|
No More Cheques
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6272606.stm
"London Underground said that fare dodgers will still be able to use cheques to pay their fares, and fines, to ticket inspectors". So only a fare dodger can pay by cheque. If I happen to lose my ticket or I am mugged will I have to find some other means of payment or would I become a fare dodger. Kevin |
No More Cheques
On 9 Jul, 12:57, Kev wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6272606.stm "London Underground said that fare dodgers will still be able to use cheques to pay their fares, and fines, to ticket inspectors". So only a fare dodger can pay by cheque. If I happen to lose my ticket or I am mugged will I have to find some other means of payment or would I become a fare dodger. Does *anyone* still have a personal cheque guarantee card that isn't also a debit card? If not, then the difference that this makes to anyone is precisely 0 (since company cheques will still be accepted). -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
No More Cheques
On Jul 9, 1:17 pm, John B wrote:
On 9 Jul, 12:57, Kev wrote: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6272606.stm "London Underground said that fare dodgers will still be able to use cheques to pay their fares, and fines, to ticket inspectors". So only a fare dodger can pay by cheque. If I happen to lose my ticket or I am mugged will I have to find some other means of payment or would I become a fare dodger. Does *anyone* still have a personal cheque guarantee card that isn't also a debit card? If not, then the difference that this makes to anyone is precisely 0 (since company cheques will still be accepted). -- John Band john at johnband dot orgwww.johnband.org Well my cheque cards aren't debit cards and the company account doesn't have either a cheque card or a debit card. So I will be stuffed. Since I use a credit card I don't see what advantage a debit card gives, except that if I lose it I will have to cover the cost of the misuse whereas if a cheque is misused then it is fraud pure and simple and down to the bank. Kevin |
No More Cheques
"John B" wrote in message
ups.com... On 9 Jul, 12:57, Kev wrote: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6272606.stm "London Underground said that fare dodgers will still be able to use cheques to pay their fares, and fines, to ticket inspectors". So only a fare dodger can pay by cheque. If I happen to lose my ticket or I am mugged will I have to find some other means of payment or would I become a fare dodger. Does *anyone* still have a personal cheque guarantee card that isn't also a debit card? If not, then the difference that this makes to anyone is precisely 0 (since company cheques will still be accepted). Yes I do - I refuse to have debit card on my current account - any dipping into my money is limited to ME, by the time I get my statement it's going to be much too late! Even more so when they go contactless (like Oyster) as the criminals will just wave their thieving mitts near your wallet. We have to make the stand NOW Steve |
No More Cheques
On 9 Jul, 13:33, Kev wrote:
Does *anyone* still have a personal cheque guarantee card that isn't also a debit card? If not, then the difference that this makes to anyone is precisely 0 (since company cheques will still be accepted). Well my cheque cards aren't debit cards and the company account doesn't have either a cheque card or a debit card. So I will be stuffed. AIUI, company bank accounts don't ever have cheque guarantee cards. They only exist for personal bank accounts. So your company can still pay for your Tube tickets by cheque, if you want it to. Since I use a credit card I don't see what advantage a debit card gives, except that if I lose it I will have to cover the cost of the misuse whereas if a cheque is misused then it is fraud pure and simple and down to the bank. It means you can spend money conveniently from your current account, without having to mess about with an obsolete, time-consuming and expensive technology. Also, the position on fraud is *exactly the same* for debit cards and cheques - if someone nicks your money, the bank will refund it once you ask them and once they've investigated. (personally, I'd trust "secure electronic encryption" over "a piece of paper anyone can nick & write whatever they like on", but maybe that's just me). -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
No More Cheques
Kev wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6272606.stm "London Underground said that fare dodgers will still be able to use cheques to pay their fares, and fines, to ticket inspectors". So only a fare dodger can pay by cheque. If I happen to lose my ticket or I am mugged will I have to find some other means of payment or would I become a fare dodger. Cheques? What are they? I've only used my cheque book about three times in the last five years. |
No More Cheques
John B wrote:
Also, the position on fraud is *exactly the same* for debit cards and cheques - if someone nicks your money, the bank will refund it once you ask them and once they've investigated. Up to a point - apart from the the fact that debit cards aren't covered by the Consumer Credit Act, banks are less likely to rush to refund you as it's your money not theirs as with a credit card. E. |
No More Cheques
On Jul 9, 2:08 pm, John B wrote:
