That's not just pertinent to a digital bank tho is it? Any institution might choose to not validate the details of applicants, whether it's digital or 'traditional'.
I had dealings with an estate agent that couldn't be arsed to complete rudimentary admin and blamed the tenant and the landlord when inevitably the wheels came off (landlord not receiving rent). When the truth was exposed - the paperwork was stuffed in a file not acted upon - said agent just shrugged knowing fine well he'd got away with it, the landlord and tenant sorted themselves out. The agent lost that landlord as a client but he'd already been paid (for essentially naff all) and the demand for rentals was such he'd never miss the revenue. He even hung on to tenants' deposit money for weeks after he was supposed to pay it back, I had to doorstep him to get a cheque, just so he earned a few quid more interest on the account.
Some businesses make a decision on their business model that there's a level of non-compliance that isn't worth doing cos there is always a level they will get away with for which the financial consequences are cheaper than the cost of doing it properly - a 'customer service' employee of a leading credit card company told me exactly that "we don't worry about all the small print in the t's n c's cos too few customers bother with what they're owed when we get stuff wrong."
I've had a bank fuck up and "misplace" a few thousand pounds of my money. This was only recently an its made me feel like keeping my money in a box buried underground or in a safe in my house. Their attitude to fixing their balls up was atrocious too.
Their approach to retail banking is also ensuring that will soon vanish. They are only concerned with selling over-priced financial products as opposed to helping people manage their money. My mate helps his dad with this stuff and his dad had something like £50k in a current account and all the arseholes did when he took his dad down there to move most of it into a savings account was be obstructive and attempt to sell mortgages with shite rates, credit cards this guy plainly didn’t need before telling my pal they would only issue the money in installments over 2 weeks, asking him to take it out in £5k lumps, walk it along to the other bank his dad had opened a savings account in and deposit the cash in there. Absolutely no reason they couldn't have transferred it via BACS immediately.
Move bank, I work in around financial services, and it stuns me everyday that people don't leave the main high street institutions
100% agree with this. The main high street clearing banks are truly dire in their service levels, and accessibility for genuine customer centered advice, guidance and support.
Barclays in Bromley have always been good from my experience.
That's not just pertinent to a digital bank tho is it? Any institution might choose to not validate the details of applicants, whether it's digital or 'traditional'.
I had dealings with an estate agent that couldn't be arsed to complete rudimentary admin and blamed the tenant and the landlord when inevitably the wheels came off (landlord not receiving rent). When the truth was exposed - the paperwork was stuffed in a file not acted upon - said agent just shrugged knowing fine well he'd got away with it, the landlord and tenant sorted themselves out. The agent lost that landlord as a client but he'd already been paid (for essentially naff all) and the demand for rentals was such he'd never miss the revenue. He even hung on to tenants' deposit money for weeks after he was supposed to pay it back, I had to doorstep him to get a cheque, just so he earned a few quid more interest on the account.
Some businesses make a decision on their business model that there's a level of non-compliance that isn't worth doing cos there is always a level they will get away with for which the financial consequences are cheaper than the cost of doing it properly - a 'customer service' employee of a leading credit card company told me exactly that "we don't worry about all the small print in the t's n c's cos too few customers bother with what they're owed when we get stuff wrong."
I get the feeling that they were stuck in massive growth stage, and thought sod the consequences, it'll be a fine and not one that would kill the business, and to be fair to them now, they've sorted there shit out massively. There have been bigger and nastier KYL/AML fails from banks with bigger fines.
That's a nifty opening fine for Monzo. But they've got some way to go to get up to Barclays exalted level of punishments from the FCA: 2009 £2.5mn 2011 £7.7mn 2012 £59.5mn 2014 £37.7mn 2015 £284.4mn 2015 (yes again) £72.1mn 2020 £26.1mn 2022 £10.0mn 2024 £10mn
Saw a proposal the other day that we are now able to cut commercial banks out of the equation entirely and everybody can do go directly to national central banks (via digital accounts)
The idea being, huge swathes of money doesn't need to go to "middlemen" and the public can access better rates directly.
