DOCSLIB.ORG

Project Carlton – Initial Research for Public Circulation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Project Carlton – Initial Research for Public Circulation 07939 132341 [email protected] www.lyddonconsulting.com 28th January 2019 PROJECT CARLTON – INITIAL RESEARCH FOR PUBLIC CIRCULATION Version 7 – Sponsor approved version of 12th August 2018 A BALANCE SHEET OF THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE PAYMENT SYSTEMS REGULATOR AND THE PAYMENT STRATEGY FORUM 2014-2018… …AND OF THEIR ASSISTANTS IN THEIR ENTERPRISE TO REFORM PAYMENTS IN THE UK: HMTREASURY, THE BANK OF ENGLAND, PAYMENT SYSTEM OPERATORS DELIVERY GROUP, OPEN BANKING IMPLEMENTATION ENTITY, NEW PAYMENT SYSTEM OPERATOR/PAY.UK, AND PAYMENTS UK/UK FINANCE NO ASSETS OF VALUE CREATED © Lyddon Consulting A PRIVATE COMPANY LIMITED BY SHARES & REGISTERED IN ENGLAND & WALES COMPANY NUMBER 4428435 (FORMERLY BARNRIDGE LIMITED) 14 PORTSMOUTH AVENUE, THAMES DITTON, SURREY, KT7 0RT Registered for VAT in the UK under registration number 838 5410 17 Project Carlton – initial research August 2018 Preface The re-vamping of UK payments is well on the way towards repeating the experience of other notable UK projects – smart meters, NHS Connecting for Health, the DVLA’s abolition of paper tax discs and many, many more. Expensive, multi-year fiascos costing many millions of pounds. The question is not whether the direction of travel portends disaster, the direction having been set by the combined ministrations of HMTreasury, the Bank of England, the Financial Conduct Authority, the Payment Systems Regulator, the Payment System Operators Delivery Group, Payments UK and their successors New Payment System Operator and UK Finance, not forgetting the cast of thousands who acted as unpaid extras within the Payment Strategy Forum. The question is what to do. About the author Bob Lyddon is an experienced management consultant both privately and with PwC in the fields of international banking, payments and cash management. Between 2003 and 2017 he was engaged as General Secretary of the IBOS international banking club. With PwC between 1997 and 2000 Bob managed several programmes at the time of the initial introduction of the Euro, and while at BankBoston between 1994 and 1997 Bob designed and brought to market the Connector international banking club. Bob’s earlier career was spent at Chemical Bank/Manufacturers Hanover and Lloyds Bank International in international capital markets, big-ticket export finance, and aircraft finance. Bob has written a series of online courses on Cash Management, Trade Finance and Corporate Treasury, as well as delivering such courses in person. Bob has acted an expert witness in connection with cross-border payments, and is a retained consultant to trade bodies in this same field. Bob Lyddon holds a First Class degree in Modern Languages from the University of Cambridge. © Lyddon Consulting Ltd 2014 Page 2 of 162 Project Carlton – initial research August 2018 Table of Contents Section Page Preface 2 Author biography 2 Executive Summary 4 Rationale and Set-up of the Payment Systems Regulator (“PSR”) 5 The Bank of England and its account and payment services 7 The Bank of England’s antiquated policy framework and IT complex 10 CHAPS outage in 2014 and lessons (not) learned 13 Direct Access to Payment Systems 16 PSR Market Review on Indirect Access to Payment Systems: substance 20 PSR methodology as exemplified by the Market Review on Indirect Access 26 PSR Market Review on Infrastructure Provision 29 Status of remedies under PSR’s Market Reviews 31 The PSR’s Payment Strategy Forum: establishment and strategic context 32 Payment Strategy Forum – the venue in which market detriments should have been remedied 38 Payment Strategy Forum Design & Implementation Phase 43 Not paying well? Take ISO20022 XML – it cures all known payment ailments 50 Status of payments market detriments in 2018 59 The PSR and the Interchange Fee Regulation 61 The PSR and LINK 65 The PSR and Authorised Push Payment Fraud 68 Payments Fraud in the UK 75 PSR response to Payments Fraud figures 80 Foundation and initial phases of New Payment System Operator (“NPSO”) 85 Proceedings of NPSO Board of Directors and make-up of NPSO Advisory Councils 90 NPSO’s ineffective governance and lack of expertise 94 NPSO workplan and interaction with other bodies 95 NPA status, timing and deliverables 98 More components in the NPSO monolith 100 Open Banking – another still-born child 102 Open Banking and the EU’s Access to Accounts, or XS2A 106 Open Banking and the “Simplifying Access to Markets” working group of the PSF 110 The “Simplifying Access to Markets” working group of the PSF 111 Balance Sheet of “Simplifying Access to Markets” stream of the PSF 116 Failing resilience of the UK’s payment systems 119 NPA’s threat to the resilience of the UK’s payment systems 123 Financial vulnerability of the NPA’s layered model 124 Flawed financial business models of New Entrants and Challenger Banks 128 Credit-free world is one without consumer protections 133 Prospects for investment in Cheque clearing and BACS Direct Debit 135 Cheques and BACS Direct Debits will have to conform to NPA rules, reducing competition 136 NPA as an enabler for payment fraud 138 Genesis of Faster Payments and the name check 139 NPA new services and tie-in with Faster Payments 144 Balance Sheet of “End User Needs” stream of the PSF 147 New facilities and measures to combat Financial Crime 148 Indirect Access Liability Models 151 Balance Sheet of Financial Crime, Data and Security Stream of the PSF 154 Conclusions on the PSF as a whole 156 Overall conclusions 157 Next steps 158 Appendices Page List of source documents 159 Full list of members of CHAPS, Faster Payments, BACS and Cheque&Credit on 31/7/18 161 © Lyddon Consulting Ltd 2014 Page 3 of 162 Project Carlton – initial research August 2018 Executive Summary The ministrations over the past 5 years of HMTreasury, the Bank of England, the Financial Conduct Authority, the Payment Systems Regulator, the Payment System Operators Delivery Group, Payments UK and their successors New Payment System Operator and UK Finance, and of the many people within the Payment Strategy Forum add up to a huge weight of effort. The results have been on the very low side of expectations, out of all proportion to the investment so far, but worse is to come. In the name of innovation, choice and competition we have an agglomeration of market power into two actors – New Payment System Operator and Mastercard. We also have a roadmap under New Payment System Operator to make all “retail” payment types interdependent within the New Payments Architecture (“NPA”) project, and to elevate the Faster Payments system in importance over the other payment systems, Faster Payments being the seedbed for the most rapidly increasing type of payment fraud – Authorised Push Payment Fraud enacted on the back of eBanking channels, be that mobile banking, remote banking or the new Open Banking. The direction of travel is towards “push payments” (like BACS Credit, CHAPS and Faster Payments) and away from “pull payments” (like BACS Direct Debit, cheque and card), the latter having better consumer protection measures around them. “Pull payments” are likely to be starved of investment going forward, and made to conform to the NPA model, hindering their ability to develop new feature and function, even were there investment funds available. A core mechanism for bringing all of this about is the adoption of the ISO20022 XML data standard, despite its questionable track record in the Single Euro Payments Area as a platform for enabling innovation and spurring competition – on any other measure than price. Without revenues there can be no re-investment in resilience, or in new measures to combat emerging fraud threats. This is the direction of travel, though, and it does not bode well for the UK economy or for the achievements of the benefits that these changes are supposed to bring about. The projects have built up a head of steam and have strong support from the authorities. It is highly questionable whether the supertanker can be turned from within, which leaves two options – firstly to do nothing, which seems quite irresponsible. Secondly to build something either separately on a greenfield basis, or to try and wrest control of the UK’s “pull payment” systems away from NPSO and to develop those as a competitor to NPA. © Lyddon Consulting Ltd 2014 Page 4 of 162 Project Carlton – initial research August 2018 Rationale and Set-up of the Payment Systems Regulator (“PSR”) The PSR has ambitious objectives but in its first four years it has cost far more than expected, done much busywork, caused a huge amount of work for others, but achieved very little • PSR established to resolve innovation and competition issues • Its scope was “payment systems”: CHAPS, Faster Payments, BACS, Cheque&Credit Clearing, LINK, Visa and Mastercard • Supposed to cost £2.5 million per annum: actually costing over £10 million • Has issued a series of “Directions” • Has taken on two roles as “competent authority” pursuant to EU legislation • Has carried out two Market Reviews • Has become involved in ATM charges and payments fraud • But to what avail? The PSR was established in 2014 pursuant to an “HM Treasury Impact Assessment – The Regulation of Payment Networks” of 20/8/2103, authored by a Mr Dan Turnbull. The salient issues were that the then-current arrangements were deemed not conducive to competition and innovation: What is the problem under consideration? Why is government intervention necessary? The regulation and governance of payment networks does not enable them to respond to current and future challenges in the most effective way. Given the fundamental importance of the money transmission system to the economy, any inefficiency has a significant impact on economic welfare. The Government has accepted the recommendations of the Treasury Select Committee to extend regulation in this area, in order to tackle the multiple competition issues inherent in the payments market.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Network Risk and Key Players: a Structural Analysis of Interbank Liquidity∗
