8 ms·

Your reasoning is so far off. Banks don’t control how long it takes to move money, the fed does. Move money between accounts at the same bank, money transfe

by adrr 7y ago

Your reasoning is so far off. Banks don’t control how long it takes to move money, the fed does. Move money between accounts at the same bank, money transfer is instant. Banks can’t kite money with ACH either, that’s why overnight lending market exists to cover between debits and credits even if they are break even for the bank.

spookthesunset 7y ago
> Banks don’t control how long it takes to move money, the fed does. If the banks really wanted to lobby the government and change whatever laws or regulations keep them from offering instant, free transfers.... they'd have done so already. The fact that the US doesn't have instant, free inter-bank transfers is 100% on the banks. In fact, I bet they lobby the shit out of the government to keep it slow and expensive.
- adrr 7y ago
  You don't understand how the banking system works. Fed holds the balance of every bank. That is what is getting updated every night when you move money between banks. Banks want faster processing and settlement time because it de-risks them. There is less risk of check kiting and other scenarios where customer is spending money that doesn't exist. Bank listed in article is on the hook for $26 million because transfers and settlements aren't instant.
tzs 7y ago
> Your reasoning is so far off. Banks don’t control how long it takes to move money, the fed does. Move money between accounts at the same bank, money transfer is instant. Banks can be pretty silly with accounts at the same bank, too. A friend of mine finished a contract job at a major defense contractor, which had a lump sum payment at the end. The company wrote him a large check, drawn on their account at the local branch of a major bank. What he wanted to do was (1) open a checking account at that bank, (2) deposit about 95% of the check in that new account, and (3) take the remaining 5% as cash, for first and last month's rent at an apartment he wanted to rent that afternoon. The bank could not do that. Even though the check was drawn on an account at that branch, they said it would still take three days to clear, so he would have to wait for the cash. Finally, he ended up going to a teller and asking to cash the check. That, of course, worked, although it was a big enough check that it apparently triggered some safeguards that required getting a couple of levels of management above the teller involved, and so it took about an hour for them to actually hand him the cash. He then took his cash, set aside 5% for getting that apartment he wanted, and took the remaining 95% back to the new accounts desk, and said "I want to open a checking count here, and deposit this cash".

by adrr 7y ago

spookthesunset 7y ago

> Banks don’t control how long it takes to move money, the fed does. If the banks really wanted to lobby the government and change whatever laws or regulations keep them from offering instant, free transfers.... they'd have done so already. The fact that the US doesn't have instant, free inter-bank transfers is 100% on the banks. In fact, I bet they lobby the shit out of the government to keep it slow and expensive.

adrr 7y ago
You don't understand how the banking system works. Fed holds the balance of every bank. That is what is getting updated every night when you move money between banks. Banks want faster processing and settlement time because it de-risks them. There is less risk of check kiting and other scenarios where customer is spending money that doesn't exist. Bank listed in article is on the hook for $26 million because transfers and settlements aren't instant.

tzs 7y ago

> Your reasoning is so far off. Banks don’t control how long it takes to move money, the fed does. Move money between accounts at the same bank, money transfer is instant. Banks can be pretty silly with accounts at the same bank, too. A friend of mine finished a contract job at a major defense contractor, which had a lump sum payment at the end. The company wrote him a large check, drawn on their account at the local branch of a major bank. What he wanted to do was (1) open a checking account at that bank, (2) deposit about 95% of the check in that new account, and (3) take the remaining 5% as cash, for first and last month's rent at an apartment he wanted to rent that afternoon. The bank could not do that. Even though the check was drawn on an account at that branch, they said it would still take three days to clear, so he would have to wait for the cash. Finally, he ended up going to a teller and asking to cash the check. That, of course, worked, although it was a big enough check that it apparently triggered some safeguards that required getting a couple of levels of management above the teller involved, and so it took about an hour for them to actually hand him the cash. He then took his cash, set aside 5% for getting that apartment he wanted, and took the remaining 95% back to the new accounts desk, and said "I want to open a checking count here, and deposit this cash".