Starling Discussion & Feedback


It doesn’t give you much info in the Starling app, but it does let you launch the onedox app directly!

(Michael) #933

Now that is a good question, but I think on balance I would prefer more customers as there are not many suggestions (certainly not from me) that Monzo do not have the expertise to match in the cases they want to


Interesting move by Starling. No surprise that bill switching is big part of Monzo’s market place value prop. Do you think Monzo will integrate with the likes of Onedox to provide this, or will they build they own bill switching capability?

(Rowan Blackwood) #935

I’m happy to say that after a year of starling as my main account, I have switched to Monzo. I like starling, but saying I’d be banned for a year from starling if I switched was ultimately what made me leave. I’m not a fan of being held to ransom by my bank.


Not exactly held to ransom, you left

(Jolin) #937

Good news is that Monzo have built their contact access with privacy in mind, so your data isn’t exposed (even to Monzo). :tada:

I’m not sure why you keep complaining about the contacts access, and not acknowledging it’s done in a way that is secure and doesn’t expose the person’s data? It’s not like this hasn’t come up before when you’ve raised the issue (click the :arrow_down_small: to see the full quote). :wink:

(Tom) #938

I’m personally less keen on it because it shouldn’t be a requirement to enable contact access for something like, which is just a web link.

I also don’t want/need all my random contacts showing up in Monzo, mostly its stuff like ‘Dave the Electrician’ or ‘that guy I worked with for 3 days a year ago’.


It’s not true that it doesn’t expose some data about you.

It tells people with your number and an account that you have a Monzo account and lets you find out if any of your contacts (or in fact anyone whose phone number you have obtained) has an account.

That’s not terrible, but the fact it’s really unnecessary makes it problematic.

Previous discussions have not convinced me in particular that full contacts access is necessary.

(Dan Mullen) #940

This is the most bizarre piece of logic :joy:


Not necessarily. It’s a screw you. If you leave your banned for a year from opening an account? Well i’m going to leave and not come back as there are other options out there anyway.

(Dan Mullen) #942

If there’s a reason for leaving then fine. But it says that was what ultimately made him leave. It’s like Inception :rofl:

Seriously, you can use any bank you like, you can leave accounts dormant, you can switch… plenty of options. A policy of having a 12-month waiting period before you can open an account after closing one seems sensible. Why would anyone want to close, open, close, open, etc. accounts with the same bank? It costs nothing to leave it dormant. If you don’t want to leave it dormant and definitely want it closed, then what harm does it do you to have the 12-month policy in place? Odd :thinking:


It’s a policy they make you aware of. They don’t stop you. I don’t get why anyone would get upset


I don’t think anyone is upset. Sounds more like a principle thing.


What principle?


You would have to ask them, that is usually fairly personal.


It certainly doesn’t endear Starling to me. Sounds like punishment and 'you must do things our way".

That’s just my personal take - others will react differently. We don’t all have to agree on this.


I think N26 has a ten year hold on reopening an account. Which would make Starling seem pretty reasonable in comparison. But still harsh compared to anyone that doesn’t.


Do you think the same when you cancel a credit card and they say 6-12 months before you can get another with the same company?

( related to Monzo CEO, Investor in Monzo ) #950

I agree, thems their rules , it would seem sensible with people who continually close and open accounts with every new feature pushed through - it has an expense for the issuer , Starling have decided that if you close your account , they won’t reopen it for a year. as Dan said there is no expense to let it lie dormant


I think the same when companies are focused on punishing their customers for no real reason. I understand the credit card situation more if it’s about an introductory rate - but here there’s no sense to it. It’s Starling cutting their nose off, as the cliche goes.

Ultimately it’s each bank’s policy. We vote with our feet. If we don’t like it, we don’t bank there. I have a Starling account, so it’s obviously not a deal-breaker, but this policy doesn’t endear them to me.

I think that’s a view that I’m entitled to hold - and which others are entitled to feel differently about. But I can’t see myself changing my view on it. :man_shrugging: