Move money out of pots automatically!

I’d (genuinely) love to debate it but this is the sort of discussion that doesn’t work in text because tone of voice conveys a lot. Written, it normally comes across as a lot less friendly than intended.

Suffice it to say I disagree but it really doesn’t matter either way because our opinions are rooted in our own assumptions about the way it’s supposed to work and only Monzo have access to that information. :smile:

1 Like

Pot withdrawals are 3am

When the committed spending pots come in they’ll be for the use you describe but pot withdrawals aren’t that


I mean, duck out of you like, but I really don’t see the ambiguity or what assumptions you’re referring to? The announcement states that it’s not just for shunting around arbitrary amounts on a schedule, but also for moving money in to fund bills. They forgot to check scheduled payments out. Simples!

1 Like

My pot withdrawal occurred at 3.30am, and my scheduled payments ~15 mins before, which lead to the problem.

I disagree. The announcement explicitly said that an expected use-case is to fund bills. They just forgot that scheduled payments are a type of bill - think: rent, it’s (basically) always a bank transfer. It’s a pretty easy fix, and I am sure that Monzo will be on it soon enough.

No, you don’t and that’s why this is such a bad medium for this sort of discussion. An essay would end up being required.

Still, we can agree it will probably be sorted out on the next iteration.

1 Like

Woah what? The money comes out of pots after the direct debit time? Really? What a massive oversight. There’s a reason salaries go in at 1am and direct debits go out at 2; it’s so that payments going out on the same day you get paid don’t fail. Since the use case for this feature is generally to set money aside for bills and bring it back in automatically to pay them, these movements out of pots should be at 1am. Movements in to pots should be later though as those should be processed after direct debits and standing orders.

As for terminology, if the feature is intended to set money aside for bills, and the time they’re running means that bill paying fails, I’d absolutely call it a bug. If the feature is intended for other things as well as bill paying, then it’s an oversight. A big one, but just an oversight and not a bug.

1 Like

No, I think they said it comes out before Direct Debits. Scheduled transfers are the issue if I understood correctly.

Hmm, if that’s the DD time, its clearly after them too.

Well scheduled transfers also seem to happen at 3am (mine went out this morning at 3:24, previous ones went out at 3:07), so yeah it still counts and either way still an hour after direct debits. I’m alright because I have an overdraft but yeah it’s still bad.

Edit: ah i see you edited your post. Carry on :sweat_smile:

As Mike says it’s not direct debits, just scheduled transfers. What might be happening is that scheduled transfers and pot withdrawals are just dumped into a queue at the same time - 3am - so it’s a bit random whether you’ll get affected. Either way, definitely happened to me this morning!

Direct debits are totally affected though as they come out at 2am, before pot transfers and other scheduled transfers (standing orders).

Oh, good point. Yeah so it’s definitely a nasty bug then!

Now you’re just trying to provoke me :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

1 Like

I bet you’re doubly keen not to author that essay and share it with us now :wink:.

At the risk of getting caught up in @Feathers’ essay, I think that the intended behaviour is probably correct - as in it’s doing what the engineer designed it to do.

Now, it seems the design was a bit wrong, but it’s not a bug - just a (dodgy) design feature.

None of this means that it meets users’ needs though, so is absolutely a candidate to get changed…

(Puts on hard hat :construction_worker_man:)


I counter, from the announcement that this topic is about:

If DDs go at 2am, and pot withdrawals at 3, then that would appear to not be the case.

We’re (violently? passionately?) agreeing, I think!

A bug is when code is misbehaving. This is just a design issue. But it should be fixed.

Anyway, it’s probably unhelpful to debate what’s ultimately points of terminology. Let’s just agree that it’s something that folk want to get changed soon!

:construction_worker_woman: :construction_worker_man:

1 Like

A design flaw is where a feature is awkward, opaque, or misleading, but it still performs its advertised function. Whereas a bug is where a feature is broken and does not perform its advertised function. Here the advertised function is: “schedule the money back into your account so it’s there when the Direct Debit’s taken”. That feature does not work. It is a bug. This is not semantics. It is very, very obviously so.

I’m not sure how winning this argument will help fix the bug problem for you any sooner, so I will (hopefully graciously) retire, just in case it does :slight_smile:

I just find it quite odd - report a pretty serious bug where payments fail, get told that it’s not a bug!

I agree, if you define a bug that way then you’re perfectly correct. Unfortunately, that’s not a definition of ‘bug’ that I (or perhaps we) recognise.

It really is just a problem of linguistic semantics but as I write requirements for part of my living, linguistic semantics can be really, really important (and can be fun in a twisted sort of a way).

At least we all agree it needs correcting.

1 Like