Bank account

by Jinxer Thu Nov 09, 2017 12:07 pm

Just had an email from my bank to say because of a change in the law, that they are changing the terms and conditions to let third party providers to act as if they are me with mobile banking. I wonder what the implications of this will be.I wonder how long will it be before a dca will be able to access your account and just take money.

by Guest Thu Nov 09, 2017 12:16 pm

Hi Jinxer

So have you written back that you don't consent?

Cheers!

by Jinxer Thu Nov 09, 2017 12:43 pm

Only just got the letter today and the last time I tried to stop them sharing the fact I got a bank account with credit reference agencies, they said because it's a requirement in law that the only choice I had to stop it was to cancel my bank account. I wish I could manage without a bank account but unfortunately I cant.

by Jinxer Thu Nov 09, 2017 12:48 pm

What’s new?
Third party providers (TPPs)

What’s the change?
We’re adding terms to allow you to use ‘TPPs.’
What is a TPP?
A TPP is a service provider that is authorised to provide information or payment related services on certain online accounts. If you sign up for a TPP service, you can:
* make payments and balance transfers from your account on the terms of your agreement(s) with us through the TPP or with the TPP acting for you; or
* instruct them to provide account information services (for example, to enable you to see your accounts with different providers in one place or provide tools to analyse your transactions and spending patterns).

We’ll treat any instruction from a TPP as if it was made directly by you.
You should check from the information it gives you that the TPP you are thinking of using is authorised.
You should also note that if the TPP needs your security details to provide these services, it’ll be able to see exactly the same information that you can see when you use Online Banking.
We may refuse to allow a TPP to access your account where we are concerned about unauthorised or fraudulent access by that TPP.
You must always tell us about unauthorised or incorrect payments even where you use a TPP.

by Jinxer Thu Nov 09, 2017 12:55 pm

They make it sound as if you will be in control and have a choice but why would the law need to be changed if it was for our benefit.
I remember when you had to give your consent for anyone to do a credit search on you and only if you was trying to get a loan, now they just do it automatically for nearly everything without asking you.

by Guest Thu Nov 09, 2017 1:38 pm

Hi Jinxer

As far as i know, contract/agreement supercedes law and legislation.

You have an agreement with the bank already, all you have to do is insist they honour it.

They're lying when they tell you the account will be closed.

They seem to be using power of attorney you have granted them to confer P.O.A. on third parties you would refuse P.O.A. to.

i suspect this can be used to aid debt collectors of various breeds.....

Cheers!

by Jinxer Thu Nov 09, 2017 2:17 pm

Paypal do it all the time as well change the terms and conditions and if you don't agree the only option is to close your account. This was in the last e-mail paypal sent me
Please read this document.

We’re making changes to the legal agreements that govern your relationship with PayPal.

We encourage you to carefully review this notice to familiarise yourself with the changes that are being made.

You do not need to do anything to accept the changes as they will automatically come into effect on the Effective Dates shown below. Should you decide you do not wish to accept them you can notify us before the above date to close your account

So the only choice you have is to close the account if you don't want to accept. I'm surprised no one in legal land has ever contested this if it's not allowed. The bank is exactly the same no choice but to accept or close the account. Everyone with bank accounts and paypal accounts receive the same letters, I can't be the only one who don't like them changing things.

by Guest Thu Nov 09, 2017 2:25 pm

Hi Jinxer

It's all in the wording. We have to learn to be as particular in reading it as T.H.E.Y are in writing it....

'Should you decide you do not wish to accept them you CAN notify us before the above date to close your account.'

It says 'can' rather than 'must'.

It also says YOU have the option to close the account - not that THEY have an option to close the account.

Think about it. If it was an option for them they would have worded it very differently.....

Cheers!

by **LionsShare** Thu Nov 09, 2017 2:51 pm

Hi iamani,

All IMO BTW:

"'can' rather than 'must'." - "can" does that mean "must" as in gas/electric acts it goes on about where changing to pre-meters "may" as oppose to "can" - "may" - only with permission, "can" to me would mean "must", or if they want to.

by Guest Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:01 pm

Hi LionsShare

It's along the same lines as 'must' and 'may', in as much as T.H.E.Y. are using wordplay to obfuscate an issue.

What i was getting at is that when they say 'can' in this instance it (the option of your closing the account when you don't consent to a new agreement - which is what the new terms amount to) is just a suggestion of an option you have, not a mandate or obligation.

T.H.E.Y. know full well you can refuse new terms, and that they don't have the option of closing the account if you refuse.

Cheers!

by **daveiron** Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:14 pm

Hi guys ,Ive looked in three legal dictionaries & can only find one definition for CAN (Blacks 8th)

CAN ,vb.1.To be able to do something 1.you can lift 500 pounds

2. To have permission (as often interpreted by courts) MAY<NO appeal can be filed until the filing fee is paid>

Unable to find a def for MUST

by **LionsShare** Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:22 pm

iamani wrote:Hi LionsShare

It's along the same lines as 'must' and 'may', in as much as T.H.E.Y. are using wordplay to obfuscate an issue.

What i was getting at is that when they say 'can' in this instance it (the option of your closing the account when you don't consent to a new agreement - which is what the new terms amount to) is just a suggestion of an option you have, not a mandate or obligation.

T.H.E.Y. know full well you can refuse new terms, and that they don't have the option of closing the account if you refuse.

Cheers!

