Slashdot Mirror
UK Wants To Phase Out Checks By 2018
The board of the UK Payments Council has set a date to phase out checks in a bid to encourage the advance of other forms of payment. They added, however, that the target of Oct. 2018 would only be realized if adequate alternatives are developed. "The goal is to ensure that by 2018 there is no scenario where customers, individuals or businesses, still need to use a cheque. The board will be especially concerned that the needs of elderly and vulnerable people are met," the Payments Council said in a statement.
No more old ladies holding up the line for an hour because they're too technophobic to use a debit card.
I'll shit bricks when they outlaw cash.
If I wanted to buy a car from somebody, how would I do it? Right now the only reasonable options are PayPal, check, cash, or credit card. The only tender an ordinary person would accept for a car are cash and check, and most people wouldn't want to handle enough cash to pay for a car.
dom
It isn't spelt 'checks' it's 'cheques' in the UK - for fucks sake get it right.
It's cheque.
In Sweden there this was done 10 years ago, welcome to the future UK!!
I hadn't seen a check in Finland for over 10 years. Then I come to US and find out it's the common way to pay bills. And transfers from bank account to another one are difficult or even impossible between two random people.
Surely the UK Payments Council want to phase out cheques?! Unless they do mean to finally do away with, say, checking cheques?
We have cryptographically secure algorithms for anonymous digital cash. These schemes are easy to implement using blind signatures. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_signature. If properly implemented such a system provides far more anonymity than cash, checks, credit cards or debit cards. We really should be working to switch to such a system.
"The board of the UK Payments Council has set a date to phase out checks in a bid to encourage the advance of other forms of payment. "
A chip embedded in the hand would work best. ;)
Germany phased out checks / cheques 4 or 5 years ago....with no negative impact at all.
Every month, I pay my landlord (a professor; I'm his only tenant) with a check. I wonder what system would replace that, that would be significantly different from checks, but that my landlord could accept?
Also, what if I run over someone's bicycle, and I want to give him a blank check to pay for it? Or, more realistically, what if I need to pay an individual that I have only just met more money than I have in cash? What system could replace that that would be significantly different from checks?
I guess it could be done, but it might take some creativity.
I can understand wanting to phase out personal cheques but a bank draft is a payment instrument that is drawn ahead of time into the account of the bank that issues it. How do they handle large purchases without at least a bank draft?
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
Above all else my money must be anonymous!
// MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
What could possibly go wrong?
What's the backup plan in case a massive solar flare fries our power and computing infrastructure? Have we reached the point where that's the end of civilization anyway? Or am I underestimating the ability of people to muddle through on cash an informal IOUs for a while in a pinch?
we call em cheques
oh and "how do people pay each other?" = in kind
I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of slow-writing middle aged women suddenly cried out in terror.
Yeah, because governments that are supported by taxation of financial transactions are going to LOVE anonymous cash.
Gold is about the only thing that's going to be worth anything by 2018. Maybe they should be phasing out cash too.
No.
The more the government tightens its grip, the more stagnant the economomy becomes. I believe they'll only push digital cash if the government can tax every red cent that it can. They first came for the gold in the 1930s and what was left were fiat greenbacks.
Now all that will be left are binary 1s and 0s?
Don't sign me up. I'll deal with the hassles of cash, thank you very much.
Oh, and replace the ridiculous and costly-to-administer-and-enforce tax system with something sane:
http://www.apttax.com/
We have numbers on our side! :)
Sorry, bro.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
It isn't spelt 'checks' it's 'cheques' in the UK - for fucks sake get it right.
I didn't know Slashdot comments came in wheat gluten-free versions now!
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
We have cryptographically secure algorithms for anonymous digital cash.
But who wants that? The little people? Hah.
There are only two institutions that could create and support an anonymous cash-free financial system: the government and big financial institutions. Where is a motive for either one that is more juicy than the possibilities of being able to track every monetary transaction you engage in?
Privacy is a tool of the people to evade control by those with too much interest in their day to day lives. No one with power wants to give that to the common man, and if some of us little people got together to try to build a network for handling cash out of the government's and the banks' eyes, it would be tied up in anti-terror laws faster than you can say, "Hawala."
Honestly, cash is something that would not be allowed to be invented today if it didn't already exist and wasn't too hard to get rid of.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
Red cents are only worth two yellows. The blue coins are where it's at.
I lived in the UK for 2 years, and let me tell you, despite a lot of things that are annoying over there, being able to transfer money easily is one thing they do well.
All you have to do is give someone your bank account and routing numbers, and they can send you money, for free. Your landlord, friend, etc. And yes, it's free. Why do we have to let Paypal make millions off of this lack of capability in the US?
For all the people in the US who worry about account security, isn't it funny, they don't seem to have problems with this system where you give your account number to someone else. Did you ever realize anyway, that every time you write someone a check, you're giving out your account numbers already? And the fact that we rely on paper checks that take days to be processed opens up way more fraud opportunities than electronic means.
