I was reading through the Synapse bankruptcy court filings, and oh jeez, is this a mess: > Synapse often used multiple Partner Banks to service different funct

I was reading through the Synapse bankruptcy court filings, and oh jeez, is this a mess: > Synapse often used multiple Partner Banks to service different functions for the same Fintech Partner. In certain instances, end user deposits through a Fintech Partner were deposited in an account at one Partner Bank, while end user withdrawals through that same Fintech Partner were processed from a different account at a different Partner Bank. This business model makes it both essential and difficult to reconcile transactions and ensure end users receive access to the correct amount of funds due to each end user. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/68458190/synapse-financial-technologies-inc https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/68458190/synapse-financ... This fintech product model, with multiple intermediaries and service providers between end users and the depository banks, is a house of cards. Is running your bank-like financial services product as an actual bank that hard? These technology companies seem to want all the upsides of being a bank, with none of the responsibilities. From my perspective, the big gap is that these depository banks aren't maintaining the customer and transaction data for the beneficial owners of the money they have on deposit. They seem like they should be the ones ultimately responsible for safeguarding the customer's funds. In the middle of this, the Federal Reserve dropped this gem about KYC non-compliance for one of the banks involved, swearing that it has nothing to do with the Synapse bankruptcy. https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/enforcement20240614a.htm https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/enfo...