2 ms·

> €15000 (we have a whole symbol for the Euro) I don't have one on my keyboard unfortunately, otherwise I'd happily use it where appropriate! > And I've certa

by Alupis 6y ago

> €15000 (we have a whole symbol for the Euro) I don't have one on my keyboard unfortunately, otherwise I'd happily use it where appropriate! > And I've certainly sent somewhat smaller amounts for stuff like "Hey trip is on, we booked that holiday villa, €1000 for single rooms, €800 each if you're sharing, let me know if you can't pay this week". Your scenario doesn't seem to have been impacted by 2 minute mandatory transfer times in either direction. > I'm sure this rule would have been fine if it was €10 000 rather than €15 000 but how often do you want politicians to re-authorise? If it was €1000 by now people would be annoyed at the size limit already. Sure it's an arbitrary amount and they had to pick some amount I suppose. Even $10K is a lot for an ordinary person - potentially life changing if lost in some unfortunate instant transfer with the wrong number entered. That, of course, is a human problem (typing wrong number or whatever), but the delays we're talking about provide a safety cushion to cancel transactions in those scenarios.

tialaramex 6y ago
Deliberately fooling people into giving the wrong account numbers for transactions they wanted to make, but to somebody else ("Push Fraud") was a thing in the UK. So, they told the banks to make the previously merely reference value for the recipient's name actually enforced. If I try to give money to Victoria Smith 12-34-56 0123456789 then the backend will notice that's not Victoria Smith's account, and tell me I need to figure out what I did wrong. Maybe the problem is Victoria married, and is now Victoria Jones, you can clear that up. Maybe I got the number wrong. Maybe she's Victoria Smyth or Smithe and then it'll suggest this was just a typo using some heuristic. Or maybe it's the account of a scammer named Michael Black and the scam fails because the name doesn't match. This was a bit awkward for my ISP because their name has an ampersand in it, and so of course this means some banks end up believing their name is "Andrews &AMP; Arnold" and similar stupidity. But it's been bedded down now a bit. This approach leverages a reference for the payee that existed but was previously not checked, plus KYC checks already in place, it's hard these days to open accounts for names that aren't yours or with no apparent credit history for an organisation.

by Alupis 6y ago

tialaramex 6y ago

Deliberately fooling people into giving the wrong account numbers for transactions they wanted to make, but to somebody else ("Push Fraud") was a thing in the UK. So, they told the banks to make the previously merely reference value for the recipient's name actually enforced. If I try to give money to Victoria Smith 12-34-56 0123456789 then the backend will notice that's not Victoria Smith's account, and tell me I need to figure out what I did wrong. Maybe the problem is Victoria married, and is now Victoria Jones, you can clear that up. Maybe I got the number wrong. Maybe she's Victoria Smyth or Smithe and then it'll suggest this was just a typo using some heuristic. Or maybe it's the account of a scammer named Michael Black and the scam fails because the name doesn't match. This was a bit awkward for my ISP because their name has an ampersand in it, and so of course this means some banks end up believing their name is "Andrews &AMP; Arnold" and similar stupidity. But it's been bedded down now a bit. This approach leverages a reference for the payee that existed but was previously not checked, plus KYC checks already in place, it's hard these days to open accounts for names that aren't yours or with no apparent credit history for an organisation.