If you don't need an overdraft open a Nationwide business account - pay in
10 cheques a day, 6 cheques per month no charge. No DD facility though so you also need a regular account. Others BSs probably offer similar.
you could use a GSM Chip and Pin terminal like
Martin
Simple. Eliminate the cheques. There is no longer any reason to use them or to employ the people to process them.
There is also the issue of what happens to the funds between when they are debited from the drawer's account to when they are credited to the recipient's account. A great deal of money for approximately two days.
|!On 9 Feb, 07:52, Dave Fawthrop |!wrote: |!> On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 23:54:02 -0000, "The Medway Handyman" |!>
|!> wrote: |!>
|!> I assume that it is a little difficult to install a card reader, with |!> permanent access to the Banks computers in the back of a van. Also as I |!> know to my cost, the Banks charge the earth to small businesses. |!
|!you could use a GSM Chip and Pin terminal like
The was the charges of the Credit Card Companies which put me off cards.
But why does it still take four days for an electronic transfer, and two days longer if a weekend gets in the way? (If I pay my credit card from my current account on-line it takes four days but I can go on-line to my credit card account and request the money from my current account and it's a same-day transfer! Why?)
With 12 million being written every day, there are obviously a lot of people who disagree with you. Doing away with the delay between issue and clearance would have a major, if short term, impact on cash flow in a lot of businesses.
If you read through the process I outlined, you will see that the drawer's account cannot be debited before the cheques have reached the issuing bank's clearing house and have been verified, which is late on day 2. It is then paid to the recipient's bank the next day. The bank probably only has the money for a few hours, although admitted, they can earn a lot of interest even in that short time.
Colin Bignell
I would take that up with your bank if I were you. I have a customer whom I phone up with the price of an order, she nips next door to her bank, sends me the money and it is in my account before she gets back to phone me and tell me. I also routinely pay suppliers on the other side of the world using electronic transfer and they have it next day, when their banks open.
Colin Bignell
It is also possible for the merchant to use an online payment service, of the sort usually used to take payment from a web site, as a virtual terminal, although that will soon only work with 3D secure payments - most commonly seen as 'Verified by VISA' but shortly to be adopted by Mastercard. That only requires a computer with internet access.
Colin Bignell
"nightjar .uk.com>"
Is she the same bank as you? That would be the only way I can think of getting a payment processed that quickly.
There are two main methods of inter-bank electronic money transfer - BACS and CHAPS. The former takes at least three days, and is generally not charged for on personal accounts (and is the means by which DDs are collected too), the latter is same day, but normally attracts a charge of 20 quid or so.
(Surely you know all this?)
cheers, clive
I wanted to purchase something from an EU country and the company didn't take credit cards. Looked into an electronic transfer from Barclay's - no. Ended up sending Euro notes got from my next door neighbour. ;-)
Yes, the cost and clumsiness of sending payments even to nearby countries in the EU is ridiculous.
I have set up an account with XETrade that does at least allow me to make payments to bank accounts in Europe and elsewhere electronically. It's cheaper than the big banks and can be done entirely on the internet.
Bloody Hell! Keep it quiet, the UK bank will start getting ideas..................
In message , nightjar writes
Speaking only for Scotland:
Every evening every branch of the above is visited by a global courier company (my employer) and the cheques are collected and delivered to clearing houses (e.g. Tweed House) at the Gyle in Edinburgh by 7:30 PM (on pain of significant financial penalties if they're late) That includes the likes of Aberdeen, where they are collected at 3:30.
The cheques are sorted overnight, and delivered to their issuing branch (within Scotland) before opening time the next morning, by the same courier company.
Therefore, ignoring electronic communications, the issuing bank has the ability to clear the payment within a few working hours, not days.
Ding! (Or should that be Kerching!)