The best thing was that it must have been mandated some time ago that every UK bank offer this, so every bank has to have free transfers in this way. I think it should have been required for the US banks in their bailouts -- as long as we're helping them out, they have to get rid of a system that does nothing but cost consumers fees. Think about it, if you could choose anew, would you have people transfer funds by writing pieces of paper (which by the way, cost like $0.20 cents each if you've looked at the cost of ordering checks) that you have to go the bank to deposit, take several days to clear, and might bounce? Why are we tolerating this middleman system? Why do we tolerate $35-a-pop overdraft fees as a surprise, when clearly they have the means to tell you right away if your balance is insufficient? Boo hoo, the banks will lose some profit from the decline in overdraft fees. Well, they shouldn't even be making huge profits off of those shady fees in the first place.
I read that there's one bank which lets you take a iPhone photo of checks someone gives you, and send in that image as the deposit. Or other banks that let you scan checks in at home and send them in via their website. At that point, why are we even having the checks? cmon people, let's not put up with this bullshit any more. Give us free transfer capability, honest information on our accounts, and no more idiots writing checks in supermarket lines. What, did you drive up in your horse and buggy?
sorry, this topic makes me grouchy about how behind the US is, and apologists who think it's fine and want to cut productivity-sucking banks any slack over it.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
If you buy a british car in the US, you will get the steering wheel on the left side.
Same goes for spelling on a US site.
Oh, in case you don't know what a "steering wheel" is, it's what you call a "driving wheel".
Personal cheques are a purely a cost to the average bank, shuffling paper and checking signatures does not make them scads of cash. They'd dearly love to replace them with credit cards for which they get to charge an annual fee to the card holder, monthly and annual fee plus a percentage commission from the merchant, and any interest accrued by the card holder at the usual inflated rates, and all riding on the back of a process that is essentially automated (reduced staff costs). Even the direct deposit substitute is a good money spinner with limited numbers of "free" transactions per month before fees kick in, and charges for daring to use an ATM. What's not for a bank bean counter to like about this?
Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
1. The worlds governments are banding closer together under the guise of AGW.
2. Loss of freedoms are happening in the western world and breakneck speeds.
3. The lure of socialism and what it promises.
4. Electronic payments only in the future.
5. Mark of the beast???
Every transaction will be traceable by the "benevolent" power-that-be; not for anything but the purest of motives, of course.
Just from the absolutely ludicrous statement "... the board will be especially concerned that the needs of elderly and vulnerable people are met", which anyone with enough functional brain cells to form a synapse can tell is pure propaganda, you should know that there is another agenda entirely.
Let's look at cheques as non-electronic money transfers that are easily available to most people. Is it wise to phase out these? It assumes that there will be no breakdown in electronic methods of money transfer. What might happen with serious power failures, solar storms, war, or economic collapses? Will we have to revert to cash for everything, and is there enough of it?
I still want a paper reciept for every transaction, but dealing with them each time could be a pain. It would be easier if the banks managed them and collected them to send with your statement. They could scan them for paperless bills, and paper ones too. Obviously we'll want a standard size and layout that everyone can recognize legitimate ones vs. fakes. Wait a minute...
I lived in France for four years, using checks. Now I live in Luxembourg and use bank transfers. I much prefer bank transfers. It's easier, faster, less prone to fraud, etc...
However, a couple things bank transfers don't do that checks do:
1) Security deposits: recently my fiancée and I reserved a monastery in France. We had to make a deposit of, what is for us, a significant amount of cash. With checks this is easy. He has a check, which is only valid if we don't show up, and we have a year to pull together the money. If he has hard cash, first of we lose access to that cash for a year. Second, if he doesn't deliver the goods, he has the cash, and all we could do about it is sue him!
2) Large amounts between individuals: we're selling our car and aren't quite sure what to do. Obviously cash is a little inconvenient, but a wire transfer happens at a bank or online. So neither of these work as nicely as a check either. Of course, I'm certain there's some way around it, but until an online bank transfer happens immediately, it won't be as nice and secure as a check.
www.eissq.com/BandP.html Ball and Plate System. Amuse your friends. Crush your enemies.
Those paper slips that serve as criminal plot points in American movies? They're real?!
I thought they were like rotating fireplaces, rings with poison and cars that explode when they crash.
this seems designed to destroy community groups. I send precisely two cheques each year, through the post, one to an individual, and one to a small village shop. That pays for our village Christmas party. I only do this job because it's so easy (I do have other commitments): community work like this only survives because it can be broken down into extremely easy steps. Any other form of payment would make my job ten times harder, due to needing personal visits, easy to lose cards, etc.
With paper trail banks are accountable of transactions. You can be reasonably sure that bank wouldn't forge paper check, and if you are depositing someone else check you have paper receipt. If transaction is purely electronic your are on sufferance of the bank in case of dispute or bank mistake. Surely you can check bank logs, but only if you obtain court warrant. You give them transaction number and they can say it was not a bank mistake, it was participant's problem. If bank refuse to recognize mistake in transaction you can't show them paper as a proof. And in my experience bank mistakes are quite often occurrence.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
So is the spelling of check/cheque some british vs. american english issue?
