On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 17:51:44 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
wrote in message
news
On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 13:46:15 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:36:06 on Tue, 18 Dec
2018, remarked:

Still a 30 quid limit. Useless for almost all tradesmens jobs anyway.

Apple/Android Pay don't have that limit.

Big deal. How many people use those? Or would even want to frankly.

Getting back to transport (sorry about that) I was intending to try
out Android Pay on TfL, but neither of the cards I was proposing to
associate with the App were acceptable.

In a sense odd, because using the cards natively contactless is fine.
Must be that lack-of-30quid limit when laundered through Android Pay
that's making the bank nervous. And frankly, me too.

Handing over random access to my bank account to Apple or Google makes me
very nervous which is why I'd never do it. Its bad enough when a direct
debit
goes wrong but at least they're usually only once a month.

your direct debits go wrong once a month

that's unlucky

Don't worry, I'm sure those payment systems will never go wrong and apple and
google won't do anything with your data, just like their spyware voice
activation systems don't store everything you say to them on a central
server to be use for their own purposes.

In message , at 12:02:04 on Fri, 21 Dec
2018, remarked:
A lot of sole traders don't want the hassle or the fees from lugging
a card machine around when they go to jobs.

most of these people give me an invoice and expect me to pay by internet
banking

Some trademens do , some don't. Plus there's often a discount for paying in
cash but you probably wouldn't know about that.

even my sister's window cleaner worked this way

An invoicing window cleaner? Where does she live, Islington, or maybe Chipping
Norton?

At my previous house the window cleaner invoiced (about twelve pounds a
month, I'm not sure if that's regarded as expensive or not). I always
paid cash, if I was at home, because of the time it takes to do an
electronic transfer.

I had to do one this morning to a new tradesman (who I'll not be using
again, because it was that kind of a one-off job) and it took six
minutes to get the banking site logged into, a new payee's details
entered and authorised, and then the individual payment made and
authorised. It would have taken me thirty seconds to write a cheque
*and* I'd have had a hard copy audit trail automatically.
--
Roland Perry

On Fri, 21 Dec 2018 13:20:35 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:02:04 on Fri, 21 Dec
2018, remarked:
A lot of sole traders don't want the hassle or the fees from lugging
a card machine around when they go to jobs.

most of these people give me an invoice and expect me to pay by internet
banking

Some trademens do , some don't. Plus there's often a discount for paying in
cash but you probably wouldn't know about that.

even my sister's window cleaner worked this way

An invoicing window cleaner? Where does she live, Islington, or maybe Chipping

Norton?

At my previous house the window cleaner invoiced (about twelve pounds a
month, I'm not sure if that's regarded as expensive or not). I always
paid cash, if I was at home, because of the time it takes to do an
electronic transfer.

I had to do one this morning to a new tradesman (who I'll not be using
again, because it was that kind of a one-off job) and it took six
minutes to get the banking site logged into, a new payee's details
entered and authorised, and then the individual payment made and
authorised. It would have taken me thirty seconds to write a cheque
*and* I'd have had a hard copy audit trail automatically.

It does make me wonder if the people who evangelise online payments for
everything actually have vested interests. They have their place but they're
not always a convenient alternative to cheques or cash.

In message , at 16:43:41 on Fri, 21 Dec
2018, remarked:
At my previous house the window cleaner invoiced (about twelve pounds a
month, I'm not sure if that's regarded as expensive or not). I always
paid cash, if I was at home, because of the time it takes to do an
electronic transfer.

I had to do one this morning to a new tradesman (who I'll not be using
again, because it was that kind of a one-off job) and it took six
minutes to get the banking site logged into, a new payee's details
entered and authorised, and then the individual payment made and
authorised. It would have taken me thirty seconds to write a cheque
*and* I'd have had a hard copy audit trail automatically.

It does make me wonder if the people who evangelise online payments for
everything actually have vested interests. They have their place but they're
not always a convenient alternative to cheques or cash.

It's a collective failure to realise that "one size doesn't fit all".

While there are many transactions where payments can be made to
established suppliers with virtually no authentication, especially if
there's an intermediary [ecommerce platform or credit card issuer] who
has a reputational stake in resolving glitches.

Send a one-off faster-payment direct to a local tradesman, and it's like
throwing the money into a black hole.

