Bank refused to accept cash for a mortgage payment.

ArtSmart

dotsman wrote: »

I'm afraid that simply didn't happen. There is no way they would have instructed you to set up a direct debit (as it would be impossible to do so).

where are you dude?

ArtSmart

ceegee wrote: »

Just a shame that all the claims in the op regarding the bank refusing cash and the arrest are utter fiction

well i know nothing of that, but was shocked by the thred title because of my situation.


i absolutely stand by MY statement, completely. and will give exact details to this site owner by PM if required.

dotsman

ArtSmart wrote: »

as to your second bit, that is irrelevant.

as to your assertion 'that simply didnt happen, i'm categorically stating it did and at two different branches of BOI

ETA, actually i think direct debit or standing order was the statement, but i cant recall the exact words, except for the set up an regular payment online as we will not be accepting over the counter cahs payment in the future.

Well, a Standing Order would make a lot more sense, give it is the exact opposite of a direct debit...

patwicklow

Millicent wrote: »

Thread reminded me of this. Man arrested for fraud for trying to cash a cheque the bank issued to him. Nuts.

Thanks for that link as we all can see its happening before are very eyes well the eyes with out the blinkers that is.

ArtSmart

dotsman wrote: »

Well, a Standing Order would make a lot more sense, give it is the exact opposite of a direct debit...

well i dont know enough about the difference to agree or disagree, but do please explain.

anyway, the request to 'set up a regular online payment mr 'ART'' was crystal clear. eta, as was the 'we wont be accepting cash lodgements in the future' and from two separate branches with about a month in between - the second was last friday.

ArtSmart

wrote:

Difference from Direct Debit

Standing orders are distinct from direct debits; both are methods of setting up repeated transfers of money from one account to another, but they operate in different ways. The fundamental difference is that standing orders send payments arranged by the payer, while direct debits are specified and collected by the payee.

A standing order can only be set up and modified by the payer, and is for amounts specified by the payer to be paid at specified times (usually a fixed amount at a specified interval). The amount can be paid into any bank account, which need not belong to an organisation vetted by the payer's bank.
A direct debit requires the payer to instruct the bank to honour direct debit requests from a specified payee; the payee can then take a direct debit for any amount at any time. The payer has no direct control over these payments, but can cancel the direct debit at any time, with no reason required, and require the return of disputed payments. It is not possible to authorise an individual to take direct debits; only organisations that have a contract with the payer's bank, or have been vetted by it, can do this. For details and country differences, see direct debit.

from wiki

ok, i see the difference and capt midnight's point.

still, my point still stands, the BOI asking me to set up a standing order rather than accept cash at the counter.

patwicklow

ArtSmart wrote: »

from wiki

ok, i see the difference and capt midnight's point.

still, my point still stands, the BOI asking me to set up a standing order rather than accept cash at the counter.

They can charge you more for a start by doing this, its all down to hidden costs
so can grap more money off you.

ArtSmart

I will say this though. I'll be documenting the outcome of my queries with consumer Ireland etc on boards (assuming permission is granted to do so)

whatever about anything else, a bank refusing or threatening to refuse cash for one of their own customers is....well, insane.

Run_to_da_hills

Speaking of Cashless, Senator suggests social welfare debit card only usable only in Ireland to prevent fraud.

A good idea in theory but in practice big brother will be watching you every time you go to the supermarket, worse still you could be blocked from buying fags or booze, you won't even be able to shop over the border. :eek:

Living with this would probably give you more an incentive to get a job.

http://www.joecarey.ie/2012/02/social-welfare-%E2%80%98debit-card%E2%80%99-could-help-to-cut-down-on-fraud-%E2%80%93-noone/

NakedNNettles

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Speaking of Cashless, Senator suggests social welfare debit card only usable only in Ireland to prevent fraud.

In fairness I wouldn't really be against this, it would keep that percentage of cash circulating within our own economy which can't be a bad thing....with all the deposits leaving the country in the last few years.

Social welfare is there as a means to support and help people who are out of work, get them back on their feet or into education, I don't see how the state giving cash to people who then buy booze and cigerettes is supporting someone.

galwayrush

An Irish bank told me that they would be bouncing a cheque on me because i didn't have sufficent funds in my account to cover it. The cheque was for 2100, and i was lodging 3000 in cash at the time. They said the cash had to be in my account before the cheque was presented so thus, it would not cover the cheque. and that only a bank transfer would work at this stage. as had already lodged the cash at this stage so i had to withdraw it, get my wife to lodge it into her account and then transfer it to my account. Hey presto, cheque was cleared..
Banks are useless assholes.

pickarooney

ArtSmart wrote: »

amazing reading some of the posts. we get the society we deserve i guess.

yes, the man walked in with a camera to a bank he's been in before to make a cash payment of 1300 dollars- to illustrate a point. imo a valid point. no, he wasnt a drug dealer gangster etc,


anyway, the BOI recently told me they would not be taking cash lodgements for payment into my LL's BOI account. (nothing huge, average enough amt.


let me repeat that.

the BOI recently told me they would not be taking cash lodgements for payment into my LL's BOI account.

they asked my to set up a direct debit instead.

i'll let you know what the consumer people say about it, (the ombudsman said try them first) but to me, it's fuking outrageous.