Because the headline would have been about 87% easier to understand with the spelling cheque. My first thought here was something like, "great, they are phasing out the checks at the airport or border" or something. Of course, that's completely utopian since the article also mentioned the UK, but one can always hope.
c++;
There are lots of small businesses that will be damaged or made unprofitable. When taking low volumes of payments, where a cheque is much more cost-effective than taking cards, for instance the weekends-only kind of bed & breakfast - getting a card terminal costs £400 and just isn't worth it - that £400 represents our profit for an entire summer.
"Cock Up Your Beaver" does not mean what you think. This sig is intended to clog filters and annoy do-gooders
Checks? We haven't had those in wide use in Finland for at least 15 years. Every bank here and many local shops have secure electronic terminals where you can pay your bills, if you do not want to do it online. I have paid all my bills online for about 10 years now, and never had a single issue. We can also order from many Finnish-based online stores and make transfers directly from personal bank accounts, a direct debit transaction. No credit cards are needed in many cases and the approval takes no longer than a credit card transaction. Direct-debit from your own bank account is also possible in practically any shop using a so-called "bank card". In most cases, the credit cards issued by the local banks are also bank cards. When I ring up a purchase, I just tell the clerk to either charge the purchase to credit or direct-debit from my account. Easy, simple. I absolutely hated paper checks when I was living in the US. Keeping the checkbook balanced (which it never was), etc.
I don't understand this fear of online payment in the US. It seems most people in the US would gladly give out their credit card number over an unsecure landline to an unknown person/company at the other end, but paying bills online using a secure site is just too risky. Get over it and join the 21st century already.
As an American living abroad, it really frustrates me to see how totally awful some systems are in the US, when I have seen the alternatives available elsewhere. Don't get me started on healthcare, or mobile phone providers, or ISPs... or...
You are contradicting yourself. The unique property of cash is that the government doesn't need to know that you bought some communist books in Barnes and Nobles or that you arranged a private business transaction to voluntary introduce a mind-altering substance into your body. They are still free to jail you if you resort to violence as a result of getting stoned or your ideology. Something tells me that Britain's effort to mandate electronic payments is precisely to track thought crime and precrime.
Here bank transfers don't have any additional charges. Knowing a name isn't enough but bank account number is. It is in no way private piece of information here, though so you can give it away freely with no problems. I have multiple times handed out or received bank account numbers in bar from people whose names I don't know as we have had some common friend and I've owed them something for a ride or such. Unlike the sibling poster from Netherlands, I wouldn't need to know name of a city or such.
The rent scenario you described would go like this: Ask your landlord's bank account number, log into your online bank account (for free), set a monthly transfer of sum X to be transferred to his account on n:th day of every month (for no additional charge), log out and never worry about it again except if your bank account is empty when the transfer should occur. Perhaps you should create a bank account here in Finland and use that to pay rent? ;)
I can't say that I envy checks... I am 20 so my life experience is limited (never had to *buy* a house, for example) but I've never had the need to use checks or heard anyone saying "It would be handy to have checks right now"... We do make occasional jokes about writing checks, though.
Some other commenter asked what to do if you wreck someone's car, bike or such and want to pay on the spot. Here in Finland the correct procedure is for the injured party to ask for a written document (anything will do. Just a note saying "I pretty much totaled [name]'s car on [date]" and signature). This document is usually not used for anything, it is just in case that the other party later denies having done anything. If he is unwilling to give any proof (I guess calling a third party to act as a witness works too) you can call for police. Then you take up his name (everyone has ID with them here anyways, if not, you can call the police if you see it necessary) and leave. He transfers money when he gets home.
Well, Jeremy Clarkson may disagree with you. He was stung after putting his account details in a national paper. Granted, it was only possible with a charity (apparently), but still, people can take as well as deposit money using your account details :)
What's more likely to be the source of accidental error? The one that involves two computers transferring data to each other, or the one that involves writing out a piece of paper, handing it over to someone else to be validated, moved around the country a few times - before performing pretty much exactly the same electronic transfer.
If you don't trust your bank not to screw you... WHY ARE YOU GIVING THEM YOUR MONEY?
I lived in the UK for 2 years, and let me tell you, despite a lot of things that are annoying over there, being able to transfer money easily is one thing they do well.
UK banks are by far the worst ones in Western Europe! And I work with banks every day, so I should know.
Personal story:
Couple of years ago I wanted to pay something to a UK bank, and got the answer "No, we don't accept foreign transfers!". WTF?
This is blinging
the board of UK payment council is leading to a good alternative but could not know how far is it going to succeed till 2018 or does the overall motive should be fulfilled? a little unknown...
Here in Sweden there are lots of companies who buy products like these http://www.merchantexpress.com/wireless_credit_card_processing.htm which is a wireless credit card machine. As long as you use it in an area where cell phones work, most of these will also work.
It's perfect when you are on an outdoor market, a convention etc. Even our ice cream trucks in Sweden use wireless credit card machines.
Last time I saw a cheque used was more then 15 years ago, mainly because we have used credit/debit cards for so long that we no longer need or want cheques. For instance, cashing in a cheque from USA in a bank here can cost about $70-90 USD no matter what the amount is. So we rather do electronic payments, cash or debit/credit cards.
