General Random Conversation..

[Monkeys Fist 42066]

11 minutes ago, Alex said:

I honestly think I’d have given that back. 

Aye, when I read that story the other day, my first thought was also  “ what kind of cunt doesn’t give it back?”

People are cunts. 

[Rayvin 5183]

I would have too. Fucking hell, how is it possible that you can't simply get the police involved to retrieve the money.

 

[TheGingerQuiff 2412]

41 minutes ago, Alex said:

I honestly think I’d have given that back. 

 

What if you knew beforehand that it was j69s inheritance? 

[Alex 34846]

1 minute ago, TheGingerQuiff said:

 

What if you knew beforehand that it was j69s inheritance? 

 Even then

[Renton 21311]

Bizarre. I read a case about a lass who found a 20 pound note on a shop floor and pocketed it. Someone had dropped it. Long story short, the customer who dropped it came back and enquired, the CCTV showed she'd taken the money, she was prosecuted for theft, and now has a criminal record which has fucked her employment. All for not handing in a 20 quid note. And this fucker gets away with pocketing nearly 200 grand?!

[Andrew 4718]

11 hours ago, Monkeys Fist said:

Volcano on a privately owned island has gone BOOM, as volcanos will tend to do. 
People were pictured inside the crater moments before it went up. 

It last erupted in 2016, and the NZ Volcano boffins had warned it was likely to go…

New Zealand volcano: At least five dead with number expected to rise https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-50708727

 

@Andrew can you let us know if you’re dead, mate?

 

I'm ok, sorry to worry you pal.

[Alex 34846]

They didn’t steal anything. They were given something in error and didn’t return it. Morally abhorrent but perfectly legal. The law is an ass

[Renton 21311]

11 minutes ago, Alex said:

They didn’t steal anything. They were given something in error and didn’t return it. Morally abhorrent but perfectly legal. The law is an ass

 

They didn't. But if you find cash, and pocket it without reasonably trying to find the rightful owner or handing it in, that is theft. It seems to me to be perverse that you can pocket a tenner and get prosecuted for theft, but if someone deposits thousands in your bank account in error, then that's not theft.

 

Here's the story.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-39119990

 

I researched this because I went to a cash point and the previous person, who had gone, had left 100 quid in the machine. I thought about the ethics, but sharp handed it in to the shop the cash point was joined to after reading this! Bet the staff in the coop had a good night out as a consequence!

 

[Monkeys Fist 42066]

25 minutes ago, Andrew said:

 

I'm ok, sorry to worry you pal.

Sound. 
Don’t go visiting any exploding volcanos, though. 

[Renton 21311]

15 hours ago, Kid Dynamite said:

https://amp.theguardian.com/money/2019/dec/07/i-lost-my-193000-inheritance-with-one-wrong-digit-on-my-sort-code?__twitter_impression=true

 

The banks are so crooked. My 85 year old Gran was convinced to transfer £10k by scammers last year. She did it in person at the bank, failed her security questions because she was so flustered, but the bank completed the payment anyway. After months of arguing with the bank she got about £3k back 

 

Okay, by sheer chance I've just discovered this has happened to me. I'm getting building work done, so wiring money out left right and centre. One of my contractors has complained he hasn't been paid. I've checked and money was sent out to the right name, but somebody elses bank details (my mistake). The person the money went to hasn't mentioned it. Fortunately I still owe this individual about the same amount so I'm just going to deduct his little windfall from that. I'm disappointed by his dishonesty.

 

But goes to show the banks can't be arsed to cross reference names with account details. All this shit about bank security, 16 character passwords, etc, and they can't even be bothered to check a fucking name. Mine was for £400, but as that case demonstrates, and J69s, it could be for much more. Beyond a joke. 

[wykikitoon 19893]

How many transactions must go through on second?  

 

However, they should be more robust than that.  If you put a reference in and a name it should be able to look at that and the account number and flag it up surly.

[Renton 21311]

The names were completely different. It's not exactly advanced AI to have an algorithm match the name with the account. We do much more complex data computing here with hardly any resources. 

[wykikitoon 19893]

 

[The Fish 10744]

11 hours ago, Renton said:

 

Okay, by sheer chance I've just discovered this has happened to me. I'm getting building work done, so wiring money out left right and centre. One of my contractors has complained he hasn't been paid. I've checked and money was sent out to the right name, but somebody elses bank details (my mistake). The person the money went to hasn't mentioned it. Fortunately I still owe this individual about the same amount so I'm just going to deduct his little windfall from that. I'm disappointed by his dishonesty.

 

But goes to show the banks can't be arsed to cross reference names with account details. All this shit about bank security, 16 character passwords, etc, and they can't even be bothered to check a fucking name. Mine was for £400, but as that case demonstrates, and J69s, it could be for much more. Beyond a joke. 

Hang on, if you owe this guy roughly that amount, is he dishonest by not complaining that you've paid him roughly what you owe him?  

[Renton 21311]

37 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Hang on, if you owe this guy roughly that amount, is he dishonest by not complaining that you've paid him roughly what you owe him?  

 

Yes, because it came to him several weeks ago before he would be expecting any pay, and he's invoiced me for the whole amount since. 

 

Youre going to love this Fish, he's a local double glazer and has also done a bit of a shit job. Ive had to pay a grand on remedial plastering as well. What was it you said? Something about paying twice? 

Edited December 10, 2019 by Renton

[Isegrim 9733]

3 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

Yes, because it came to him several weeks ago before he would be expecting any pay, and he's invoiced me for the whole amount since (after trying to overcharge me by a grand). 