On 9 Jul, 13:33, Kev wrote: It means you can spend money conveniently from your current account, without having to mess about with an obsolete, time-consuming and expensive technology. Also, the position on fraud is *exactly the same* for debit cards and cheques - if someone nicks your money, the bank will refund it once you ask them and once they've investigated. (personally, I'd trust "secure electronic encryption" over "a piece of paper anyone can nick & write whatever they like on", but maybe that's just me). -- John Band john at johnband dot orgwww.johnband.org All of what you said can equally be done with a credit card and I can get up to 4 weeks to pay it off, and I can use a cheque to do it with. To be fair almost all my purchases are with a credit card. Obsolete, well maybe but still does the job. Time consuming, do cheques take that much longer than a debit card and whether it is a cheque, credit or debit card by far the quickest way to pay is with cash. My personal cheques are free so no disadvantage there. Can't really pay my council tax, gas, electric, telephone by card unless I want to spend forever on the phone. On line banking, not very quick and I don't do dd's. To me the big advantage with cheques is that I know where the hell I am with them. Kevin |
No More Cheques
Kev wrote:
All of what you said can equally be done with a credit card and I can get up to 4 weeks to pay it off, and I can use a cheque to do it with. To be fair almost all my purchases are with a credit card. I do the same but make a single payment by electronic banking. Obsolete, well maybe but still does the job. Time consuming, do cheques take that much longer than a debit card and whether it is a cheque, credit or debit card by far the quickest way to pay is with cash. My personal cheques are free so no disadvantage there. Can't really pay my council tax, gas, electric, telephone by card unless I want to spend forever on the phone. I've never paid any of those items by phone (in fact, I've never paid ANYTHING by phone - far too slow). All of them are paid either by standing order or by being directly billed to my credit card (and a lot more, like health insurance/dental fees besides). I've never used my debit card yet. On line banking, not very quick and I don't do dd's. It probably depends upon your bank or building society. Mine is extremely user-friendly and quick. I can sign-on, make my monthly payment, transfer cash to my current account (from my high-interest Internet banking account) and sign-off again in around 60-90 seconds. It would take me that long to find a chequebook and pen. |
No More Cheques
In article . com,
John B wrote: On 9 Jul, 12:57, Kev wrote: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6272606.stm "London Underground said that fare dodgers will still be able to use cheques to pay their fares, and fines, to ticket inspectors". So only a fare dodger can pay by cheque. If I happen to lose my ticket or I am mugged will I have to find some other means of payment or would I become a fare dodger. Does *anyone* still have a personal cheque guarantee card that isn't also a debit card? If not, then the difference that this makes to anyone is precisely 0 (since company cheques will still be accepted). My debit/guarantee card will still guarantee a GBP100 cheque even when I haven't enough funds to pay a GBP100 debit transaction. Admittedly the bank will charge me about 80 quid in excess ripoffs if I do that and the money isn't in my account three days later, but there is a difference in the two functions. Nick -- http://www.leverton.org/blosxom ... So express yourself |
No More Cheques
On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 04:57:35 -0700, Kev wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6272606.stm "London Underground said that fare dodgers will still be able to use cheques to pay their fares, and fines, to ticket inspectors". So only a fare dodger can pay by cheque. If I happen to lose my ticket or I am mugged will I have to find some other means of payment or would I become a fare dodger. Not uncommon these days. I reckon it's time the banks took action to abolish cheques completely. BACS and other electronic payment systems are far superior. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
No More Cheques
On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 05:33:56 -0700, Kev wrote:
Since I use a credit card I don't see what advantage a debit card gives, except that if I lose it I will have to cover the cost of the misuse whereas if a cheque is misused then it is fraud pure and simple and down to the bank. Then pay by credit card. That's also an option. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
No More Cheques
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 13:53:05 +0100, "Steve Purdy"
wrote: Yes I do - I refuse to have debit card on my current account - any dipping into my money is limited to ME, by the time I get my statement it's going to be much too late! That is a risk, which is why I prefer a credit card. Even more so when they go contactless (like Oyster) as the criminals will just wave their thieving mitts near your wallet. I will admit I have serious misgivings about that technology as applied to credit cards. Far better to have an "electronic purse" like Geldkarte, Chipknip or indeed Oyster, where the amount that can be stolen is limited to a certain amount. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
No More Cheques
Neil Williams wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 04:57:35 -0700, Kev wrote: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6272606.stm "London Underground said that fare dodgers will still be able to use cheques to pay their fares, and fines, to ticket inspectors". So only a fare dodger can pay by cheque. If I happen to lose my ticket or I am mugged will I have to find some other means of payment or would I become a fare dodger. Not uncommon these days. I reckon it's time the banks took action to abolish cheques completely. BACS and other electronic payment systems are far superior. Completely agree, however there are many out there (especially the older generation) who don't use telephone or internet banking. Smaller businesses (a good example being B&B's) will only take cash or cheque payments as (they say) it's uneconomic for them to be set up for card payments. -- Phil Richards, London, UK 3,600+ railway photos since 1980 at: http://europeanrail.fotopic.net http://britishrail.fotopic.net |
No More Cheques