Having lived in Switzerland for a while and experienced the cheque-free banking system there, I can say that cheques suck on so many levels. Handing or mailing someone an IOU in the form of a cheque is stupid when you consider the alternative.
In Switzerland, and I believe in most of Europe, payments are pushed rather than pulled. The receiving party sends the paying party a standard slip with the receiver's account information and amount being billed (or the payer could fill out a blank slip manually). The payer feeds the slip to his own bank's ATM and authorizes the payment. Or, he keys in the information to his bank's e-banking website. Alternatively, they payer can take the slip to any post office and pay with cash. The transaction clears the same day.
Compare that with a cheque-based system:
There are only two advantages of cheques that I can think of:
In summary, a cheque-based banking system is so completely backwards and broken, it's amazing that such a system could exist in the modern world.
"Well, Jeremy Clarkson may disagree with you [bbc.co.uk]. He was stung after putting his account details in a national paper."
This is clearly an implementation issue that can be sorted out.
You should never be able to set up a direct debit without proving who you are. The best way to do this is if you have to set it up yourself, either in person or on your Internet bank.
The Brits came late to this game and failed to understand and copy the systems that have worked well in other countries. One of the worst is allowing companies to set up a direct debit with your bank as long as you have signed some piece of paper with them. This is not how it is done in Norway at least.
If the government is driving the removal of cheques, then the government is creating the replacement. The thing is that the UK government has proved time and time again that it is technologically incompetent (eg the various databases and top secret documents that are lost or left on trains) so this won't be properly implemented.
A lot of commenters seem to be missing a key point in the summary. Cheques will only be phased out if "adequate alternatives are developed". It's pointless to talk about current payment options when, presumably, something better will be developed in the next decade. I think a payment by text system would be good. The payer texts his bank to authorise a transfer to the payee's account, then the payee immediately receives a text from his bank indicating a transfer has started.
Chip and Pin was implemented in less than ten years. And that required far more new equipment than the payment method likely will.
'Only if alternatives are developed' = APACS will come up with some inadequate, fraud-prone solution involving debit cards. They'll claim it's an alternative and use that as an excuse for abolishing cheques. There'll be about 5-10 years of widespread abuse and then the FSA will tighten up the rules. It was the same with Chip & Fraud cards, it'll be the same with contactless debit cards.
If you're writing an article about the UK, it helps to use the correct spelling. I looked at "phase out checks" and thought, what?! Checks for what?!
I'm 40 years old, and I've never used a check. In Sweden, where I live, checks are OBSOLETE. Since long time back. I think some people in the banking industry in the UK (and the US) needs to start learning about computers and information technology. It's about time.
Is ban checks for amounts less than $1,000. Fucking grannies holding up supermarket lines for 15 minutes to write on a piece of fucking paper, seemingly forgetting how to do it even though they've probably written thousands in their lifetime.....fuck. With regards to buying cars, it should be cash or check. A year ago I accepted $3,000 for selling a car. I had a sign on the window stating "$3,500. $3,000 cash". They happily paid cash.
Read the frikken parent post! I want to sell my car. It is my only car so I don't want to start up a small business for selling the one car.
This car will sell for several hundred to a couple of thousand pounds.
You can't easily withdraw more than £250 a day and you'd not want to walk around with a couple of grand in your pocket in any case.
So cash isn't going to be offered.
I'm not a small business nor do I wish to be one.
So what can I use when a cheque is no longer available?
I can see people in the US holding out longer but that's because being the capitalist free-market beacon that it is, the banks don't do anything to help consumers they just fuck their customers up the ass all day. This is despite the fact credit unions offer much better deals.
Last time I was over there you still had to pay a fee to use a ATM machine not owned by your bank. In fact just about everything you do has a fee attached. Having less than a certain amount of money in a chequeing account can result in a fee. If I have less than $200 in my account maybe I'm a bit strapped for cash. Charging me a fucking fee won't improve that.
I think the UK is actually more of a free market than the US. Things are more likely to go in the consumer's favour to help win them over.
It's in the UK so it's cheques. Right?
Where is the "Sudenoutbreakofcommonsense" tag when one needs one?! When I moved to the UK about two years ago I was quite shocked that cheques did exists here and have been used so much. We are in the 21st century and one still writes paper slips which takes an insane long time to be processed and cleared!? In all the countries I lived before payment by bank transfer was the most convenient thing to do. Even transfering between states in Europa (those who are modern enough to use the same currency) is free and works nowadays like a charm! So why is UK still so much behind the state of the art?
Where you do pay is if you exceed your overdraft limit by even one penny (something which is very easy to do when the bank automatically gives everyone a debit card, encourages them to use it and most businesses accept them without further charge).
...and they'll also charge an arm and a leg for bouncing a cheque and/or honouring a cheque which puts you overdrawn.
Both bank transfers and cheques are typically free on UK personal accounts (business accounts are another matter). Both cost money if they lead to an unauthorized overdraft.
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
What really annoys me is that supermarkets and petrol stations already won't accept them. When I was hard up, I knew that I could still survive for 4 days before pay day, because I could pay with a cheque and it would clear once my pay was in the bank/consulting money cleared, etc.
Since most of us curry a mobile phone, it would be nice if we could pay using our phone.
