Latest opinions that Bob Lyddon has shared on Finextra

Join the Community

22,037

Expert opinions

43,964

Total members

420

New members (last 30 days)

182

New opinions (last 30 days)

28,682

Total comments

Join Sign in

Bob Lyddon

Consultant

Lyddon Consulting Services

Member since

30 Sep 2007

Location

Thames Ditton

View Bob Lyddon's full profile

Bob's opinions

MT202 COV defunct thanks to court decision

It is surprising to find nothing on the agenda of SIBOS conference or the SWIFT Payments Market Practice Group about the recent court decision that negates vital content of the SWIFT Message Reference Guide and BIS and PMPG documents on the subject of MT202 COV. The issue is the extent of the MT103 sending bank’s obligation to the MT103 receiving ...

24 September 2019 /payments /sibos

iPagoo’s insolvency puts question mark against NPA

We have recently blogged about NPA and Pay.UK’s loose governance procedures generally, but we need to focus in on the case of iPagoo/Orwell, and its implications for New Payments Architecture (“NPA”), and whether it is soundly based. NPA is essentially the brainchild of Orwell’s CEO and CTO. Orwell’s CEO was a full member of the Payment Strategy Fo...

29 August 2019 /payments /startups

Netting and pooling, not the same: unless you are the ECB

[First published by AccountingCPD] Many multinational corporates have a pooling arrangement for the cash balances owned by their various subsidiaries. For example this could be with Bank Mendes Gans in Amsterdam, under Dutch law, with every subsidiary holding as many currency accounts as it needs and periodically transferring surplus balances into...

27 August 2019 /payments

Pay.UK governance and ongoing indications of a fiasco

Having taken a break from following the governance of Pay.UK for a while, a quick skim underlines the prevailing chaos. We have already written about the ditching of a key feature of ISO20022 XML and the broken governance arrangements that have permitted this. There is a claim to openness about Pay.UK’s affairs, but this is belied by both the styl...

13 August 2019 /payments

Pay.UK Board ditches main benefit of ISO20022 adoption

Pay.UK was set up to deliver a New Payments Architecture (“NPA”) for the UK, implementing the blueprint that was passed to them by the Payment Strategy Forum. NPA would be based on the usage of the ISO20022 XML data format to enable rich data to flow up and down the payment chain between the two endpoints. This is the core value point of ISO20022. ...

08 August 2019 /payments

Crummy CReM code Part VIII and the low standards for firms to meet

This is the eighth and final blog in our series on the Contingent Reimbursement Model code (“CReM”) that purports to offer customers strong protection against certain types of Authorised Push Payment Fraud, or “APPF”. This one concerns the “expectations” and “standards” that firms should abide by, if they are signatories to the code. Firms have to ...

17 March 2019 /payments Transaction Banking

Crummy CReM code Part VII and customers’ added responsibilities

This is the seventh blog out of eight in our series on the Contingent Reimbursement Model code (“CReM”) that purports to offer customers strong protection against certain types of Authorised Push Payment Fraud, or “APPF”. It adds considerable work for the customer and in doing so reduces the numbers who will be able to make a successful claim. With...

15 March 2019 /payments Transaction Banking

Crummy CReM code Part VI as customers’ baseline rights are overridden

This is the sixth blog out of eight in our series on the Contingent Reimbursement Model code (“CReM”) that purports to offer customers strong protection against certain types of Authorised Push Payment Fraud, or “APPF”. In it we discuss how customers’ baseline rights in law are overlooked. The CReM fails to adequately qualify what happens in an AP...

14 March 2019 /payments Transaction Banking

Crummy CReM code Part V few customers covered, voluntary for firms, and dependent upon CoP

This is the fifth blog out of eight in our series on the Contingent Reimbursement Model code (“CReM”) that purports to offer customers strong protection against certain types of Authorised Push Payment Fraud, or “APPF”. Here we focus on who qualifies for cover, who is offering cover, and the vague contingency of cover on the as-yet non-existent Con...

14 March 2019 /payments Transaction Banking

Crummy CReM code Part IV, and ensuring validation of mandatory data at the beneficiary firm

This is the fourth blog out of eight in our series on the Contingent Reimbursement Model code (“CReM”) that purports to offer customers strong protection against certain types of Authorised Push Payment Fraud, or “APPF”. We made the point in Part III that firms demanded Name + Sort Code + Account Number as mandatory information for instruct...

12 March 2019 /payments Transaction Banking

Community