Phil Richards wrote:
Completely agree, however there are many out there (especially the older generation) who don't use telephone or internet banking. That's the biggest problem. My parents are in their 80s and I still can't even get them to use cashpoints. My father still insists on driving to the bank every week and drawing money out over the counter, in spite of the fact that he now has a PC and is (slowly) learning how to use it. It drives me mad (and wastes my time!) when they insist on giving me cheques in payment for things or as presents. |
No More Cheques
On 9 Jul, 21:51, "Jack Taylor" wrote:
Phil Richards wrote: Completely agree, however there are many out there (especially the older generation) who don't use telephone or internet banking. That's the biggest problem. My parents are in their 80s and I still can't even get them to use cashpoints. My father still insists on driving to the bank every week and drawing money out over the counter, in spite of the fact that he now has a PC and is (slowly) learning how to use it. It drives me mad (and wastes my time!) when they insist on giving me cheques in payment for things or as presents. Would any of you technophiles like to suggest an alternative to the cheque for parents paying for school trips, scout group etc subscriptions, and all the other things that go with having a family? Too much for cash, none of the organisations concerned are set up for cards- that's the real world.. Stuart J |
No More Cheques
StuartJ wrote:
Would any of you technophiles like to suggest an alternative to the cheque for parents paying for school trips, scout group etc subscriptions, and all the other things that go with having a family? Too much for cash, none of the organisations concerned are set up for cards- that's the real world.. I demand that they give me their banking details (sort code and account number) and set up a one-off direct credit on my Internet banking, with an appropriate reference (membership number or name). I've done that for all of the annual subscriptions that I have, with only one exception, that was still issuing two-part carbonated subscription reminders, even in 2002! After a second request that they provide a direct credit option for renewal (it only requires the provision of sort code and account number and of a box to tick on the renewal slip) and no response, a year after my first request, I cancelled my membership. The others have actually commented that they are happy with a direct credit payment as it saves them the hassle of banking cheques. |
No More Cheques
On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 15:25:10 -0700, StuartJ
wrote: Would any of you technophiles like to suggest an alternative to the cheque for parents paying for school trips, scout group etc subscriptions, and all the other things that go with having a family? Too much for cash, none of the organisations concerned are set up for cards- that's the real world.. BACS transfer into their account, or standing order. Our Scout Group even gives a discount for using that method as it saves Leaders having to handle cash on the night. That method is pretty much zero-cost to both parties. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
No More Cheques
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 01:42 +0100 (BST), (Colin
Rosenstiel) wrote: The main reason I write cheques these days is for posting things off with payment. The German approach would be to post whatever then send an "Ueberweisung" separately as noted. There is no reason why that would not work with a BACS transfer here. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
No More Cheques
In article ,
(Neil Williams) wrote: On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 01:42 +0100 (BST), (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote: The main reason I write cheques these days is for posting things off with payment. The German approach would be to post whatever then send an "Ueberweisung" separately as noted. There is no reason why that would not work with a BACS transfer here. Except that the traders want payment with order. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
No More Cheques
On Jul 10, 6:38 am, (Neil Williams)
wrote: On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 15:25:10 -0700, StuartJ wrote: Would any of you technophiles like to suggest an alternative to the cheque for parents paying for school trips, scout group etc subscriptions, and all the other things that go with having a family? Too much for cash, none of the organisations concerned are set up for cards- that's the real world.. BACS transfer into their account, or standing order. Our Scout Group even gives a discount for using that method as it saves Leaders having to handle cash on the night. That method is pretty much zero-cost to both parties. So far this thread has only mentioned personal cheques and company cheques, both of which can be guaranteed. But there are also accounts for "community groups" with banks like Unity Trust, such groups being very likely to arrange bookings for travel, meetings rooms etc, where cheques are not guaranteed and require multiple signatories, and Internet payments can't be made other than to accounts with the same bank. This may be the fault of the bank, but it's still a good reason for having to use cheques until they fix it. |
No More Cheques
On Jul 9, 11:45 pm, "Jack Taylor" wrote:
StuartJ wrote: I demand that they give me their banking details (sort code and account number) You sound a friendly sort of chap to do business with. Stuart J makes a valid point though, I am forever paying for school dinners, music lessons, this trip, that trip and as I see it cash or cheque is really the only way to do it. Kevin |
No More Cheques
In message , Jack Taylor