Here is a possible solution when buying a product:
1) the clerk scans the product (or products) and a total price is formed.
2) the client activates the "pay" command on his/her phone.
3) the total price of goods is transmitted via infrared to the phone. All the client has to do is hold up the phone to the infrared emitter of the cashier device.
4) the client sees on his/her phone the price.
5) the client accepts the payment.
6) the phone sends an SMS (possibly encrypted) to the bank; each phone is linked with a bank account. The transmitted information contains the bank account of the shop.
7) the bank transfers the amount of money to the bank of the shop.
8) the client receives an SMS that the payment was successful.
This is not only the fastest way to pay, but it can also eliminate fraud (like tax evasion) in the large scale.
Other than the cashflow benefits of not paying things immediately, I honestly can't see what benefit they have over other payment methods.
Time it takes me to get $$$ from a US check: 3-6 weeks.
Time it takes a wire transfer from anywhere else; 1-8 days max.
hahahahhahah....
hahahahhahahahhahah....
hahahahhhahahahahahah....
0.6% on all transactions? good luck getting 0.01% on FX transactions, seriously, that would NEVER go down... people would just trade in other jusisdictions. A 0.60% tax on all trades would destroy the united states...
a marginally more sensible 0.005% tax on all worldwide financial transactions is being proposed, if this goes ahead it will raise a lot of cash, but this would have to be an international decision, not something for the US alone to decide - if they do, forget about the US surviving in the top 5 of world markets.
I am very sucseptible to "let's have another drink"
I think this is a daft idea, there are still lots of times where electronic banking doesn't cut it, such as payments between individuals.
Get a gift card.
Je ne parle pas francais.
Cheque is nice. In the last noble decades, the end of 19th century, military officers ruined by gambling often forged cheques to cover their debts. When found out, they had to shoot themselves in the head. Nowadays we see most evil crooks, like the Maddoff jew, who steal dozens of billions electronically to amass illegal wealth and even if caught, they laugh all the way to the cooler, knowing fully well that in a mere few years they will be pardoned out of triple life term and fly straight to their Haifa luxury mansions.
Another inhabitant of Continental Europe here.
If I wish I can save my transaction(s) to my local PC as a pdf (or make a snapshot of my screen when entering a transaction) when I use the e-banking system of my bank (and yes, I do make (encrypted) backups offsite). Cheques can be forged much more easily than the PKI encryption mechanisms used with electronic banking.
If I would have to put my trust somewhere it wouldn't be in cheques.
Shut up! We get it, you fools still use cheques. the rest of the world is moving on but you're unable to see a world without this archaic method of moving money around.
it's ok, you guys pay to receive phone calls, most of your phone network is 2G CDMA, and you still use imperial measurements. the pattern I'm seeing is that you insist on being different, even when the way everyone else does something makes sense, and the way you choose is ridiculously stupid.
Wow. Sir, in my seven years on Slashdot, you are the first spammer I have *ever* seen. I remove my hat to you. Good day.
[FUCK BETA]
[a check payment processor] automatically does a background check
When's this feature coming to credit cards?
Banks, which administer credit cards, already do periodic background checks with the credit bureau even if only so that they can get in on "universal default".
I used to have a personal czech, but I dumped her!
I have never written a cheque in my life and the last time I received a cheque was as a present from the grandparents. Even the government was able to transfer my income tax refund directly into my bank account.
One root cause of this is that the banking system in the US grew from state-chartered banks, not federally-chartered banks. 50 states, all with different rules and regulations.
The 27 states in the EU are even more independent than US states, but based solely on comments I've seen posted to this story, it appears that banks in parts of the mainland EU have worked out paperless EFT without exorbitant bank fees better than banks in the US have.
One was once written on the side of a cow and left at the bank.
Just a linky for the other like me who didn't know about this (fictional) story.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
If you consider that almost everybody trusted by a UK bank with a cheque book is also issued with a cheque guarantee card - which in almost all cases is some kind of debit card
If you mail-order something from a paper catalog or a TV ad, how does the merchant see your cheque guarantee card?
{pendantry}
{pedantry}
Thank you for being the first person to spell cheque properly. {/pendantry} Some people follow the convention of using the spelling of whatever anglophone country is being talked about. Wikipedia appears to follow a variant of this. Under this convention, the UK has cheques and the US has checks.
If whoever is in power (and it isn't necessarily the politicians) can monitor what you do, have control of your means of communications and can, on a whim, prevent you from travelling, then they don't need to put you in a concentration camp. You are already effectively under house arrest.
You know this. Somewhere in the back of your mind you realise that you are being monitored and that your movements are tracked, your behaviour has changed (well maybe you were compliant already). Good. No need for big brother to intervene there either.
A crushing dictatorship doesn't need jackboots and marching troops, nor does it need to use physical violence in order for it to exist. With the right technology there will be no need for all that. You are the perfect product of this technology. Compliant and blind.
The UK has all that too. I haven't written a cheque for years, last time I needed to I couldn't find my chequebook and managed to convince the recipient that internet banking would be quicker and less hassle. I don't know why it needs to take so long to phase them out.