FWIW, when I've dabbled in online selling professionally, I've always
used such an intermediary, and never asked people to simply wire money
to a sortcode/account.
--
Roland Perry

wrote in message
news
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 17:45:02 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
wrote in message
news
On Mon, 17 Dec 2018 15:37:46 +0000
Robin wrote:
Meanwhile vast swathes of both the public and private sectors are
operating in the 21st century with employees placing orders and making
payments online. Eg use of payment cards was common when I retired 13
years ago. There were naturally limits on how much could be charged on

A lot of sole traders don't want the hassle or the fees from lugging a
card
machine around when they go to jobs.

most of these people give me an invoice and expect me to pay by internet
banking

Some trademens do , some don't.

so far, they all have

Plus there's often a discount for paying in
cash but you probably wouldn't know about that.

the man in the lock shop gave me a discount for cash, after saying "cash
only" when I proffered my card (for 40 quid)

even my sister's window cleaner worked this way

An invoicing window cleaner? Where does she live, Islington, or maybe
Chipping
Norton?

did! Canterbury

tim

In article ,
wrote:
It does make me wonder if the people who evangelise online payments for
everything actually have vested interests.

Of course they do. Sorting and processing cheques is very expensive,
as is dealing disputes when they're lost in the mail, or people claim
they're lost in the mail.

Since October 2017, cheques in the UK are photographed by the payee or
his bank, and all you get back is a picture. Doesn't seem all that
different from a transfer.

Over on this side of the pond, where we've had check imaging for
several years, the banks all provide a free billpay service where you
enter the payee's address and phone number, not bank details, and it
mails them a check, which is a good deal for the customer since they
pay for the stamp. I found that even though we have thousands of
banks, there are two service bureaux that do most of the billpay. You
can sign up with them so if they recognize your details on an outgoing
payment (that's what the phone number is for) they "truncate" the
check and transfer the money directly into your account, saving
several days.

There are also account to account transfers if you know the
recipient's bank details, but they're a lot less popular. And there
are third party apps like Venmo and Square Cash and Zelle (the last
being the banks' belated response to the first two) which will handle
the coordination between payor and payee. Venmo is very popular among
the under-30 crowd.

For the record, my dog is opposed to check truncation because when I
get a paper check, we take down to the bank where they fuss over him
and give him a dog biscuit.

--
Regards,
John Levine, , Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

Graeme Wall wrote:
On 18/12/2018 14:59, Arthur Conan Doyle wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:

Apple/Android Pay don't have that limit.

I wasn't allowed to use Android (now Google) Pay at Tesco for a transaction over
£30. Terminal declined it.


That's Tesco's choice.

Not only tesco but many others eg waterstones several restaurants etc.
Recent shopping has required cash or credit card to be used. Apple pay in
about 50% of cases.

wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 13:46:15 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:36:06 on Tue, 18 Dec
2018, remarked:

Still a 30 quid limit. Useless for almost all tradesmens jobs anyway.

Apple/Android Pay don't have that limit.

Big deal. How many people use those? Or would even want to frankly.

Getting back to transport (sorry about that) I was intending to try
out Android Pay on TfL, but neither of the cards I was proposing to
associate with the App were acceptable.

In a sense odd, because using the cards natively contactless is fine.
Must be that lack-of-30quid limit when laundered through Android Pay
that's making the bank nervous. And frankly, me too.

Handing over random access to my bank account to Apple or Google makes me
very nervous which is why I'd never do it. Its bad enough when a direct debit
goes wrong but at least they're usually only once a month.



For Apple pay at least you don't hand over any bank details just credit
card

Robin9 wrote:

I'm unskilled at political prophesising so I won't try to predict
what will happen.

I've said many times that motorists are the sleeping tigers of
London politics and that if they ever wake up and recognise
what is going on, their unified reaction could sweep away
several dishonest, hypocritical politicians. As I've posted before,
if this Mayor or any of his predecessors had genuinely been
concerned about air pollution in London, they would have
stopped making our roads unfit for road vehicles.

In my neighbourhood, Whipps Cross Roundabout, which has
always done a splendid job of processing three large, constant
streams of traffic, is now being replaced by a complex system with . . .
..
yes, oh so predictably . . . . numerous traffic lights. The increase in
traffic queues and air pollution will be horrendous.


Reality will soon be dawning for the owners of the 2.5 million vehicles who
will be hit by the new ULEZ fee in just three months time:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/almost-2-5m-drivers-a-year-will-be-caught-by-london-pollution-charge-gvw5vw6hs?shareToken=501580d835a761d8b0757dc1f7348 c6b

I wonder how many of them will be regretting voting for Sadiq?

It will be interesting to see if the Tories have the savvy to
recognise the political potential in this. So far, they've been
as out of touch with normal people as the other parties.