Bank makes error in your favor.

Not in real fuppin life they don’t… !!

Full Story

My real point in posting this, is to ask the question:

Why do these ‘errors’ always favor the banks ?

When do you last remember a story where banks undercharged thousands of customers ?

Surely in a balanced risk environment, with two parties, the errors should fall evenly ?

But no, its always the customers who end up getting shafted.

I’m not specifically saying that the banks are deliberately over-charging. But it seems obvious that whatever controls they have in place, are designed to protect the banks, & not their customers.

Well of course it’s not a balanced risk environment. It’s much easier to detect a double transaction than it is to detect one that’s missing completely.

The people working on the system are invariably going to err on the side of “caution” which is of course overcharging rather than undercharging.

Donning tin foil hat.

Now, it would not suprise me in the slightest if BOI needed a " Short Term Loan" on 0 interest form its customers yesterday afternoon.

This is the second time in as many months that this has happened. :nin

How about this one?
breakingnews.ie/archives/200 … hcwkfidmh/

also, you generally make more withdrawals from banks than deposits, so more chance of error.

A mate of mine once had a extra grand or so thrown into his PP account, they never copped it.

Guys, let’s not get too worried over the numbers, they’re only lots of zeros after all.
The time to worry is when they start screwing up their spellings - I mean, if they don’t take care it could easily become the Bane of Ireland! :open_mouth:

One hyphen can take care of all headlines for years to come:

Ire-land.

I have a client who got 45k by accident. Told bank. They fixed it and then did it again. Told bank again. Thanked profusely. Corrected it again and then promptly redid it. He gave up at that stage.

Did they realise their mistake?

Tell your friend to send them a solicitors letter saying that they have caused him huge personal torment, demand that they return the money one more time, and then demand 45k to be paid directly into his bank account in compensation. Then wait and hope :nin .

I knew folks would be able to point out point examples where banks had actually made mistakes that briefly went in the customers favor.

But.

We aren’t talking about point examples.

We’re talking about; repeated, sustained, & systematic, over-charging of customers to their long-term detriment.

Can you imagine AIB undercharging on FEx transactions over months ?, or BoI neglecting to charge anyone for ATM transactions ?

Like feck !

So how can the regulator & the CB tolerate a bank that isn’t protecting their customers rights with the same diligence as its protecting its own arses. This is a rhetorical question obviously :slight_smile: ]

The answer of course is simple. If you make a mistake, the fine from the regulator will equal 100% of the overcharge. I’ll bet these incidents would cease immediately.

Screw that!

These people are obviously morons.

Send them a solicitors letter stating that the original transfer was legitimate and the actual error was a missing zero at the end.

Full and fair reimbursement and 10% “pain and suffering” compensation!

It was human error. It was supposed to be a transfer between accounts, but one account was credited with the money without it leaving the other. Explained to them carefully and they still fucked it up.

I kept it as a provision in his accounts for three years and then took it to profit.

Lucky bastard. A few years ago the revenue refunded him about 80k he wasnt due. Again, transfers between tax heads make the error essentially untraceable. There was a revenue audit, unrelated subsequently, but of course, they dont examine their work :laughing:

That’s one of the more famous ones, but how many of you actually know what happened?
The RTE coverage of that story was so misleading and poor as to make it virtually impossible
to understand the nature of the overcharging.

For example, how many people realise that the “Overcharged” cost of FX from AIB at that time was still
cheaper than the “Legitimate” cost of FX from Bank Of Ireland.

-Rd

Weren’t AIB busted of just this 10 years ago, pilfering out of student accounts and skimming off currency transactions?

I can tell you categorically that this isn’t true.

I’ve developed software in two Irish Banks and again and again we were warned that if there is a bug in
the software, it’s better it be in the customers favour than not. (obviously no bugs in the software was
what we were shooting for).

The Spectre of Joe Duffy (actually It was Marian Finnucane in my day) does loom larger than you might think.

These sorts of issues such as the Laser transactions at BofI are a real headache. People are dragged off whatever
they’re working on. Enormous effort to fix the issue, enormous cost.

Whatever you may think, it simply isn’t worth it for a bank to do something like this deliberately.
For one thing, I doubt you’d be able to get IT, and the various layers of testers to do it.

-Rd

Thanks for dropping by & providing some information from experience.

I work in software development, so I understand that providing bulletproof software isn’t possible, & I agree that it isn’t in the banks best interest to have these kinds of events.

I’m don’t think there’s a conspiracy, but I do believe that the procedures; both human & automated, to prevent these kinds of errors are skewed towards the banks.

When a bank is going to change a rate, do they run the change in an offline environment to verify that it behaves as expected ?

Do they have a model of their real network that allows them to test changes before they are actually made in the real network ?