So in a totally che(ck)que-free system, a bill could arrive electronically with demand for full payment within the hour, as that is eons of time to automated systems. Brave new world, indeed.
I'm not entirely certain about what fees may be associated with using a debit payment, but I hope this doesn't mean we're facing a future of de-facto lining the corporate pockets of major credit companies like Mastercard and Visa. Even debit cards generally have the Mastercard/Visa logo on them ... does this mean they still see a fee even when using it as a debit transaction?
For a particular store? What if I don't know where they'll want to spend it?
A preloaded credit card that they can spend anywhere? Yeah, sorry but they generally charge a fee to purchase one. There's also the fact that they CAN'T be spent anywhere...still plenty of places that don't take credit/debit. And what if they choose to save the money for a downpayment on a house or something? A gift card isn't much use there either.
For business purposes I use cheques all the time. I don't know if any of you have ever had a tax audit, but when dealing with governments, papers ALWAYS wins over any "e-statment" or any other electronic form of information keeping, or at least, that has been my direct, first hand experience. Last time the government looked me over for anything, they never took a penny form me for two reasons : 1) I knew the law like the back of my hand; 2) I had PAPER to back up every single statement I made, including canceled cheques.
You see, at least what I was told, when you have a cheque in your hand, you have physical evidence, fingerprints, personal handwriting, etc. Heck, maybe even some left over DNA somewhere. You cannot fake that, but some people can very easily fake electronic financial statements.
I also find that at least once a year, somebody, somewhere, individual, business or even a government agency claims I didn't pay a bill, and then I go pull out my canceled cheque, wave it in front of them, and watch the dumbfounded look on their faces. Now here's the thing that scares me. If I find an error at least once a year, how many errors are there out there every year, how may people are NOT looking closely at their accounts and keeping close track of them? In find electronic statements are often wrought with error, and most people trust a computer before they trust themselves.
Another thing about cheques is that you - believe it or not - have very few bad payments or even fraud or ripoffs. Seriously. My business take no credit card or debit card, and my bad debts/losses are almost non existent. I am not saying you can do this with every business, not by any means, but it is easier for people to commit fraud with electronic means and credit cards than with cheques.
Something else many of you seem unaware of, but credit cards and debit cards are very expensive for any business or merchant to use. Easily 5% of any purchase you make at most small and medium sized businesses with a credit card goes not to the store or business, but to the credit card company. Don't ever shurg it off and say "oh, that's the cost of doing business", because IMO, that phrase is one of the most foolish things you can ever say. People who says things like that are the ones who in the past created the Enrons of this world, or who created some of the major financial messes we are in today. so if you think the ease and use of a credit card is worth an unofficial 5% "bank tax" on every purchase you make, go ahead, knock yourself out.
One last thing - book keeping and accounting of any kind is a major PITA, no two ways about it, but grow up and get a life before you start tossing 'attitude" at people like me who use cheques. If I can financaily keep my head above water by using cheques, and that helps me keep my finances on an even keel, what's wrong with with that? For what it is worth, I have zero personal debt. I may not own much, but everything I own is paid for 100%. So maybe some of us cheque writers aren't that stupid after all.
All I am saying is, if some of use stone age idiots like myself want to use cheques, and you don't, fine. I'm not saying all of you should, and I don't think I have the right to tell any of you what to do, but I am asking for the same right & respect back.
In the UK for pounds and in Europe for euros, the different bills are different sizes, and they use different physically sized currency, they use one and two "dollar" coins extensively, and they don't charge fees for most ATM withdrawals. The result is that cash transactions can be less painful, and the checks don't save you money over using an ATM card or withdrawing a bit of cash when you need it.
The flaw is that people get used to using plastic to buy everything, and can become very casual about credit card use, and _that_ has tremendous dangers.
Given that the UK banking system is a lot less bad than the US system (I interact with both), that should give you some idea of how bad they have it on the other side of the pond...
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
1. Require anyone who doesn't want to deal in straight cash only to get a merchant account.
2. ????
3. Profit!
Apparently 2. is "See #1"
Bah, digital cash systems are a waste of breath. All these protocols rely on a third party facilitator, and the best that facilitator can hope to get is deniability. But that wouldn't help them. If some bank started dealing in blind-signature money orders, the government would call them up and ask "What the hell do you think you are doing?".
And justly so. If these protocols worked as advertised, every form of economic crime would become immensely more profitable since the huge risks and expenses of old-fashioned money laundering would disappear. Corruption at all levels would explode, since it would be 100% impossible to prove anything. Any criminal enterprise, no matter how evil, could raise funding as easily a tech startup.
But it won't happen. There can be no cryptographic solution to the need for a facilitator: Assume I'm exchanging cash for a service, but both me and my counterparty are 100% anonymous through some perfect protocol. If I pay first, what will prevent the counterparty from taking the money and running? If I get the service first, why on earth should I bother paying? (If I buy information instead, I can effectively arrange for the transaction to be simultaneous, but I have no guarantee that what I get is the secret documents I want, as opposed to Aunt Tilly's brownies recipe.)
There can be no transactions without trust, and no protocol can create trust between two completely anonymous parties. It's a pipe dream, get over it.
xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
"the target of Oct. 2018 would only be realized if adequate alternatives are developed."
