Making our company goals public: Q4 2018

It is a shame Pots were designed to be person–owned, rather than account– (including joint persons–)owned.

They were introduced last November, by which time there had been at least three months interesting discussion (first 130 or so posts on this thread) around the legalities of joint accounts and the ownership of funds therein.

I and others argued that ownership of funds is key to any joint banking relationship, and others, including the bank, argued that Monzo was going to do joint accounts “the Monzo way” (ie. completely new! Called Pots!) before subsequently introducing a traditional joint product.

It seemed to me at the time, and even now, that Monzo’s care over the traditional legalities with joint accounts was lacking a little, in the rush to invent something new and get Pots out, and this rowing back to a traditional model has left joint Pots somewhat difficult to reengineer.

(This wouldn’t be the only time Monzo’s legal team has been caught on the back foot, as the overdraft charges/total account balance debacle demonstrated.)