Community

As far as I can see, from the BRC report itself, the use of Cheques is on the increase both in terms of mix of use (up 50% from 0.06% to 0.09%) and number of transactions (up 77%).

The use of cheques therefore seems to be increasing, albeit the value of cheque payments is decreasing.

The use of credit and charge cards also seems to be increasing (which attraact the highest interchange fees I think) with use of debit cards falling off in % mix terms.

Or did I get my sums wrong?

The upcoming SuperStream changes will significantly reduce the use of cheques for Super contributions, which become EFT only from mid 2013.  Courtesy of the Gillard government. 

Thankfully, the this handy 'remittance' for Super admin teams will be replaced by standard xbrl data delivered electronically; correct use of which seems set to be highly regulated by the ATO.

Roll on the day the UK government does something similar for pension contributions.

Am I living in a vacuum?  Our (SME) company hasn't seen any change at all in e-invoicing over the last 5 years.  I keep reading that things are really taking off, but see no change at the coal face.  In fact, things seem to be going backwards.  Oh, and the fax machine still spews out remittances.

30 years with one bank.  9 mortgages paid off.  3 loans paid off.  300 credit card payments made on time.  Now there is loyalty.  My reward?  Same mortgage rate as a newcomer.  Good grief.

Loyalty is the way forward and I see none of it right now - just marketing, as you say.

e-invoicing almost invisible in our 100 strong FTSE size clients - just 3 asking us to do it.  It's certainly failing to make an impact on us!

This all sounds very familiar and perhaps the start of a trend - The Insidergate Tapes.  Seems a little inconsistent to not publish the full text of the conversations, feel like I am missing out. Mr Einhorn should call foul.

I now have to phone my bank (Lloyds) every time I go somewhere overseas and want to use an ATM; otherwise it's a stand off at the ATM and no cash.

My bank won't let me unlock certain countries in advance that I know I am going to because I cannot be precise on timing.  So every time I travel, its the same old regime of calling to clear it.

If only they would allow me to input a second PIN to confirm my overseas transaction then I would be done.  On the the phone, they let me use a memorable word to do anything.  So if I can do anything on the phone with a memorable word, why not at an overseas ATM with a second memorable PIN?  Or text it to me and I'll input it into the ATM (like Lloyds actually does for some internet transactions, which is pretty cool).

For now, I am back to using cash because quite frankly I can't be bothered with all this phoning.

Speaking as a consumer, I don't expect to pay for international payments services.  It wouldn't even cross my mind that having to pay someone overseas should be diferent from paying someone in my own country.

Until, of course, I then try to do so and I realise there is a cost and its complicated (well it is via a normal bank). 

Thankfully, the amounts I want to actually send overseas as a consumer are relatively small, so there is no big deal and I am just left with a sour taste in my mouth about the costs (as I am with credit card transaction fees).

For me, the key is removing any complexity or effort - go on the internet and make the payment overseas without having to worry about anything other than whether I've got the target right and the cash in my bank account (like any other internet payment).  The bank can deal with all the complexity involved and I'll put the sour taste of the charges in my basket of things that will eventually disappear when sending cash overseas really does become like booking a flight - who cares where you are going, here is the ticket.

For me, ‘in-band’ transmission wins every time because I’ve had too many ‘out-of-band’ experiences.

Our business insight on this is that not only do the banks need to adopt an ‘in-band’ remittance capable payment standard but the corporates need to change their attitude as well.

In our work with banks and corporates seeking to straight through processpayments to their back office we come across issues with bulk payments all the time.  The problem is that the bulk payment arrives electronically but no remittance data is attached – creating the ‘missing remittance’ issue and a reconciliation nightmare that technology can’t really help with. 

But never underestimate just how much of the 'missing remittance' problem arises not from the lack of a payment message with the necessary fields, but from the customer simply refusing to share the remittance data at the outset.  Your customer has the extended remittance information readily to hand and in electronic form, after all it comes straight out of the accounting system when the payment is initiated. But, your customer is unwilling to always share it with you.  No matter how hard you try, you cannot get a list of the invoices making up the bulk payment.

If you are someone like a property agent or pension administrator then you are receiving large bulk payments all the time and have a contractual (sometimes legal) duty to pass on those payments to a third party in good time.  But if you are unable to get your customer to tell you what the bulk payment was made up of then you have a business process problem and not a banking problem. 

Therefore, a global adoption of remittance standards tomorrow would not solve everyone’s problems.  First, we need to change the attitude of some customers – who just don’t want to tell you what they are paying.

So the ‘missing remittance’ problem won’t be solved by the banks alone, nor should it be.  Corporates also need see the benefit of sharing information between them, initially outside of the banking system, before we can realise the true benefits of straight through processing within the banking system.

For volume customer businesses, you either need to take social media [e.g. Twitter] seriously or not bother at all.  Your blog is spot on.

I asked a question of Garmin (retailer) via Twitter but no answer.

Just barely mentioned Metro Bank (bank) on Twitter and they were all over it and started following me...

Metro has clearly decided to follow their convictions and strategy; the customer is always right - engage with them on their terms.

Garmin clearly don't see the shadow of a big Apple rolling their way.