So they want to faze out checks but they do not have any adequate alternatives? and they even have a date they want they fazed out by?
Seems like they are really getting ahead of themselves here.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
It won't be free for long.
If the banks are forced to re-organize their charging regimes (i.e. not charging people with unauthorised overdrafts through the nose) then be prepared for the rest of us to make up the shortfall, i.e. no free inter bank transfers, a monthly charge for having an account etc etc etc.
Not all banks subscribe to Faster Payments, and not all accounts are enabled. My business account with the Abbey certainly isn't.
The banks don't hold the large companies details, they licence a product called Biller Wizard from Eiger systems that does.
All of these things cost money, which the banks will be unwilling to swallow if they don't have to, so therefore charging for them is going to happen, sooner or later.
I know they'll devise an alternative way of doing this, but I at least like to dream that this might kill off mail-in rebates.
No longer will I have to wait 3-6 months for a $5 check that never comes.
Checks:
Pros -
1) Variable payment.
2) Can be made on the spot.
3) More convenient (can only be deposited by who it is made out to, and is not valid without a signature).
4) Safer (Not carrying around a massive billfold, especially for large amounts).
5) Can be post-dated.
Cons-
1) Can be stolen.
2) Signature can be forged.
3) Very slow clearance time (Because retailers like to sit on them and wait for them to hatch!).
E-Banking:
Pros-
1) Fast(er).
2) Paperless
3) Less to worry about getting stolen.
Cons-
1) Need some form of access to Internet.
2) Electronic passwords can be stolen.
3) Account information easier to steal.
4) Transaction dates do not necessarily reflect actual dates (The idea of a 'Valid Transfer Date' is absolutely USELESS!).
5) E-Banking using your CrackBerry/iPhone/PDA may require the purchase of data plans, and additional data/usage charges.
6) Technical issues can make simple purchases impossible.
Before a move is made to switch away from checks, there needs to be a level of compatibility and functioning that is several orders of magnitude higher than the level that we are at now:
1) Single Standard - Every bank and vendor uses the SAME standard, so there are no technical issues. Software vendors and credit card companies all like to think that *THEIR* product is the best, and try to 'lock-in' as many businesses as possible, leading to problems. An example of this is where certain retailers only accept certain credit cards.
Some businesses only accept certain cards for certain things. My University, CSU Monterey Bay, accepts different cards for different things: Parking tickets, making payments in person, making payments on-line (PLUS a $2.00 'convenience' fee). If online payments are going to be used, then the convenience fee needs to be outlawed, since people will be trapped, and the charge can be imposed at will by either the retailer or credit card issuer, or both.
There needs to be some regulation where retailers/vendors must accept ALL cards, and not pick and choose which ones they want to carry.
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
Most of the comments I've read are in the context of using cheques to pay for retail purchases. Yeah, that's bad.
I don't use cheques to pay for anything, except one item: my rent. Cheques actually solve that problem pretty well.
See, my landlord (essentially just a guy I live with) doesn't have the infrastructure set up for electronic money transfer, nor should he. So I can't pay by debit, and it would strain my withdrawal limit to hand him $425 cash every month. What to do then?
I can just leave a cheque on the fridge, and he can cash it whenever. Debit and credit are suited to retail (cashier and customer are together, money needs to be transferred now) but cheques are well suited to money transfers where both parties aren't at the same place at the same time.
"Live as if you'll die tomorrow." Ridiculous. You could die later today.
>We have cryptographically secure algorithms for anonymous digital cash. [...] We really should be working to switch to such a system.
Never going to happen.
The government - any technologically advanced 'Western' government, but specifically the British - will never accept anonymous over monitored; tracked; recorded or vetted *anything* where there is the option of doing one or the other or both.
Information is power - and they like their power over the serfs too much.
Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
There are a lot of papers out there on anonymous digital cash systems with 'revocable' anonymity. To me this seems to be the ideal solution to the problem. Law abiding Joe Citizen can make payments to Jane Citizen without revealing any personal information to each other or the government (not unlike cash now). However it is possible for a digital 'coin' to be tagged such that the anonymity is revoked.
My understanding is that this is detectable only to the authority that placed the tag, so for example Undercover Officer buys a load of Drugs and Guns and Bombs from A.Terrorist with a tagged coin. The authority can detect it as it is deposited in A.Terrorists account. Then you could conceivably tag every transaction made by A.Terrorist until you've uncovered an entire supply chain for his Drugs and Guns and Bombs, something you can't do as easily with cash at the moment. I might be wrong, but this sounds like an ideal system - protecting the innocent, persecuting the guilty etc.
the idea is that the transaction total is on the terminal when you enter your pin, and the pin does not leave the terminal. There should be no way for the store to replay the transaction with the same or different value. Obviously that's the theory. . .
You'd use a certified "check" that you don't ever see from a lending company, or you get a special one from your bank. They are not talking about removing certified checks, just personal checks.
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
That's it right there. The banking systems are all ultimately controlled by the governments of this world and they have no interest in enabling large anonymous transactions. This is why large denomination bills, at least in countries where rampant inflation hasn't made them worthless, haven't been printed in nearly half a century in most places around the world.