Bank run Couriers need a full five year employment history, full CRO checks and security vetting, a minimum period of experience in their area, and five days training on a bank run, yet they still mange to leave bags propped up outside the bank doors, (and the bank doors unlocked) or let them fall out of insecure van doors, or leave them lying in the van overnight, or even forget to collect them altogether.
The bank contract is worth 35 million quid a year!
This really isn't an excuse for remaining in the Victorian era.
Overnight money market? They certainly can. A *lot* of money.
Short answer is that it doesn't. If your bank is playing this game then offer them the option of fixing it or fire them.
They may try to charge you extra for a same day transfer. This of course is bullshit. What is actually happening is that they are losing the opportunity to make money on the overnight money market and want to make up for it by charging the customer.
Simply decline the extra fees and tell them that it's same day transfer for no extra fee or no customer.
Irrelevant. Transfers can be processed in minutes, even when the banks are different.
I know that the £20 fee is a con and won't pay it. All transfers between my company account and my personal accounts (different banks) occur rapidly and without additional charge. Both banks were told that it's no charge or no business. It's really very simple.
At a guess, your business is worth quite a lot to them - you'll be paying in other ways. If everybody made that demand, their (people, not banks) bluff would be called and they would discover all the banks charge extra for that level of service. (*) (not that I disagree about it being a con - instant electronic transfers should be part of the normal service).
(* Which could lead to an interesting variant on nim for the banks - the idea is to be the second choice bank. The customer will choose the first one, get pissed off with the charges, and move accounts to the second. When they find the second one screws them just as much, they'll realise there's nowhere else to go and stick with the second. Well, it's an amusing theory anyway :-) )
cheers, clive
Yes and no. It's more an issue of what is being done for what is being charged.
Cheque handling is in part a manual process and there is a cost involved in employing people to do the work and some cost for the IT infrastructure. On the other side, the bank can charge for the service as well as making a margin from having the money on the market for a period of time.
For electronic transfers, there is little or no human intervention so less or no cost there and again an IT infrastructure cost. However, the transaction can be completed in seconds so there is no justification for it not to be. In other words, delay is there in order that the bank holds on the funds for a period of time and makes money on it. So the charge is really about people's willingness to pay for what they perceive to be a premium service, whereas the reality is is about how much margin opportunity the bank has ( or not)
I don't agree. Periodically the banks have tried to introduce charges for the use of ATMs where accounts are held elsewhere. They have found that it doesn't fly for two reasons:
- People are very sensitive to it
- Their competitors break ranks and don't charge.
On this basis, there is no reason why the same principle shouldn't apply to instant electronic transfer. It's simply that the market is not yet sensitive to it and consider that a 3-5 day period to move money around is acceptable.
As more people use electronic banking it will occur to them that this is nonsense.
As regards paying bank charges (or actually providing an opportunity for the banks to make money, I have no problem with that provided that they are doing the work. For example, if I invest in a managed fund, I expect to pay some level of management fee (I look at this very carefully). Equally, if I invest in something like an index tracking fund, then I expect to pay little or nothing for that.
I had this exact discussion with my bank manager not long ago and he pointed out that of course banks are looking for money making opportunities with their customers. Where customers have accounts that are a long way from zero in either direction, there is a greater opportunity or potential opportunity for them to make money and the customer gets more attention. They really don't want to spend much time on customers with accounts that are close to zero in either direction and/or have low transaction rates because the opportunities are not there for them. Under those circumstances, they perhaps only have transaction charges on current accounts as a revenue opportunity.
That will all change at the point that the market becomes sensitive to it.
For what reason no? I can set one up from my desktop, but that is using Barclay's business banking software.
Colin Bignell
I've not asked, but I know that my Far East suppliers are not.
When I used to do electronic transfers by handing a form over the counter, I used one called BOBS.
I suspect that the cost depends on the deal you negotiate with the bank when setting up the account. I can transfer money from one business account to another, in a different bank, by the next day, at the latest, without any additional charges. The banking software doesn't name the mechanism used though.
Colin Bignell
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.