writes I demand that they give me their banking details (sort code and account number) and set up a one-off direct credit on my Internet banking, with an appropriate reference (membership number or name). I've done that for all of the annual subscriptions that I have, with only one exception, that was still issuing two-part carbonated subscription reminders, even in 2002! After a second request that they provide a direct credit option for renewal (it only requires the provision of sort code and account number and of a box to tick on the renewal slip) and no response, a year after my first request, I cancelled my membership. The others have actually commented that they are happy with a direct credit payment as it saves them the hassle of banking cheques. Unfortunately that wouldn't work with our (voluntary) organisation. Our treasurer lives in North Wales and I (the membership secretary) live in East London. I have no access to our group's bank accounts and our treasurer would constantly be sending me details of random payments received that may or may not be anything to do with my role. We continue to prefer cheque payments for the time being. If you want to be a member, that's the way it's done. -- Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building. You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK (please use the reply to address for email) |
No More Cheques
"MIG" wrote: So far this thread has only mentioned personal cheques and company cheques, both of which can be guaranteed. Which bank gives cheque guarantee cards to limited companies? Dangerous territory, I would have thought, for the bank concerned. Especially as many company cheque books contain 100 cheques....... Chris |
No More Cheques
|
No More Cheques
On Jul 10, 7:30 pm, "Chris Read" wrote:
"MIG" wrote: So far this thread has only mentioned personal cheques and company cheques, both of which can be guaranteed. Which bank gives cheque guarantee cards to limited companies? Dangerous territory, I would have thought, for the bank concerned. Especially as many company cheque books contain 100 cheques....... Chris Oh, I didn't mean that so much. More that company cheques usually don't need a guarantee card and are accepted by ticket offices etc, a bit like building society cheques. |
No More Cheques
On Jul 10, 7:52 pm, (Neil Williams)
wrote: On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 08:58 +0100 (BST), (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote: Except that the traders want payment with order. Unless you are writing your guarantee card number on a cheque yourself (which you're not meant to do), they are no more getting that with a posted cheque as they are with a BACS transfer. In both cases one needs to verify if the funds have cleared by checking one's account, unless one is being very trusting. My concern (and I think the one possibly referred to) is that unless you attach payment to a specific order, how do they know who is paying and what for? If I made an electronic transfer to pay for goods etc, I would be concerned that if I got the reference wrong, the supplier wouldn't know who had paid or what for. |
No More Cheques
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 12:31:17 -0700, MIG
wrote: If I made an electronic transfer to pay for goods etc, I would be concerned that if I got the reference wrong, the supplier wouldn't know who had paid or what for. Then don't get the reference wrong! Seriously, it does not appear to be a problem for the Germans. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
No More Cheques
Steve Fitzgerald wrote:
Unfortunately that wouldn't work with our (voluntary) organisation. Our treasurer lives in North Wales and I (the membership secretary) live in East London. I have no access to our group's bank accounts and our treasurer would constantly be sending me details of random payments received that may or may not be anything to do with my role. That's similar to the various preserved railways that I am a member of. The treasurers receive membership fees by direct credit, with the membership number quoted as the payment reference. The membership secretaries receive the renewal forms, with the direct credit option ticked. The treasurers (I presume) periodically confirm the latest batch of payments that have been received by e-mail to the membership secretary. It's hardly rocket science and it's far more secure for both parties. We continue to prefer cheque payments for the time being. If you want to be a member, that's the way it's done. I'm afraid that, if that is the attitude, then I wouldn't be bothered about being a member. I've already discontinued my membership of one preserved railway that I had been a member of for over twenty years, due to their inability to embrace modern technology (ironic as they are one of the bigger railways, whilst the smaller ones that I am a member of can function efficiently). |
No More Cheques
In message , Jack Taylor
writes That's similar to the various preserved railways that I am a member of. The treasurers receive membership fees by direct credit, with the membership number quoted as the payment reference. The membership secretaries receive the renewal forms, with the direct credit option ticked. The treasurers (I presume) periodically confirm the latest batch of payments that have been received by e-mail to the membership secretary. It's hardly rocket science and it's far more secure for both parties. You're right, it's not rocket science, but as you suggest it, it would cause for us, a number of people more work. These people are all volunteers so I'm not inclined to be some sort of a job creation scheme for them. I'm afraid that, if that is the attitude, then I wouldn't be bothered about being a member. I've already discontinued my membership of one preserved railway that I had been a member of for over twenty years, due to their inability to embrace modern technology (ironic as they are one of the bigger railways, whilst the smaller ones that I am a member of can function efficiently). shrug You're obviously not that interested in being a member if you can't even manage to raise a cheque once a year. -- Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building. You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK (please use the reply to address for email) |
