Because arranging for manufacturing and distrubution via a metal card producer would be costly and slow, blocking a feature many people have asked for and say is essential on a one a handful of people have said would be a ‘nice to have’?
Again its an assumption that it will be slow, its just a suggestion.
If post office is a better all round and possibly cheaper solution (going by other banks models) then surely they could use the paypoint way as a stopgap until the other solution is possible?
I understand monzo have made their choice on this, im just adding in an idea to the rest of the community to gauge interest.
At the point cash is being put in a bank it’s already been laundered
Exactly This is one reason why it is so hard to spot patterns that related to cash based criminal activity, the source is less known.
Less known your judged a criminal cause it’s not a pay check or benefit payment and cash is like suspect even if the source is legal.
I get money off my mum and that’s legal but banks etc say cash is suspect and not legal and your just causing issues for the poor in society
Try explain to the jobcentre that the cash you get is not new income etc etc and try say to the banks your not a fraudster it’s non starter they always have upper hand and you get no say
There’s no law to say you can’t hold an account in Ireland for example but the government will think that is tax evasion when it’s not cause you earn your money in the UK it is legal
Do you think every person who deal in cash is a criminal stealing it or getting it from drugs or laundering it there’s plenty older people who think technology is ok for dealing with your account but deal with cash on a regular basis my mum always goes to the cash machine every Thursday gets money out and uses it a lot and pays coins in to the bank she will never change her way. I’ve seen myself forced to do cash at times and I have to pay cash in too a lot but try pay by card where possible
No But there is greater risk exposure with accepting larger amounts of cash deposits that there is now when they do not. I can understand why they would want to initially keep these deposit thresholds low, if it is indeed until they build up their internal systems. So for now the product would be useful to more people than the day before it was released, and in the future, if deposit limits are increased/ an additional method is release, it becomes more useful again for even more people
I don’t know how Starling have built their implementation or what agreement they have with the Post Office but when we were looking into this it was going to be necessary to get a new chip profile before we could do this If Starling have managed to work out with the Post Office a way to do this without replacing a load of plastic that’s awesome!
With regards to the £1 fee; I’m not a big fan of it either. Not because it’s a huge sum of money but because we set out to make our product clean and simple and adding in fees and charges feels very much against the way we want to go.
However, it does cost us money to provide this service (after all, handling cash is expensive) and those who have been on the forum may remember the ATM fee debates… It was said that we shouldn’t have been nice and launched something assuming people weren’t going to take advantage of it in a way that became unsustainable (which is totally fair). So, instead we’re making sure to cover the costs from the very beginning this time round so that we can analyse how people use the account and make changes to hopefully bring down or remove the charge in time.
It seems like you can’t win either way though!
As has been pointed out nothing is actually free and it has to be paid for somehow. There is loads of exciting stuff we want to build but we can’t do that if we aren’t here to build it so we need to be careful with the pennies, as every business does. That doesn’t mean we should sacrifice customer experience and we need to make sure that we do our best to tread that line carefully
Go the way Sweden is ban cash from most places then it has to be electronic but then the downside to that is excludes people from spending money in many places it’s more to go cashless and prove where funds come from. I know limits shouldn’t be too low and discriminate straight a way but to see a limit of say £1000 cash every 30 days would work cause I save in building society and one time I got £750 back in one go and had it all in cash I paid it straight in to the bank but that’s not criminal money as it was saved up over a long period of time
I always say don’t restrict current accounts to certain in society though I see Barclays block me from the bank accounts cause they think I’m fraud risk where they get that from I don’t know so black mark cause I’m just savvy in how I do things but that alarms banks they don’t want to see people changing
You have a right to a basic current account so you can pay your income in to and to pay your bills but to see banks block some in society altogether means people will be forced to pay extra to do things and they could loose out on certain things in life cause you need bank account to gain certain things like phone line at home and a house to live in
Wow is this still going on!
Some people are like a broken record. Say your bit and move on because flooding the topic repeating and trying to push your opinion onto others is only going to wash out other peoples views - good and bad. Let’s make it clear to Monzo whether we support this or not by keeping the topic nice and clean
I beilive an update script can be pushed to cards during a chip and pin transaction.
Maybe they did this a few months ago and now they are ready to activate?
I get the fee, it’s fine by me.
I just don’t get the limit. Sure, money laundering, but Monzo competition is doing cash deposits with NO limits.
It’s the shame that the minority has to spoil a good feature for the majority who want cash deposits.
I never pay in cash and don’t see why I should subsidise those who want to pay it in. £1 does not seem a lot, and if it puts off people joining who would cause a net loss to Monzo if free then there isn’t a problem.
I respect your views on this and can see why you think youd be subsidisig others.
Mine are quite different, i dont want monzo to be elitest and put those from lower incomes off from joining with silly fees.
Interesting, but you’d think monzo would know about that then,
Although they mentioned a new profile rather than an updated one,
£300 limit?! What for?
Yeah it seems just updating it wouldn’t work from what’s been said above.
It’s a limit pay point put in place. You are welcome to make multiple transactions though.
Hmm… but not more that £1000 per 180days?
I do think this has been approached from the wrong angle. Surely it costs all banks money to provide this service, either with the Post Office or through a branch network. That in itself doesn’t justify charging for deposits and I’m sure their costs are significantly higher, particularly if operating a branch network.
Perhaps other banks are cross-subsidising products, however I’m reminded of an interview with Anne Boden (here) who stated that fundamentally current accounts are profitable and not loss leaders as widely believed.
Looking at cash deposits in particular, they’re likely used by a minority of Monzo customers due to the nature of Monzo being a digital bank. Thus, it may seem logical to charge those customers so that others aren’t subsidising the service, however at some point you have to settle on a ‘core’ service. I’d personally say that cash deposits are a ‘core’ service of banks right now, but Monzo clearly disagrees.
If people are opposed to any cross-subsidy at all, then surely all ATM transactions should be charged. For example: I don’t use ATM’s at all and they cost Monzo money, so why is there any free allowance? You have to draw the line somewhere.