will block their card the second they get a notification of a transaction when they're not stood there making it, rather than "oh, I'll phone later" or not noticing it until it's 5 grand's worth at statement issue time.

It's one of those "win win situations" that business likes and is very rare in practice.

 

[whhistle]

No they won't, especially for large amounts, where £500 could be easily altered to £1500 for example.
It's too open to fraud, however with the original paper cheque, this can be detected very easily!

Say you pay in a cheque for £500.
Both have to have the words right? So no easy fraud there.

Let's delve a bit deeper - say you manage to scan the cheque in to a PC and change the numbers and wording to add an extra 0. Do you really think the company paying the cheque won't notice? If they don't, that's more fool them. And then who will be in the firing line? YOU - for comitting fraud.

YOU don't need to worry about that if YOU aren't going to mess about changing values on a cheque on the off chance it'll be paid with no questions asked. Whether other people will commit fraud isn't for you to worry about, that's the banks problem to find a solution to. Keeping an old fashioned system of paying in cheques isn't a solution.

If cheques are too open to fraud, may as well just not bother with them... like the idea was floated about a few years ago.
Many train companies don't accept cheques these days - even corporate ones. Most large transactions by companies are done by bank transfer by various finance departments. Nothing to get lost, nothing to potentially be changed, quick, instant - all pluses.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If cheques are too open to fraud, may as well just not bother with them... like the idea was floated about a few years ago.
Many train companies don't accept cheques these days - even corporate ones. Most large transactions by companies are done by bank transfer by various finance departments. Nothing to get lost, nothing to potentially be changed, quick, instant - all pluses.

I believe one proposal for a paper cheque replacement was going to be something like the long-running German "Ueberweisungsauftrag" system. Those wishing to do things on paper would have written out a paper transfer form with details of target account and amount and taken it to the counter at their own bank rather than giving it to the recipient. No clearing to do (the teller would just perform the transfer on the spot and then shred the slip), and the person who wishes to use the high-effort method of payment has to put the effort in themselves rather than subjecting others to it.

I think it's a shame that was not followed through, but realistically I think cheques will probably just die out of their own accord over the next 10 years or so.

 

[radamfi]

Many countries have not used cheques along the British/American system for at least 50 years so there really is no need for them.

 

[radamfi]

I Ionder if sort codes almost hark back to days gone by when cheques and things were sent for processing at the individual bank branch, hence take "a few days" to clear.

We should scrap sort codes and use the IBAN, for compatibility with the rest of Europe.

 

[Bletchleyite]

We should scrap sort codes and use the IBAN, for compatibility with the rest of Europe.

Most accounts have an IBAN as well, but as almost nobody needs to do international transfers on a day to day basis (I've done about two ever, everything else has been card or PayPal) it's very low down the list of concerns.

 

[ComUtoR]

Unless you bank with Lloyds.
They still require you to go in, waste 30 mins, watch an 8 minute video about safety and sign a piece of paper.

Safety video ?