Saw a proposal the other day that we are now able to cut commercial banks out of the equation entirely and everybody can do go directly to national central banks (via digital accounts)
The idea being, huge swathes of money doesn't need to go to "middlemen" and the public can access better rates directly.
Interesting idea
Very interesting. Need some time to digest and think that through. Could be good for things like the national investment fund. People effectively deposit savings direct with the BOE who use it to invest in the UK. Have to be very careful with risk and ratios of reserves etc. as a central bank failing would be a disaster.
Monzo is brilliant though. It's been massively helpful being able to partition money into pots and create a budget. Has really allowed me to tackle debt.
Monzo is brilliant though. It's been massively helpful being able to partition money into pots and create a budget. Has really allowed me to tackle debt.
Monzo is great. It is my default card on Apple Pay. I just use it as a pre-paid debit card, loading money on it as needed - safer than using my main current account debit card. It's never failed at home or abroad and fee free forex transactions are a bonus!
That's a nifty opening fine for Monzo. But they've got some way to go to get up to Barclays exalted level of punishments from the FCA: 2009 £2.5mn 2011 £7.7mn 2012 £59.5mn 2014 £37.7mn 2015 £284.4mn 2015 (yes again) £72.1mn 2020 £26.1mn 2022 £10.0mn 2024 £10mn
All the banks and leading audit companies get massive fines all the time, it means nothing to them, as the times they don't get caught obviously more than make up for it, probably ten times over. They accept it as an occupational hazard.
It's fraud on a massive scale, but hardly anyone goes to prison for it. They get bonuses instead.
That's a nifty opening fine for Monzo. But they've got some way to go to get up to Barclays exalted level of punishments from the FCA: 2009 £2.5mn 2011 £7.7mn 2012 £59.5mn 2014 £37.7mn 2015 £284.4mn 2015 (yes again) £72.1mn 2020 £26.1mn 2022 £10.0mn 2024 £10mn
All the banks and leading audit companies get massive fines all the time, it means nothing to them, as the times they don't get caught obviously more than make up for it, probably ten times over. They accept it as an occupational hazard.
It's fraud on a massive scale, but hardly anyone goes to prison for it. They get bonuses instead.
That’s not true.
It is a cost of doing business in some respects I agree.
But I assure you banks spend huge amounts in trying to combat financial crime but it’s difficult because of the sheer volume of customers and transactions and need to do things quickly and efficiently and also because you are trying to match bank records against a wide variety of formats and partial information of the ‘bad’ guys. Also the dodgy people are very good at what they do too in many instances.
I worked in this area for a long time and all the banks take it seriously.
Fines count against them from a reputation perspective as well as the financial cost and increased scrutiny next time from regulators.
Good thing by Chris Skinner, who's a banking consultant on this, that a lot of the issues come from when Monzo went from a pre paid card to a full bank, didn't KYC people on the way across to a full bank, and had these issues.
That's a nifty opening fine for Monzo. But they've got some way to go to get up to Barclays exalted level of punishments from the FCA: 2009 £2.5mn 2011 £7.7mn 2012 £59.5mn 2014 £37.7mn 2015 £284.4mn 2015 (yes again) £72.1mn 2020 £26.1mn 2022 £10.0mn 2024 £10mn
All the banks and leading audit companies get massive fines all the time, it means nothing to them, as the times they don't get caught obviously more than make up for it, probably ten times over. They accept it as an occupational hazard.
It's fraud on a massive scale, but hardly anyone goes to prison for it. They get bonuses instead.
That’s not true.
It is a cost of doing business in some respects I agree.
But I assure you banks spend huge amounts in trying to combat financial crime but it’s difficult because of the sheer volume of customers and transactions and need to do things quickly and efficiently and also because you are trying to match bank records against a wide variety of formats and partial information of the ‘bad’ guys. Also the dodgy people are very good at what they do too in many instances.
I worked in this area for a long time and all the banks take it seriously.
