Comments on: No Checks Please, We’re British

By: J

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 23:10:28 +0000

You realise they have those systems in place already Sineira…
They are taking it one step further and removing checks completely.
They will be the first, not second last

By: Sineira

Sineira — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 22:08:30 +0000

Welcome to the 21st century.
England is probably second last, in most other countries checks were phased out many many years ago and other automatic payment systems are in place.

By: Candece Hanahan

Candece Hanahan — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 14:59:26 +0000

There are so many inexpensive ways for small businesses to process CC’s. Propay, Paypal to name just two. I have a side business, and it is always risky for me to take a personal check. It is horrible, that someone would hand me a piece of paper KNOWING there will be no money in the account for me to collect. I don’t take checks any more. I also have a laptop to compute a transaction ASAP to get a verification of my monies. Promissary notes should be abolished. I don’t even think credit cards are good, if you don’t have the money, you should not be spending it!

By: Dale DeWitt

Dale DeWitt — Sat, 26 Dec 2009 01:51:34 +0000

What about the cost of re-clothing from wearing those coins in the pockets.

By: tawster

tawster — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 05:56:45 +0000

Maybe… just maybe someday the US will drift away from checks, but something has to be an intermediary. For example, folks without computers – lots of them – or even electricity (some of them) need some system. Cash may end up being the only option, but…

Example: We paid for our dental fees in cash to get a discount. Thousands of dollars. A debit card would not count. But a check. No problem.

Example: We have a single rental. We are not equipped to accept rent payment in other means than check. ACH is an option, but… we don’t feel comfortable giving out our bank information. Not yet anyway. Maybe someday this will change.

I have several friends who have with no computer. A computer in a library is not the best choice to manage your money. Maybe in 50 years no one will be without internet or a computer, but… I doubt it.

I am rambling. There will always be a place for checks. Or there will be something similar. Or… folks will make payment in cash or… money order? Dunno.

By: mrwords

mrwords — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:01:10 +0000

it may end up being a smart idea, but a lot of people in the US still use checks because they are more comfortable with them

By: Steve

Steve — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 21:49:14 +0000

I think you’ve pointed out the only valid reason for keeping the check system, person to person transactions. While it’s currently possible to transfer money between individuals at little or no cost, the tools available are under developed. In a few years, person to person electronic transfers will be simple and common, and we’ll be able to drop the nasty paper check habit too.

By: Martin

Martin — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:02:16 +0000

The article is a little misleading, but in no way do I think it is intentionally so. I’m a Brit living in the states so I think i’m pretty well qualified to point out some discrepancies. Firstly, I don’t think the UK has the same problem of the ‘unbanked’. I was absolutely shocked to see people queueing to pay their monthly bills using cheques in the US. Last time I saw that was in Africa! I would say that it is extremely rare to find someone without a bank account that is capable of being used electronically. Is there a reason for this difference. I’m quite new to the US, so it could be just a case of me not understanding it.

The UK, in general, has no ATM fees, and there are groups of banks that allow no fee access. As noted in the article, the US is lagging behind when it comes to electronic service. I can transfer money to any other accounts for free in the UK. I can understand that people in the US would be resistant to the changes, but I think that’s because the banks here would capitalize on an opportunity to make more money, and still provide poor service.

There is scope for a much more convenient service, but I fear that the incumbent US banks would not allow it to happen. Regrettably, there is so much that could be done for customers with the technology but yet I don’t think it would be done for the benefit of the customers .

Shaun – you know the technology could be useful, can work, and can be made more secure than the easily forge-able cheque. The issue here isn’t the tech, of which you’re aptly qualified to judge, it is the privacy laws, the business practices, and what people currently perceive as acceptable. Granted, that’s possibly a moot distinction.

2 likes

By: Jarvis

Jarvis — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:32:02 +0000

Sure, it would probably be cheaper for the largest business to no longer have need to process paper checks but do you honestly believe that those businesses would give those savings back to customers in any way? Phasing out paper checks is a form of innovation that costs the consumer much more than they stand to gain and shouldn’t be attempted. Now, if you want to save money for the consumer how about we reduce the size and frequency of the print runs of new dollar bills in exchange for greater production of dollar coins. Anybody know how much it costs to make one $1-bill and how long such a bill lasts once put into circulation compared to dollar coins?

By: Pete

Pete — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 17:45:34 +0000

British retail banks are some of the most profitable in the world, cheques are not being phased out to provide savings to the customers, but to boost their profit margins still higher.

My advice to all users of the UK banking system – write as many cheques as you can until they remove your ability to do so. Heck, send all your friends a cheque for 0.01p, oh and take a pin and punch holes through the bank routing numbers, so they are forced to hand process it… that should cost them even more.

1 like