Can we not get nice European bank transfers as well as keep cheques? I use cheques and online banking about the same amount, and find both useful.
There are many differences between Switzerland and the United States that make this problem more complex than you suggest. For example, illegal immigration is practically unheard of in Switzerland whereas in the United States it is quite common. This might have something to do with the fact that Switzerland is practically surrounded by mountains in the middle of continental Europe while the United States shares one of the largest land borders in the world with what is effectively a second-world country. There are many other reasons too. The American consumer uses checks for certain transactions because, for a variety of reasons that are not under his control, a check sometimes makes the most sense. Is it inefficient? Probably. Is that the fault of the US consumer? In many cases, no.
Many illegal immigrants have bank accounts. Many poor citizens don't. I think it's because once you've left one heavily overdrawn account it's hard to get another.
Those folks deal in cash, and more and more retail purchases nowadays use debit cards. I almost never carry cash anymore.
But checks still fill an important niche, as has been explained.
Not having to know someone else's bank account details is a huge convenience, not easily overcome.
You can even make out a check to "CASH".
The poor and many small non-profits do not have access to mechanisms where they can accept credit or debit cards. Most churches get their contributions by cash or check (cheque?). You can't put a credit card in the collection plate! Poor people who have no bank account also cannot accept cards or electronic funds transfer
I have huge respect of what the UK has brought us. But how is it that surrounding countries do not even consider checks any longer but the UK does?
Provide better alternatives and checks will vanish automatically. Shouldn't be too hard as the sole advantage of a check is that you have a bit of a credit for a limited time.
Where I live you mostly pay with a direct debit card with amounts up to USD 5'000. Larger purchases you pay through bank transactions that arrive on the booking day. I never ever have more than USD 200 in cash on me.
I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
> the United States shares one of the largest land borders in the world with what is effectively a second-world country
Minor "The More You Know" correction, here: "Second World" used to mean "USSR/China and their allies" and now means, basically, whatever nations currently still exist in their place. China being a corner case since it's shifted to some kind of command capitalism hybrid. "First World" merely meant "The Western/Capitalist/Democratic nations and their allies". "Third World" was everyone else; it doesn't necessarily have to mean that they're poor or dysfunctional, just that they aren't allied with either of the big two blocs.
So Canada and the US are firmly first world by any definition, and Mexico is first world by the old political definition and third world by the modern colloquial mangling of the old definition. But Mexico is not, nor has even been, second world. Cuba is the only second world nation in the entire western hemisphere.
You can be reasonably sure that bank wouldn't forge paper check
You think they're going to forge electronic transfers?
You think having cheques available means that they don't have the electronic transfer capabilities available too, exposing you to all of the same risks anyway, and indeed widening your exposure because right now you have the electronic risks and the paper risks, rather than just the electronic risks.
Think it through...
Incidentally, if I deposit a cheque in the overnight bin, I have no paper receipt.
Regarding audit trail for electronic payments: If I get an email telling me someone's sent an electronic payment then either it arrives in my account or it doesn't. If it does, no problem. If not, still no problem: I tell them it didn't arrive.
If they money's left their account and not reached mine, trust me, their bank is going to be every bit as keen as they are to find out where that money ended up.
Banks in the UK are heavily regulated, and have a reputation of not losing customers' money.
(That is, not losing the accurate record of how much money the customer has deposited with them. They have a reputation of losing all their money, and some they don't have, by investing it in dodgy mortgage books from America that go toxic, leading to serious liquidity issues, the need for excessive short term borrowing at ursurious rates and thus requiring Government handouts to stay in business. But that's another matter entirely.)
What are these cheques of which you speak? I'm 44 and I've managed to survive so far without writing a single one.
I also live in a country where checks does not exist. At least I have never seen one. So the grandparent comment of "I guess it could be done, but it might take some creativity." is pretty much mindboggling.
Account number + amount, transfer money. Zero or low fees, depending on bank. Trust me, this is the future.
I lost my sig.
The funny part is that links posted in Slashdot comments are given a REL=NOFOLLOW attribute, instructing search engines not to visit. So he's gaining absolutely nothing by spamming Slashdot (which is why you don't see it happening very often), but he's wasting the effort anyway. I'd say we win this battle.
Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
Great post. Your two advantages of Cheques aren't really advantages of cheques. For both examples you could just use cash. Some other solutions to your causal gift in Australia are store gift cards or prepaid visa cards. You buy it and it comes loaded up with $X. You can usually specify the amount. Some shopping centres also let you purchase gift cards that can be used at any store in the centre. To make a purchase you just swipe it through like a normal EFT card.
Suppose I go to a poor country, and need to make a payment, but there is no electronic banking system. What then. Closer to home, I go to the Casino, win a few thousand, and want payment in a secure form. But I only have my debit or credit card. Will they do it for me? Add your supposes to the list. Leslie
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
"The UK" doesn't want to phase out cheques. Banks and large retailers do. The UK wasn't even asked. But at least you printed what a small group of large corporations wanted you to.
. Last time I czeched, spelt was a flour.
.
- aqk
F U