Fines count against them from a reputation perspective as well as the financial cost and increased scrutiny next time from regulators.
I appreciate you know a lot more about it than me Nick, but by the same token you were part of the establishment, so you would say that.
Literally every fortnight I read about a bank (or banks), or a major audit firm (or firms) getting fined in Private Eye. Sometimes the "bad guys" are so obviously "bad guys" it beggars belief, the same names cropping up regularly. I understand the amounts involved are huge, but I can't quite get the volumes of customers? I didn't think the fines were for Frank the high street butcher doing underhand dealings with a couple of thousand quid? These are for billionaire oligarchs and multi million pound companies fleeceing hundreds of millions out of the state or each other, or making huge amounts from insider dealing and the like. If the bank or auditor's reputation is damaged, it doesn't seem to be reflected in the profits, or in the willingness of these billionaires to do business with them... If they don't do it with one bank who has been fined, then they do it with another. As for inceased scrutiny, if the banks are serious about clamping down, surely they would welcome that?
That's a nifty opening fine for Monzo. But they've got some way to go to get up to Barclays exalted level of punishments from the FCA: 2009 £2.5mn 2011 £7.7mn 2012 £59.5mn 2014 £37.7mn 2015 £284.4mn 2015 (yes again) £72.1mn 2020 £26.1mn 2022 £10.0mn 2024 £10mn
All the banks and leading audit companies get massive fines all the time, it means nothing to them, as the times they don't get caught obviously more than make up for it, probably ten times over. They accept it as an occupational hazard.
It's fraud on a massive scale, but hardly anyone goes to prison for it. They get bonuses instead.
That's a nifty opening fine for Monzo. But they've got some way to go to get up to Barclays exalted level of punishments from the FCA: 2009 £2.5mn 2011 £7.7mn 2012 £59.5mn 2014 £37.7mn 2015 £284.4mn 2015 (yes again) £72.1mn 2020 £26.1mn 2022 £10.0mn 2024 £10mn
All the banks and leading audit companies get massive fines all the time, it means nothing to them, as the times they don't get caught obviously more than make up for it, probably ten times over. They accept it as an occupational hazard.
It's fraud on a massive scale, but hardly anyone goes to prison for it. They get bonuses instead.
That’s not true.
It is a cost of doing business in some respects I agree.
But I assure you banks spend huge amounts in trying to combat financial crime but it’s difficult because of the sheer volume of customers and transactions and need to do things quickly and efficiently and also because you are trying to match bank records against a wide variety of formats and partial information of the ‘bad’ guys. Also the dodgy people are very good at what they do too in many instances.
I worked in this area for a long time and all the banks take it seriously.
Fines count against them from a reputation perspective as well as the financial cost and increased scrutiny next time from regulators.
I appreciate you know a lot more about it than me Nick, but by the same token you were part of the establishment, so you would say that.
Literally every fortnight I read about a bank (or banks), or a major audit firm (or firms) getting fined in Private Eye. Sometimes the "bad guys" are so obviously "bad guys" it beggars belief, the same names cropping up regularly. I understand the amounts involved are huge, but I can't quite get the volumes of customers? I didn't think the fines were for Frank the high street butcher doing underhand dealings with a couple of thousand quid? These are for billionaire oligarchs and multi million pound companies fleeceing hundreds of millions out of the state or each other, or making huge amounts from insider dealing and the like. If the bank or auditor's reputation is damaged, it doesn't seem to be reflected in the profits, or in the willingness of these billionaires to do business with them... If they don't do it with one bank who has been fined, then they do it with another. As for inceased scrutiny, if the banks are serious about clamping down, surely they would welcome that?
You check all customers and transactions. That’s the point. You are trying to find and not bank the bad guys.
My Point about increased scrutiny is why they aren’t just happy to be fined. Your world of pain gets worse not easier.
That's a nifty opening fine for Monzo. But they've got some way to go to get up to Barclays exalted level of punishments from the FCA: 2009 £2.5mn 2011 £7.7mn 2012 £59.5mn 2014 £37.7mn 2015 £284.4mn 2015 (yes again) £72.1mn 2020 £26.1mn 2022 £10.0mn 2024 £10mn
All the banks and leading audit companies get massive fines all the time, it means nothing to them, as the times they don't get caught obviously more than make up for it, probably ten times over. They accept it as an occupational hazard.
It's fraud on a massive scale, but hardly anyone goes to prison for it. They get bonuses instead.
Sorry mate, but that's bollocks.
Well, two of you are telling me the same thing, so I must be mistaken. But when you look at the list of Barclays fines - one every 18 months on average - and see that they made £5.4 billion pre-tax in the year they were fined £284m, I am sure you can see why an ignorant layman like myself might think that they are not too bothered?
Monzo is brilliant though. It's been massively helpful being able to partition money into pots and create a budget. Has really allowed me to tackle debt.
don't expect them to play ball if you make a mistake, have any fraudulent* transactions or get tricked out of a few quid by a scammer * any and all card details in 'the ether' vulnerable to misuse
That's a nifty opening fine for Monzo. But they've got some way to go to get up to Barclays exalted level of punishments from the FCA: 2009 £2.5mn 2011 £7.7mn 2012 £59.5mn 2014 £37.7mn 2015 £284.4mn 2015 (yes again) £72.1mn 2020 £26.1mn 2022 £10.0mn 2024 £10mn
All the banks and leading audit companies get massive fines all the time, it means nothing to them, as the times they don't get caught obviously more than make up for it, probably ten times over. They accept it as an occupational hazard.
It's fraud on a massive scale, but hardly anyone goes to prison for it. They get bonuses instead.
Sorry mate, but that's bollocks.
memory does fade with age (of which I am living proof...😉
That's a nifty opening fine for Monzo. But they've got some way to go to get up to Barclays exalted level of punishments from the FCA: 2009 £2.5mn 2011 £7.7mn 2012 £59.5mn 2014 £37.7mn 2015 £284.4mn 2015 (yes again) £72.1mn 2020 £26.1mn 2022 £10.0mn 2024 £10mn
All the banks and leading audit companies get massive fines all the time, it means nothing to them, as the times they don't get caught obviously more than make up for it, probably ten times over. They accept it as an occupational hazard.
It's fraud on a massive scale, but hardly anyone goes to prison for it. They get bonuses instead.
Sorry mate, but that's bollocks.
memory does fade with age (of which I am living proof...😉
That's a nifty opening fine for Monzo. But they've got some way to go to get up to Barclays exalted level of punishments from the FCA: 2009 £2.5mn 2011 £7.7mn 2012 £59.5mn 2014 £37.7mn 2015 £284.4mn 2015 (yes again) £72.1mn 2020 £26.1mn 2022 £10.0mn 2024 £10mn
All the banks and leading audit companies get massive fines all the time, it means nothing to them, as the times they don't get caught obviously more than make up for it, probably ten times over. They accept it as an occupational hazard.
It's fraud on a massive scale, but hardly anyone goes to prison for it. They get bonuses instead.
Sorry mate, but that's bollocks.
memory does fade with age (of which I am living proof...😉
Not sure what relevance that link has to what I said, to be honest. But I stand by my earlier comment that, with the greatest respect, what my old mucker from the Algarve said was a load of old gonads.
Interesting to hear from people who work in the financial services sector and their take. Since the pandemic I have to admit leaving cash in a drawer and relying on cards to pay for anything and everything. In fact the only time I have had to carry cash at all was on a visit to Japan (one of the most advanced technological countries but still a society which prefers the colour of your money when making transactions).
High Street banks are pushing for their customers to take responsibility for their own banking through the use of apps. All well and good for those who prefer the tech...but perhaps not for older customers who often have the more substantial accounts. I still insist on monthly paper statements so I have a record in writing of my transactions.
The 'cash or card' title of this thread is already moving towards being obsolete given that increasing numbers of people are relying on their phones to pay for everything. Great if this is how you like to spend. So easy and accessible. Not so great if you lose your phone or it's nicked.
Very true everything is moving online but I think the banks should not be allowed to close as many branches as they are. Small businesses such as pubs etc still require a facility to deposit cash takings and withdraw change for the tills our local town had 5 banks 4 years ago the last one is closing in October the nearest Nat West will be 21 miles away ! Small businesses and the more elderly clients need branches
Very true everything is moving online but I think the banks should not be allowed to close as many branches as they are. Small businesses such as pubs etc still require a facility to deposit cash takings and withdraw change for the tills our local town had 5 banks 4 years ago the last one is closing in October the nearest Nat West will be 21 miles away ! Small businesses and the more elderly clients need branches
It's what the post office network is there for now to be honest, all of the main 10 banks in the UK (including the main app based ones) accept cash via the post office, and fills the gaps.
Branch closures are going to be the norm for many years to come
Interesting to hear from people who work in the financial services sector and their take. Since the pandemic I have to admit leaving cash in a drawer and relying on cards to pay for anything and everything. In fact the only time I have had to carry cash at all was on a visit to Japan (one of the most advanced technological countries but still a society which prefers the colour of your money when making transactions).
High Street banks are pushing for their customers to take responsibility for their own banking through the use of apps. All well and good for those who prefer the tech...but perhaps not for older customers who often have the more substantial accounts. I still insist on monthly paper statements so I have a record in writing of my transactions.
The 'cash or card' title of this thread is already moving towards being obsolete given that increasing numbers of people are relying on their phones to pay for everything. Great if this is how you like to spend. So easy and accessible. Not so great if you lose your phone or it's nicked.
You have to take your hats off to them, they are doing less and less and earning more and more. And people just meekly accept it for the "convenience" of waving a phone at a terminal.
Very true everything is moving online but I think the banks should not be allowed to close as many branches as they are. Small businesses such as pubs etc still require a facility to deposit cash takings and withdraw change for the tills our local town had 5 banks 4 years ago the last one is closing in October the nearest Nat West will be 21 miles away ! Small businesses and the more elderly clients need branches
It's what the post office network is there for now to be honest, all of the main 10 banks in the UK (including the main app based ones) accept cash via the post office, and fills the gaps.
Branch closures are going to be the norm for many years to come
Post Offices are also closing in many towns and villages.
Interesting to hear from people who work in the financial services sector and their take. Since the pandemic I have to admit leaving cash in a drawer and relying on cards to pay for anything and everything. In fact the only time I have had to carry cash at all was on a visit to Japan (one of the most advanced technological countries but still a society which prefers the colour of your money when making transactions).
High Street banks are pushing for their customers to take responsibility for their own banking through the use of apps. All well and good for those who prefer the tech...but perhaps not for older customers who often have the more substantial accounts. I still insist on monthly paper statements so I have a record in writing of my transactions.
The 'cash or card' title of this thread is already moving towards being obsolete given that increasing numbers of people are relying on their phones to pay for everything. Great if this is how you like to spend. So easy and accessible. Not so great if you lose your phone or it's nicked.
You have to take your hats off to them, they are doing less and less and earning more and more. And people just meekly accept it for the "convenience" of waving a phone at a terminal.
Have to call this one out.
for the man (or woman) on the street, with a current account waving their phone at a terminal - what exactly is the cost? Nothing additional over cash and still 99% of people pay nothing for their day to day banking.
Interesting to hear from people who work in the financial services sector and their take. Since the pandemic I have to admit leaving cash in a drawer and relying on cards to pay for anything and everything. In fact the only time I have had to carry cash at all was on a visit to Japan (one of the most advanced technological countries but still a society which prefers the colour of your money when making transactions).
High Street banks are pushing for their customers to take responsibility for their own banking through the use of apps. All well and good for those who prefer the tech...but perhaps not for older customers who often have the more substantial accounts. I still insist on monthly paper statements so I have a record in writing of my transactions.
The 'cash or card' title of this thread is already moving towards being obsolete given that increasing numbers of people are relying on their phones to pay for everything. Great if this is how you like to spend. So easy and accessible. Not so great if you lose your phone or it's nicked.
Comments
Digital bank Monzo accepted customers claiming to live at 10 Downing Street, Buckingham Palace and even its own premises, an investigation has found.
A lack of address verification meant it failed to spot the "implausible" use of London landmarks on applications to open accounts.
Monzo was fined £21m by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) for its failures regarding anti-financial crime measures.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cqjqgxzz8gjo
Any institution might choose to not validate the details of applicants, whether it's digital or 'traditional'.
I had dealings with an estate agent that couldn't be arsed to complete rudimentary admin and blamed the tenant and the landlord when inevitably the wheels came off (landlord not receiving rent). When the truth was exposed - the paperwork was stuffed in a file not acted upon - said agent just shrugged knowing fine well he'd got away with it, the landlord and tenant sorted themselves out. The agent lost that landlord as a client but he'd already been paid (for essentially naff all) and the demand for rentals was such he'd never miss the revenue. He even hung on to tenants' deposit money for weeks after he was supposed to pay it back, I had to doorstep him to get a cheque, just so he earned a few quid more interest on the account.
Some businesses make a decision on their business model that there's a level of non-compliance that isn't worth doing cos there is always a level they will get away with for which the financial consequences are cheaper than the cost of doing it properly - a 'customer service' employee of a leading credit card company told me exactly that "we don't worry about all the small print in the t's n c's cos too few customers bother with what they're owed when we get stuff wrong."
2009 £2.5mn
2011 £7.7mn
2012 £59.5mn
2014 £37.7mn
2015 £284.4mn
2015 (yes again) £72.1mn
2020 £26.1mn
2022 £10.0mn
2024 £10mn
The idea being, huge swathes of money doesn't need to go to "middlemen" and the public can access better rates directly.
Interesting idea
Monzo is great. It is my default card on Apple Pay. I just use it as a pre-paid debit card, loading money on it as needed - safer than using my main current account debit card. It's never failed at home or abroad and fee free forex transactions are a bonus!
It's fraud on a massive scale, but hardly anyone goes to prison for it. They get bonuses instead.
Literally every fortnight I read about a bank (or banks), or a major audit firm (or firms) getting fined in Private Eye. Sometimes the "bad guys" are so obviously "bad guys" it beggars belief, the same names cropping up regularly. I understand the amounts involved are huge, but I can't quite get the volumes of customers? I didn't think the fines were for Frank the high street butcher doing underhand dealings with a couple of thousand quid? These are for billionaire oligarchs and multi million pound companies fleeceing hundreds of millions out of the state or each other, or making huge amounts from insider dealing and the like. If the bank or auditor's reputation is damaged, it doesn't seem to be reflected in the profits, or in the willingness of these billionaires to do business with them... If they don't do it with one bank who has been fined, then they do it with another. As for inceased scrutiny, if the banks are serious about clamping down, surely they would welcome that?
My Point about increased scrutiny is why they aren’t just happy to be fined. Your world of pain gets worse not easier.
* any and all card details in 'the ether' vulnerable to misuse
https://www.investopedia.com/stock-analysis/2013/investing-news-for-jan-29-hsbcs-money-laundering-scandal-hbc-scbff-ing-cs-rbs0129.aspx
High Street banks are pushing for their customers to take responsibility for their own banking through the use of apps. All well and good for those who prefer the tech...but perhaps not for older customers who often have the more substantial accounts. I still insist on monthly paper statements so I have a record in writing of my transactions.
The 'cash or card' title of this thread is already moving towards being obsolete given that increasing numbers of people are relying on their phones to pay for everything. Great if this is how you like to spend. So easy and accessible. Not so great if you lose your phone or it's nicked.
Branch closures are going to be the norm for many years to come
for the man (or woman) on the street, with a current account waving their phone at a terminal - what exactly is the cost? Nothing additional over cash and still 99% of people pay nothing for their day to day banking.