Hi,

Always known its all about word play but its getting the meaning of words correct in context. Thanks for the heads up though.

by **daveiron** Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:25 pm

You could always ask them what definitions they are using in their letter & to quote the source.

by Guest Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:44 pm

Hi

LionsShare - sorry if i appeared condescending, i've read all your posts so i know you know it's all down to wordplay.

Daveiron - thanks for the input, i think it validates what i suggested about what 'can' means in this context. i think the answer is easier than asking them to provide a definition though....

Jinxer - 'Dear (whoever put their name to your notification)

Thank you for your offer of a new agreement, i have considered it and decided to accept it on condition of proof of claim that i will be obliged to cancel our original agreement if i don't agree to the new one.

If i don't receive written and (wet) signed confirmation from yourselves of your proof of claim within seven days i will consider your offer withdrawn and that our original agreement stands.

Just a suggestion fella.

Cheers!

by **LionsShare** Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:54 pm

iamani wrote:Hi

LionsShare - sorry if i appeared condescending, i've read all your posts so i know you know it's all down to wordplay.

Hi iamani,

no offence taken you to me were not condescending, don't worry!

LS

by **LionsShare** Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:56 pm

Hi daveiron,

thanks for the input

by Guest Thu Nov 09, 2017 4:15 pm

Hi

Daveiron - point of interest: does that phrase 'no appeal can be filed before the filing fee is paid' actually appear in official court rules somewhere? i mean worded in that EXACT order?

Because that phrase does not strictly rule out filing an appeal without a fee, even though it is cleverly worded to give that impression.

Isn't wordplay fun?

Cheers!

by Phillpots Thu Nov 09, 2017 5:59 pm

I'll throw this in from Etymology Online. Perhaps it might help. There are so many variations of some words that clarification might be best sort. Who knows.

must (n.4)

"that which has to be done, seen, or experienced," 1892, from must (v.). As an adjective, "obligatory, indispensable," by 1912, from the noun; must-read is from 1959.

must (v.)

Old English moste, past tense of motan "have to, be able to," from Proto-Germanic *mot- "ability, leisure (to do something)" (source also of Old Saxon motan "to be obliged to, have to,"

can (v.1)

Old English 1st & 3rd person singular present indicative of cunnan "to know," less commonly as an auxiliary, "to have power to, to be able," (also "to have carnal knowledge"),

by **daveiron** Thu Nov 09, 2017 6:09 pm

Hi iamani,

Sorry I dont know, that was the only reference i could find in a few legal dictionaries,and that was the entire def.

I have not checked O.E.D. only legal ( as we all know legal defs are only there to deceive ,otherwise there would be no need for them)

by Guest Thu Nov 09, 2017 7:02 pm

Hi

Phillpots - i agree, etymology is ALWAYS helpful. And it certainly corroborates what's been posted here. (and i'm glad you watched deek!)

Daveiron - thanks for checking. The fact it appears as a definition in a legal dictionary (Black's?) is suggestive enough imo.

Cheers!

by **assassin** Thu Nov 09, 2017 7:13 pm

You have a contract currently and in force, contract law is very specific here, it cannot be changed, a;;tered or amended without the consent of all parties.

by Jinxer Thu Nov 09, 2017 8:51 pm

They are forcing consent with the only option to not agree is for you to close your account. Any of you who have a bank account or paypal account would of had the same letters or they will be coming soon. Would be nice to see what sort of response people have who don't agree to changing contracts. Maybe someone who's cleverer than me will have success.
I've had my bank account since I was young over 30 years anyway, and paypal I got when they first started after nochex robbed me for not using their service for 6 months I think it was and they took my balance off me.
I've rang my bank and been in and complained a couple of times after they changed things but got nowhere with them. I haven't never done nothing in writing before though.

by Guest Thu Nov 09, 2017 8:54 pm

Hi

Jinxer - i'll check my correspondence. If i receive such an offer i will send my suggested letter and see what happens.

Cheers!

by Jinxer Thu Nov 09, 2017 9:38 pm

This is the latest e-mail I received and the changes are taking place January. I believe everyone who has a bank account will get the same changes. I was happy with my banks terms and conditions when I opened it 30 years ago but I've noticed over the year's loads of changes that they say are done for my benefit when you just know deep down the changes protect them and not me.

Summary of Changes
We're making some changes to our Online and Mobile Banking terms and conditions to reflect a change in the law that is taking place from 13 January 2018, which alters certain terms about Online Banking security credentials. The change in law means that customers can choose to authorise and use the services provided by Third Party Providers (TPPs). TPPs operate separately from the bank. Details on TPP's will be included in your account terms and conditions, for which you will have been sent a Summary of Change notification between September and November.
The updated Online and Mobile Banking Terms and Conditions will be available from 13 January 2018 via Online Banking and the Mobile Banking app.

The rest of the e-mail I posted up above. It will be interesting to see iamani how you get on if your bank does the same change.

by pieintheskywhenIdie Fri Nov 10, 2017 1:21 pm

This article seems to refer to the issue ..

Three-quarters of bank customers set to rebel when new rules allow banks to share personal financial data

I'm not sure I am any clearer on what a Third Party Provider is, and whether it's truly under the control of the account holder. Various blurbs refer to services where you can use one "thing" to manage different unrelated accounts, but if these are only services that you sign up to voluntarily, that doesn't explain why banks need to change terms and conditions.

by Sponsored content

Bank account

Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account

Re: Bank account