 

Youre going to love this Fish, he's a local double glazer and has also done a shit job. Ive had to pay a grand on remedial plastering as well. What was it you said? Something about paying twice? 

Does he have as bad a hand writing as Kieron Dyer?

[Renton 21311]

1 minute ago, Isegrim said:

Does he have as bad a hand writing as Kieron Dyer?

 

I'm still looking for that programme. 

[The Fish 10744]

56 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

Yes, because it came to him several weeks ago before he would be expecting any pay, and he's invoiced me for the whole amount since. 

 

Youre going to love this Fish, he's a local double glazer and has also done a bit of a shit job. Ive had to pay a grand on remedial plastering as well. What was it you said? Something about paying twice? 

We're going to need to get the windows at the back done as they're not double glazing. The Mrs said she'd phoned round a few big companies and someone would pop round to give us a no obligation quote.

Safe to say I told her she's out of her goddamn mind. We'll use a local firm for local people.

[Monkeys Fist 42066]

Mrs Fish “ Hello, Big Vern’s Glazing? Can you send someone to sort out my back end?”

 

[Andrew 4718]

14 hours ago, Renton said:

 

Okay, by sheer chance I've just discovered this has happened to me. I'm getting building work done, so wiring money out left right and centre. One of my contractors has complained he hasn't been paid. I've checked and money was sent out to the right name, but somebody elses bank details (my mistake). The person the money went to hasn't mentioned it. Fortunately I still owe this individual about the same amount so I'm just going to deduct his little windfall from that. I'm disappointed by his dishonesty.

 

But goes to show the banks can't be arsed to cross reference names with account details. All this shit about bank security, 16 character passwords, etc, and they can't even be bothered to check a fucking name. Mine was for £400, but as that case demonstrates, and J69s, it could be for much more. Beyond a joke. 

 

To be 100% absolutely fair, as someone who writes  that kind of backend stuff in the financial industry for a living

 

That mistake is entirely your fault.  

[Renton 21311]

13 minutes ago, Andrew said:

 

To be 100% absolutely fair, as someone who writes  that kind of backend stuff in the financial industry for a living

 

That mistake is entirely your fault.  

 

It is. In the same way as dropping my wallet would be my fault. I do find it exceptionally odd though that there isn't some built in security for when people make human mistakes. I mean that case with the inheritance being wired to the wrong account was technically his fault, but the bank should have still stopped it. Surely matching names to accounts isn't too difficult?

 

It makes you wonder what the fuck money really is anyway. A few photons in a fibre optic cable, electrons in a chip, 0s and 1s. None of it is real is it?

 

 

 

[Andrew 4718]

7 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

It is. In the same way as dropping my wallet would be my fault. I do find it exceptionally odd though that there isn't some built in security for when people make human mistakes. I mean that case with the inheritance being wired to the wrong account was technically his fault, but the bank should have still stopped it. Surely matching names to accounts isn't too difficult?

 

It makes you wonder what the fuck money really is anyway. A few photons in a fibre optic cable, electrons in a chip, 0s and 1s. None of it is real is it?

 

 

 

 

The problem with names and free format fields as fields to be validated against is that people are stupid.

 

They get other peoples names wrong, the get their own names wrong, they assume they know how to spell common names which they don't, they give their own names as the name on the account when it is the companies (or the other way round).

 

That name based validation will be a total pain in the arse for companies to implement if they don't already have it.

 

There has to be, eventually, individual responsibility on the customer to make sure they move their own money correctly. While what happened to that guy is unfortunate and absolutely full of system related cock-ups the companies I work for would not countenance the guy literally gave the wrong bank details to his solicitor, that that wasn't triple checked when they exchanged those details is their fault.

 

Its poor from Barclays but when you're talking about dealing with £200k and you do that without checking you're giving the absolute right numbers (a 6 digit and an 8 digit, its not rocket science) you're an idiot and that is not the banks fault.

[PaddockLad 17079]

Strange what goes through your head at this time of night....just checked, Happy Face hasn’t sent a tweet since 6th August...

 

Does anyone know him outside of the internet?...

 

 

[Gemmill 44398]

Take a look at Chris Holt (@bigchrisholt): https://twitter.com/bigchrisholt?s=09

 

That's his twitter. It's private but the links to his Ashley Lies blogs in his profile show posts as recently as November, so I think all is well. 

[Renton 21311]

7 hours ago, Andrew said:

 

The problem with names and free format fields as fields to be validated against is that people are stupid.

 

They get other peoples names wrong, the get their own names wrong, they assume they know how to spell common names which they don't, they give their own names as the name on the account when it is the companies (or the other way round).

 

That name based validation will be a total pain in the arse for companies to implement if they don't already have it.

 

There has to be, eventually, individual responsibility on the customer to make sure they move their own money correctly. While what happened to that guy is unfortunate and absolutely full of system related cock-ups the companies I work for would not countenance the guy literally gave the wrong bank details to his solicitor, that that wasn't triple checked when they exchanged those details is their fault.

 

Its poor from Barclays but when you're talking about dealing with £200k and you do that without checking you're giving the absolute right numbers (a 6 digit and an 8 digit, its not rocket science) you're an idiot and that is not the banks fault.

 

This is pure bull shit imo. It should be a piece of piss to introduce fuzzy logic protocols to make sure names and account details approximately match, it wouldn't have to be exact. Any oddities could be followed up manually. It just smacks of the banks absolving themselves of responsibility, replacing paid staff and putting all the consequent  risk on their customers.