In message e.net, at
07:47:43 on Wed, 25 Jan 2012, Mark Goodge
remarked:
At least in US parlance, a "credit card" is linked to a "revolving"
credit account, i.e. you are not required to pay the full balance every
month. A "charge card" is linked to a credit account that is _not_
revolving.

For completeness, a "debit card" is one linked to a deposit account, and
a "payment card" is the generic form for any of the three types.

UK terminology is the same.

Although a "deposit account" is the UK term for a long term savings
account, and most people will only have a debit card linked to checking
(aka current) account.
--
Roland Perry

On 25-Jan-12 02:14, Roland Perry wrote:
In message e.net, at
07:47:43 on Wed, 25 Jan 2012, Mark Goodge
remarked:
At least in US parlance, a "credit card" is linked to a "revolving"
credit account, i.e. you are not required to pay the full balance every
month. A "charge card" is linked to a credit account that is _not_
revolving.

For completeness, a "debit card" is one linked to a deposit account, and
a "payment card" is the generic form for any of the three types.

UK terminology is the same.

Although a "deposit account" is the UK term for a long term savings
account, and most people will only have a debit card linked to checking
(aka current) account.

At least in US parlance, a "deposit account" is a checking, savings or
time deposit account. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deposit_account

S

--
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking

In message , at 09:35:52 on Wed, 25 Jan
2012, Stephen Sprunk remarked:
Although a "deposit account" is the UK term for a long term savings
account, and most people will only have a debit card linked to checking
(aka current) account.

At least in US parlance, a "deposit account" is a checking, savings or
time deposit account. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deposit_account

That article badly needs some international aspect adding to it.
--
Roland Perry

On 25-Jan-12 09:49, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:35:52 on Wed, 25 Jan
2012, Stephen Sprunk remarked:
Although a "deposit account" is the UK term for a long term savings
account, and most people will only have a debit card linked to checking
(aka current) account.

At least in US parlance, a "deposit account" is a checking, savings or
time deposit account. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deposit_account

That article badly needs some international aspect adding to it.

It's Wikipedia: if you don't like it, fix it.

S


--
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking

In message , at 11:23:19 on Wed, 25 Jan
2012, Stephen Sprunk remarked:
That article badly needs some international aspect adding to it.

It's Wikipedia: if you don't like it, fix it.

I've given up, everything I edit someone else just puts back the way it
was. What a way to encourage informed participation!
--
Roland Perry

Stephen Sprunk wrote:
On 25-Jan-12 02:14, Roland Perry wrote:
Mark Goodge remarked:

At least in US parlance, a "credit card" is linked to a "revolving"
credit account, i.e. you are not required to pay the full balance every
month. A "charge card" is linked to a credit account that is _not_
revolving.

For completeness, a "debit card" is one linked to a deposit account, and
a "payment card" is the generic form for any of the three types.

UK terminology is the same.

Although a "deposit account" is the UK term for a long term savings
account, and most people will only have a debit card linked to checking
(aka current) account.

At least in US parlance, a "deposit account" is a checking, savings or
time deposit account. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deposit_account

A time versus demand deposit account has to do with the bank's cash
position and assets on its balance sheet. They wouldn't be terms
used in retail banking. Fewer assets back time deposits, as the assumption
is made that not everyone will withdraw from these accounts at once, and
if they do, the bank can prevent them from having immediate access to
their money. In retail banking, certificate of deposit (CD) would be
the term used for these types of accounts.

Prior to the late aughts, assets had to be real, even.

How many British bank customers lost money in Iceland?

A time versus demand deposit account has to do with the bank's cash
position and assets on its balance sheet. They wouldn't be terms
used in retail banking. Fewer assets back time deposits, as the assumption
is made that not everyone will withdraw from these accounts at once, and
if they do, the bank can prevent them from having immediate access to
their money. In retail banking, certificate of deposit (CD) would be
the term used for these types of accounts.

That's not really correct. (I wish I could say I was surprised.)

US banks have historically made a distinction between demand deposits,
which you could get back on demand, such as by writing checks on them,
and didn't pay any interest, and time deposits which did pay interest
but the bank could make you wait anywhere from a week to a month
before repaying you. Those distinctions have blurred a lot in recent
years, but if you have a passbook or statement savings account, that's
a time deposit and the bank could in theory make you wait when you ask
for a withdrawal, although in practice they never do. The time aspect
is why you can't write checks on them. That last bit was widely
flouted by things with names like Payment Orders or Negotiable Orders
of Withdrawal which were checks in all but name, until the regulators
relented and allowed interest on checking accounts.

We also have Certificates of Deposit (CDs) which pay a stated amount
for a fixed time, anywhere from a week to a decade, the same thing
that's called a Term Deposit or a GIC in other countries. Some CDs
can be redeemed early with a penalty, most can't be redeemed early at
all. Most CDs are non-transferrable, but there's also a market in CDs
you can buy and sell through a stockbroker. Those aren't redeemable,
but you can more less get your money back by selling it to someone
else, albeit not necessarily at the price you originally paid.

R's,
John

John Levine wrote:

A time versus demand deposit account has to do with the bank's cash
position and assets on its balance sheet. They wouldn't be terms
used in retail banking. Fewer assets back time deposits, as the assumption
is made that not everyone will withdraw from these accounts at once, and
if they do, the bank can prevent them from having immediate access to
their money. In retail banking, certificate of deposit (CD) would be
the term used for these types of accounts.

That's not really correct. (I wish I could say I was surprised.)

US banks have historically made a distinction between demand deposits,
which you could get back on demand, such as by writing checks on them,
and didn't pay any interest, and time deposits which did pay interest
but the bank could make you wait anywhere from a week to a month
before repaying you. Those distinctions have blurred a lot in recent
years, but if you have a passbook or statement savings account, that's
a time deposit and the bank could in theory make you wait when you ask
for a withdrawal, although in practice they never do. The time aspect
is why you can't write checks on them. That last bit was widely
flouted by things with names like Payment Orders or Negotiable Orders
of Withdrawal which were checks in all but name, until the regulators
relented and allowed interest on checking accounts.

So you said a lot of the same thing I said, but don't believe that
a bank's assets and nature of liabilities are related.

Gee, thanks for your expertise, dude.

In uk.railway Adam H. Kerman twisted the electrons to say:
How many British bank customers lost money in Iceland?

AFAIK, the only money that UK retail customers "lost" in the Icelandic
shenanigans was the interest they would've earnt between the banks
failing (or being failed) and when they regained access to their money.
The Chancellor of the time being very free with the taxpayers money and
promising to compensate everyone in full, even if their account balance
was above the #50k FSCS limit. (Said limit having only increased from
#35k to #50k on the day that IceSave was closed.)

OTOH, several UK local governments did lose money. They where required
by central government rules to put any surplus cash in the (UK available)
account with the best interest rate, but where regarded as entities
competent to take their own risks and hence where not covered by the FSCS.
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...