Community

Nice post. 

Wouldn't the same regulation that forbids the primary source from revealing the full name also apply on the process of enrichment? In other words, if the primary source does not reveal the full name due to some regulation, is it legal for the enrichment source to reveal the full name (by using whatever technology or data sources)?

Kudos to Judge. And yet another slap in the face of Chopra CFPB for behaving like a rogue regulator by putting price control on private sector companies. 

I've been asked many times why, as a Chemical Engineer, I landed up in IT. I tell them that when I graduated in Chemical Engineering as far back as 1985, chemical plants were highly automated and hardly required any humans. OTOH, then, and now, IT is a very manual job requiring a lot of human workers (which is why the IT industry has absorbed tons of engineers, not only from the traditional Computer Science and Electrical Engineering fields, but also from chemical, civil, mechanical, and other core engineering branches). For the first time, I see a shift in that paradigm. Going by my own dabbling with ChatGPT for coding, coding is ceasing to be manual and is poised to become highly automated. Ergo I can easily get behind Tom Blomfield's analogy of software engineers tending their own farms in the past to being replaced en masse by combine harvester now. 

Kudos to the court for this verdict. 

In my blog post titled Fraud v Scam: Who Is Liable For Cybercrime and many subsequent comments, I'd said:

"People want to hold the Alleged Scammer's bank responsible on the ground that it opened an account in the name of the Alleged Scammer despite doing KYC. They seem to assume that KYC is character certification. But it's not. As long as you produce the necessary KYC documents, a bank is not under any obligation to vet your character before opening an account in your name (Not legal advice.)".

In response, some people claimed that payee bank is indeed responsible for vetting the payee as part of KYC / KYB and should not open an account for him / her.

This verdict renders the point moot. Even assuming that the payee bank is responsible and has failed in its duty, this verdict makes it clear that that's a different infraction and that the payee bank is still not responsible to the payor / victim for his / her loss.  

Great stuff. Just like the dropping of frivolous lawsuits against Zelle, CapitalOne, etc.

Kudos to UK government for scrapping PSR. IMO its Drunk Under Lamp Post regulation on APP Scam Reimbursement was the last straw. I totally agree with Riccardo Tordera in particular and Hon PM and Chancellor in general.  

This is the same PayTM whose Payments Bank was virtually shut down by RBI last year following seven years of investigations by the banking regulator in which it uncovered several infarctions related to KYC etc. 

But this is also the same PayTM that would not have become a household name had it taken the same approach to regulatory compliance as banks do. 

I also wonder if it would have become famous enough for government to sign up with it to "extend mentorship, infrastructure support, market access, and funding opportunities to (other) startups".

Years after I wrote it, my blog post Fintechs Need Marketers And Lobbyists, Not Lawyers seems to have aged well. 

YaaY, I'd predicted that the UK government would abolish PSR's populist drunk under lamp post regulation re. APP Scam Reimbursement soon after the elections. I never dreamt that it would mull abolishment of PSR itself. Great move, hope it materializes sooner rather than later. 

Stripe and many other fintechs support not only credit card but pay-by-bank payments (via third party integrations) in India, USA, etc. So do many other electronic payment gateways, payment services providers and payments aggregators. In addition, there are payment orchestrators that carry out automatic routing across multiple ePGs based on least cost routing and lowest outage, etc. I'm guessing such fintechs are not common in UK since it seems to be a big deal for a single PSP to support multiple MOPs like credit card and pay-by-bank.  

Onshore workers have pointed to the success of WFH (Work from Home) mode while pushing back on RTO (Return To Office) mandates by their employers. In what's likely an unintended consequence of their pushbacks, their employers have started wondering if there's such a sensational difference in productivity and other metrics between 50 mile remote working and 5000 mile remote working. Like Lloyds Bank, we're seeing tons of banks and companies in other industries moving jobs offshore to their GCCs in India during the last 12-18 months.