4 ms·

More to the point, regular banks are subject to this as well (although Wise keeps insisting it's not a bank, fooling exactly nobody) and require people to show

More to the point, regular banks are subject to this as well (although Wise keeps insisting it's not a bank, fooling exactly nobody) and require people to show up in person for identity verification every so often. At least mine was pompous enough to demand that.

gwnywg 3y ago
I'm fine to do this in person, but you are right, regular bank is at risk of having my data stolen. The only difference is I can't function without bank, I am able to function without Wise... that's probably what makes me thinking if it's OK to take the risk here. Reading other commenters I think it should not be a big deal, maybe the itch I feel is part of my weirdness..
- solardev 3y ago
  It depends on your circumstances and local laws too. In the US there are laws limiting your liability for fraudulent use of your funds, credit cards, etc. I don't keep money in wise for more than a few hours, and once it's in my real bank account, it's relatively safe. Not that I have much money to begin with lol. And in my case, I need Wise to get paid. So the choice is between "slight risk of identity theft" and "not being able to pay rent".
izacus 3y ago
Yep, other banks and neobanks did that to me as well - local bank, Revolut, etc. all had requirements for ID.
traceroute66 3y ago
> although Wise keeps insisting it's not a bank, fooling exactly nobody Well its not a bank because you don't get deposit protection with Wise (if you are in a country that has such things).
johneth 3y ago
> although Wise keeps insisting it's not a bank, fooling exactly nobody I think it has to do this, at least in the UK (where they're domiciled). The UK has very strict regulations on financial products, and especially around using the word 'bank', so they probably need to be absolutely profuse in letting customers know they're not a bank.

4 ms·

More to the point, regular banks are subject to this as well (although Wise keeps insisting it's not a bank, fooling exactly nobody) and require people to show

by moffkalast 3y ago

gwnywg 3y ago
I'm fine to do this in person, but you are right, regular bank is at risk of having my data stolen. The only difference is I can't function without bank, I am able to function without Wise... that's probably what makes me thinking if it's OK to take the risk here. Reading other commenters I think it should not be a big deal, maybe the itch I feel is part of my weirdness..
- solardev 3y ago
  It depends on your circumstances and local laws too. In the US there are laws limiting your liability for fraudulent use of your funds, credit cards, etc. I don't keep money in wise for more than a few hours, and once it's in my real bank account, it's relatively safe. Not that I have much money to begin with lol. And in my case, I need Wise to get paid. So the choice is between "slight risk of identity theft" and "not being able to pay rent".
izacus 3y ago
Yep, other banks and neobanks did that to me as well - local bank, Revolut, etc. all had requirements for ID.
traceroute66 3y ago
> although Wise keeps insisting it's not a bank, fooling exactly nobody Well its not a bank because you don't get deposit protection with Wise (if you are in a country that has such things).
johneth 3y ago
> although Wise keeps insisting it's not a bank, fooling exactly nobody I think it has to do this, at least in the UK (where they're domiciled). The UK has very strict regulations on financial products, and especially around using the word 'bank', so they probably need to be absolutely profuse in letting customers know they're not a bank.