22seven versus SA banks

jes

jes

MyBroadband Alumnus
Joined
Nov 11, 2009
Messages
11,992
Reaction score
123
22seven vs SA banks

Absa and FNB have come out guns blazing after the launch of 22seven, making one wonder if its really just your banking security they’re worried about
 
Because the bank would rather you use their service. Banks love money.
 
I doubt I would ever transact with 22seven. Not interested. Happy with my status quo with FNB.
 
I like the idea of 22seven, I'm a bit so-so about the way its presented..

But its very telling for me that banks that allow read-only profiles are not informing their clients HOW to use such functionality if they wish to use a service such as 22seven...

I'm also disappointed that Nedbank haven't even made a peep about it yet...
 
Why the hate for the banks?
They want to cover their own asses, and they have every right to do that.
And ofcourse they want your business/money, but this argument is flawed because 22seven isn't replacing the bank in anyway, just giving you a new way to manage your money.
 
I wonder how this is different from mint.com? Banks really don't want you to see how much you are paying in fees. And like someone else said, it's their business to keep you in debt and financially enslaved.
 
Banks spend a ridiculous amount of money reimbursing people for fraud. Anything that raises the risk of there being more fraud is not going to be supported by the banks.
 
roguemat said:
They want to cover their own asses, and they have every right to do that.
Click to expand...

Absolutely! I would never shoulder the liability for a user dumb enough to give out their credentials.

Unless those credentials were read-only credentials, of course. If my bank lets me configure a view-only profile (presumably for the purposes of sending the login info of that profile to someone like an auditor/accountant so they can access my financial data) and that profile is used to defraud me, who's fault is it?

This is assuming:

(a) The PIN and password for the secondary profile are different from the primary one; and
(b) The secondary profile is correctly configured.
 
Have anyone used MoneySmart, same concept tha 22seven.

There is a bit of manual input need, since you just upload you CSV statement and no passwords and login credentials are entered anywhere. MUCH safer IMHO.

I feel a bit like a troll now...
 
Yup i use YNAB, (you need a budget). U pay once off for the software, no monthly fees and once everything is setup u just export your statement via CSV, dump it into the software and then do your recon which only sometimes requires u to categorise something new.

Safe, simple, cheap, easy :)
 
Why the hell does anybody need a tool to tell them they spending too much money?

I wouldn't give my credentials to anybody, not even someone from my bank.
 
I agree YNAB is awesome.

I have it on my Windows, Mac and iPhone, all syncing with dropbox. Its the best.

Jladan said:
Yup i use YNAB, (you need a budget). U pay once off for the software, no monthly fees and once everything is setup u just export your statement via CSV, dump it into the software and then do your recon which only sometimes requires u to categorise something new.

Safe, simple, cheap, easy :)
Click to expand...
 
Why the antagonism?
Considering that banks such as FNB let you create a separate profile that is unable to transact on your account, it is interesting that the message they’re blasting out only emphasises that customers shoulder the liability of fraud.

Why aren’t they also telling customers how to use services such as 22seven safely should they want to?
Click to expand...

Why exactly are the banks responsible for an outside requirement? Did 22seven engage with them before they rolled out? Does 22seven provide alternatives to getting the data into the system? Hell - does 22seven make it clear you are breaking the terms and conditions of your online banking when you sign up?

This just irritates the hell out of me - every time there is a breach at the banks, the banks gets it. Phishing is blamed on the banks and they have to deal with - even if it is the equivalent of letting some illiterate person talk you into giving him all your cash. Now some outside company tells you to give them all your details, and a day later the banks caution you and everybody is on their case. Did the banks have the opportunity to audit any 22seven? If not, why on this green earth would they ever open the doors for them? Overnight?

And frankly - this "read-only" accounts issue is not an argument. Bank details are sensitive even if you don't transact - and there are certain types of fraud that can be committed by just getting an idea of what is going on in your bank details, how much money you earn, where you have accounts, when your debit orders goes off and what ATMs you are using.

The only, only argument anybody can make is that banks does not provide EASY access to account data. The fact is they do provide you with the option to download your files, so this is only an ease of use argument.
 
The banks put a massive amount of effort into "teaching" people NOT to put their IB credentials into any other sites, making this "one exception" would compromise all of that.

I agree completely with their sentiments.
 
MS has halted all development on MS Money.
Click to expand...
That's exactly why it's free :) And I had no problem either installing it or setting it up; but it's a question of 'horses for courses', in other words every person is free to use what suits him best.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X