No More Cheques
MIG wrote:
On Jul 10, 7:52 pm, (Neil Williams) wrote: On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 08:58 +0100 (BST), (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote: Except that the traders want payment with order. Unless you are writing your guarantee card number on a cheque yourself (which you're not meant to do), they are no more getting that with a posted cheque as they are with a BACS transfer. In both cases one needs to verify if the funds have cleared by checking one's account, unless one is being very trusting. My concern (and I think the one possibly referred to) is that unless you attach payment to a specific order, how do they know who is paying and what for? Presumably by matching up their records based on incoming payments logged against customer references. Numerous organisations (e.g. the Inland Revenue etc.) will accept payment by bank transfers so in other words payment does not accompany any form etc. filled in. Somehow they manage to reconcile everything and obviously have an automated system to chase up missed payments. If I made an electronic transfer to pay for goods etc, I would be concerned that if I got the reference wrong, the supplier wouldn't know who had paid or what for. That's down to you to get the details right then! If you wrote a cheque out you could forget to sign it etc. and/or put the wrong reference on the back or something. So if the cheque got returned to the supplier it would still cause them extra work in trying to trace the missing payment back. -- Phil Richards, London, UK 3,600+ railway photos since 1980 at: http://europeanrail.fotopic.net http://britishrail.fotopic.net |
No More Cheques
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 02:08:29AM +0100, Steve Fitzgerald wrote:
You're right, it's not rocket science, but as you suggest it, it would cause for us, a number of people more work. These people are all volunteers so I'm not inclined to be some sort of a job creation scheme for them. The two model railway groups I'm a member of, where the treasurers and membership people live at opposite ends of the country, have found that accepting modern payments saves them a lot of hassle. They do still accept payment from Luddites, but I'd not be surprised if in another couple of years they impose a surcharge on cheque payments. One of them accepts card payments online and paypal, the other hands out its bank sort code and account number so people can do BACS. You're obviously not that interested in being a member if you can't even manage to raise a cheque once a year. You mean that the organisation doesn't care much about its members if it insists on them using such antiquated and inconvenient methods. Perhaps more importantly, it doesn't care about its officers if it makes them traipse to the bank every few days to hand over silly pieces of paper. -- David Cantrell | Nth greatest programmer in the world I think the most difficult moment that anyone could face is seeing their domestic servants, whether maid or drivers, run away -- Abdul Rahman Al-Sheikh, writing at http://www.arabnews.com/?article=38558 |
No More Cheques
In message , David
Cantrell writes You're obviously not that interested in being a member if you can't even manage to raise a cheque once a year. You mean that the organisation doesn't care much about its members if it insists on them using such antiquated and inconvenient methods. Perhaps more importantly, it doesn't care about its officers if it makes them traipse to the bank every few days to hand over silly pieces of paper. You have no knowledge of our operation and are therefore unqualified to comment about how we choose to operate our business. To put this into some sort of perspective from our side of things: We operate a membership system where members have to submit a 'requirements' form on renewal. This is because we offer something approaching 100 varieties and combinations of product and the member has to indicate their preference for the year. With any system we use, that member would still have to submit to me a list of their requirements before I could renew their membership. This is because that is what our members prefer. I have spent much time attempting to find a better way of dealing with this, but the bottom line is still that members would be required to communicate with us twice to renew - once with their requirements and once with the transmission of funds and all this would have to be re-assimilated once we received the two items - so, why not do this once, altogether with a 24p stamp? To use the banking system as it stands (ie. Giro transfers) costs us 96p for every membership we receive in this manner. With around 2000 members that is a lot of money that could be put to better use for the group. Then the paying in slips (which also include the above mentioned requirements) have to be posted from North Wales to me for action as the bank won't send then direct to me, adding to the cost. It costs us 40p to bank 100 cheques; I have never been to the bank with these yet, I put them in the post with the multitude of other items I have to send out. So, until we (read I as I'm the only one apparently interested in achieving a better cost/benefit in this matter) establish a better system, we will continue to prefer cheques. Of course, this could all change next month, year, whenever as it's kept under constant review. -- Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building. You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK (please use the reply to address for email) |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 01:30 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk