Sorry, I made an error in my comment, I meant to write 'if you're not unhappy'. I believe the PSR is keen to have customers choose who they build relationships with, nt be forced to stay because it's too difficult. Apologies.
05 Jan 2016 19:37 Read comment
You are right but the PSR is more interested in making it easy to move if you're unhappy with your bank than stopping you having a good relationship with your bank if you're unhappy. The low figures of customers switching banks since it was made easier tends to lead one to think more customers were happier with their bank than was thought.
05 Jan 2016 19:27 Read comment
It's a fact of life that bugs and software go together that's why we need contingency plans in place. What is most surprising about this story is that it took 10 hours to fix; so I suspect there's more to the story than a simple name change.
However, George is right, it's time to look at next generation and more open and competitive solutions which the PSR is taking an interest in.
Look forward to the report.
22 Oct 2014 11:20 Read comment
I thought it was a good article and that the real interesting fact that came out of the experiment was that the modernists (sic) still see cash as the enemy.
Cash will be with us forever and most predictions say it will bottom out at about 25% of transactions. This is more to do with the social nature of shopping than with technology.
There are people who like cash, they like to be in control of their spending or they are from socially excluded groups who's only access to 'money' is in the form of cash.
The true battle is about making payments part of the consumer culture and not always trying to push customers away from their preferred payment choice towards the technologists choice.
Cash is not always the preferred choice; mPesa was successful because it provided communities that had no access to the payments infrastructure a way of participating. Prior to that bartering, using cash and paying with goods underpinned the economy. Cash wasn't a viable alternative as the economy grew.
I'm involved in payments technology and know, as most of you do, that consumers want to pay the way they prefer, regardless of the choices available.
Call me a disnosaur but I have a contactless debit card, had it for a year and used it once.
I'd have liked to see some survey results about the experiment and how customers felt, what their experience was and what they would have liked to see.
14 Jul 2014 15:01 Read comment
As usual with these kind of articles there's a mish mash of opinion and fact and a plethora of concepts which are misplaced.
Justin has a point in that he's saying there are tools out there that replace the spreadsheet and are more reliable and safer; bu that's not to say that spreadhseets don't have their place too.
It's really no more relevant than making sure you use the right tools for the job. We'd all agree with that. I just don't see the point in rubishing something for the sake of selling different tools to that that you are criticising.
The spreadsheet isn't dead; the analytical tools like SAP aren't dead, there's room for both.
I'd rather see a blog that told us what some of the analytical tools were and why we'd use them.
14 Jul 2014 14:38 Read comment
Good comments; I reported what I saw and heard. Yes, it does seem that many countries are miles ahead of the UK in the use of ATM's. I was at a Vendorcom conference today and heard the European Chairman of the ATMIA say he couldn't understand why UK banks don't offer more services at the ATM; his theory was that the UK banks are trying to get rid of cash!
11 Jun 2013 18:29 Read comment
Andy's article is very insightful and thought provoking and really deals with two separate issues and therein lies the FP problem.
On the one hand FP was introduced to allow faster payments? VocaLink did an excellent job of that and the banks by and large have implemented FP and it thrives albeit as an enabler rather than as a product.
I work with most of the banks and know for sure that they all have FP products but mainly through their eBanking products.
So job done as far as the scheme objectives are concerned and a big thumbs up to VocaLink, including Andy.
On the other hand FP is talked about as an opportunity to charge new fees to customers for a faster service. But, that was what FP was supposed to be, a faster service. It might be faster, but it is kind of expected these days that it would be.
There are numerous articles published that on the one hand talk about FP replacing CHAPS or on the other Bacs, the point is that the Payment Council is unclear as to what FP is supposed to provide in a scheme sense. Does it compete with existing schemes or replace them?
If you are a bank and you are talking to a customer about payment methods, the three main domestic ones are FP, Bacs and CHAPS. It is unclear what the industry expects; will FP replace them all, will they morph into one or will they continue to compete. DCA has helped but it is expensive for the bank to set up and until VocaLink lower this cost I fear take up will forever be low.
The biggest confusion I find in the the industry is the lack of understanding that FP is an inter-bank product. Intra-banking has given immediate payments for some years now. So if you want to transfer money from your bank to another you'd use FP, but only if you can't deliver a file of payments to each bank for processing by them and nowadays you can easily.
I fail to see how the bank's can package FP as a revenue earning product whilst the industry, led by the Payments Council is unsure of where it fits.
The answer is in the bank's hands as Andy says, but the question is yet to be formulated; but I don't think it's just about how much more revenue we can squeeze from the poor corporate. He's looking for cheaper services.
Faster Payments in itself is just that, faster payments; and why would I pay extra for that?
08 Feb 2011 15:50 Read comment
Well done Albany for whom I have the greatest respect; I welcome this announcement that like Barron McCann has been doing for many years they can now offer rentals. Welcome to the club!
02 Dec 2009 14:55 Read comment
Typical dismissive comment from Paul; but the reality is that people want choice.
Consumers take with them the most appropriate method of payment depending on their circumstances and carrying a card is not always the most convenient. It's like Guy Kawasaki said at SIBOS, kids don't have watches anymore, they use their phone. We are raising a generation of young people who just want to carry their phone; not a pocket full of cards and cash.
Paul will probably champion the return of cheques next!
28 Sep 2009 08:59 Read comment
The Payments Business
SWIFT Matters
UK Faster Payments
Trends in Financial Services
Data Protection Act Issues
Vanessa MurdenDirector at Travelex
Vladislav DimitrovDirector at Dais Software
Jesper Beyer-ClausenDirector at Pensio A/S
Sarah JacksonDirector at Equiniti Credit Services
Ian SalmonDirector at IgniteG2M Limited
Welcome to Finextra. We use cookies to help us to deliver our services. You may change your preferences at our Cookie Centre.
Please read our Privacy Policy.