That's terrible advice! If you're setting up a regular payment for a fixed amount to a landlord you should use a standing order, not a direct debit.

seamus

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Speaking of Cashless, Senator suggests social welfare debit card only usable only in Ireland to prevent fraud.

A good idea in theory but in practice big brother will be watching you every time you go to the supermarket, worse still you could be blocked from buying fags or booze, you won't even be able to shop over the border. :eek:

Living with this would probably give you more an incentive to get a job.

http://www.joecarey.ie/2012/02/social-welfare-%E2%80%98debit-card%E2%80%99-could-help-to-cut-down-on-fraud-%E2%80%93-noone/

That was my idea, he stole it.

I see no reason why people availing of unemployment benefit should be using that money to buy fags or booze. It's a stopgap payment, to help you look after the essentials while you're searching for work. Fags and booze aren't essentials.

ilovelamp2000

Seachmall wrote: »

Surely legal tender is legal tender?

If they refuse to accept cash have they not just refused his payment, i.e. can he now not pay this month as he made a valid attempt to do so and they wouldn't accept?

Can banks force you to make your payment in copper coins too?

Has anyone made the point that because this man is the in the foreclosure process the bank accepting any payment from him during it means the process stops and if they do want to repossess the house they have to begin it again ?

I'd be willing to bet that's the reason payment was refused.

But I much the prefer the batsh1t conspiracy theories peddled here

Run_to_da_hills

NakedNNettles wrote: »

In fairness I wouldn't really be against this, it would keep that percentage of cash circulating within our own economy which can't be a bad thing....with all the deposits leaving the country in the last few years.

Social welfare is there as a means to support and help people who are out of work, get them back on their feet or into education, I don't see how the state giving cash to people who then buy booze and cigerettes is supporting someone.

Not a new idea, these cards have been in circulation in the United States for some time now and are known as Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT). The UK and other social welfare states are also is also considering them however the raise some privacy issues.

My own concern is that similar cards could spread to pensioners, students on grants, civil servants and eventually the rest of the population. (That's if people aren't foolish enough to rush out and purchase NFC phones).

http://www.vrl-financial-news.com/cards--payments/cards-international/issues/ci-2011/ci-459-460/the-beginning-of-big-brother.aspx

patwicklow

galwayrush wrote: »

An Irish bank told me that they would be bouncing a cheque on me because i didn't have sufficent funds in my account to cover it. The cheque was for 2100, and i was lodging 3000 in cash at the time. They said the cash had to be in my account before the cheque was presented so thus, it would not cover the cheque. and that only a bank transfer would work at this stage. as had already lodged the cash at this stage so i had to withdraw it, get my wife to lodge it into her account and then transfer it to my account. Hey presto, cheque was cleared..
Banks are useless assholes.

That really is disgraceful the way you were treated with that cheque but that is the way it has gone with banks there still the boss even after putting this country in a big black hole for many years to come they have cost us the tax payer billions yet they still lord over us.

ArtSmart

pickarooney wrote: »

That's terrible advice! If you're setting up a regular payment for a fixed amount to a landlord you should use a standing order, not a direct debit.

Argghhhh!!!

is my rant in vain? is it really acceptable for a bank to say, we dont want your filthy lucre over the counter, we want you to set up an online payment system???

standing order of sitting order aint the point.

patwicklow

ArtSmart wrote: »

Argghhhh!!!

is my rant in vain? is it really acceptable for a bank to say, we dont want your filthy lucre over the counter, we want you to set up an online payment system???

standing order of sitting order aint the point.

if i were you i would close your account and set up one were a bank does take cash

ArtSmart

patwicklow wrote: »

if i were you i would close your account and set up one were a bank does take cash

sigh. dont no one read prev posts no more.

i'm paying into the LL bank, which is BOI.

anyway, watch this space (-d out dude)

patwicklow

ArtSmart wrote: »

sigh. dont no one read prev posts no more.

i'm paying into the LL bank, which is BOI.

anyway, watch this space (-d out dude)

Well banks just make it tough