    Network Risk and Key Players: A Structural Analysis of Interbank Liquidity∗ Edward Denbee Christian Julliard Ye Li Kathy Yuan June 4, 2018 Abstract We estimate the liquidity multiplier and individual banks' contribution to systemic liquidity risk in an interbank network using a structural model. Banks borrow liquid- ity from neighbours and update their valuation based on neighbours' actions. When the former (latter) motive dominates, the equilibrium exhibits strategic substitution (complementarity) of liquidity holdings, and a reduced (increased) liquidity multi- plier dampening (amplifying) shocks. Empirically, we find substantial and procyclical network-generated risks driven mostly by changes of equilibrium type rather than net- work topology. We identify the banks that generate most systemic risk and solve the planner's problem, providing guidance to macro-prudential policies. Keywords: financial networks; liquidity; interbank market; key players; systemic risk. ∗We thank the late Sudipto Bhattacharya, Yan Bodnya, Douglas Gale, Michael Grady, Charles Khan, Seymon Malamud, Farzad Saidi, Laura Veldkamp, Mark Watson, David Webb, Anne Wetherilt, Kamil Yilmaz, Peter Zimmerman, and seminar participants at the Bank of England, Cass Business School, Duisenberg School of Finance, Koc University, the LSE, Macro Finance Society annual meeting, the Stockholm School of Economics, and the WFA for helpful comments and discussions. Denbee (ed- [email protected]) is from the Bank of England; Julliard ([email protected]) and Yuan ([email protected]) are from the London School of Economics, SRC, and CEPR; Li ([email protected]) is from the Ohio State University. This research was started when Yuan was a senior Houblon-Norman Fellow at the Bank of England.
    [Show full text]
  • Payit User Terms-Personal
    ® Terms for Payit™ The fast, fair, simple and safe way to pay and get paid Search Payit for more informaton The fast, fair, simple and safe way to pay and get paid Search Payit for more informaton The meaning of certain words used in these Terms: The Payee is the company, business, organisation or individual you’re making a payment to. Open Banking means the UK’s Open Banking initiative, which NatWest is a participant in. You can find out more information about Open Banking at www.openbanking.org.uk We/us are the National Westminster Bank Plc (NatWest), registered in England and Wales under number 929027 with our registered office at 250 Bishopsgate, London EC2M 4AA. We’re authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority. We’re entered on the Financial Services Register and our firm reference number is 121878. You can contact us at [email protected] Account Provider is the bank or building society that holds the account you want to make a payment from. Where we refer to you this includes each holder of the account from which you want to make a payment from using Payit. You also includes any third parties you’ve authorised to act on your behalf where the term relates to giving us instructions. You/your refers to any one, both or all of you depending on the context. Introduction These terms apply to the agreement between you and us to use Payit. Nothing in these Terms affects the operation of the account you hold with your Account Provider.
    [Show full text]
  • Form a - General Direction 2
    Faster Payments General Directions Compliance Report 2017 Form A - General Direction 2 Please complete the form below, ensuring that you respond to each section of the paper. The main headings relate to the reporting requirements of general direction 2 (2.4, a-f). The sub-headings provide you with guidance on the information that we would like you to provide in order to meet the reporting requirements. a) Self-assessment by the operator on compliance of its access requirements with the obligation in Direction 2.1 throughout the 2016/17 period. I) Please provide a statement as Statement of Compliance to whether you consider that you have complied with the obligation FPSL’s access criteria are the minimum necessary to ensure a safe, secure and resilient payment in Direction 2.1 over 2016/17. system which operates a 24*7 for the benefit of all service users. All our access and eligibility criteria are objective and risk based, an important consideration for a systemically important Financial You should cross reference a Market Infrastructure (FMI), and are publicly disclosed on our website here. statement of compliance from a responsible person. As an FMI, designated under the Banking Act 2009, FPSL has to comply with the Committee on Payment and Market Infrastructure (CPMI) and International Organisation of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) Principles for FMI (PFMIs). These principles underpin our access requirements. FPSL is also the designated Payment Systems Operator (PSO) under the Financial Services (Banking Reform) Act 2013 (FSBRA) for the Faster Payments System (FPS). In January 2015, FPSL began an ambitious and innovative access and development programme to expand the ways in which Participants are able to access the payment system and minimise the challenges faced by new Participants.
    [Show full text]
  • Faster Payments QIAT
    Faster Payments QIAT Proposer: The Clearing House and FIS February 21, 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS Original Proposal 2 Q&A Response 106 Draft QIAT Assessment 120 (Includes proposer comment in Appendix A & B) 136 Task Force comments 140 Proposer response to Task Force comments 153 Final QIAT Assessment 155 Submitted by: Proposal to Faster Payments Task Force April 22, 2016 This Proposal is submitted under and subject to the terms of the Amended and Restated Faster Payments Task Force Participation Agreement for an Organization (the “Agreement”), and shall be used only as explicitly set forth in the Agreement. The Proposal includes technology that is owned by or proprietary to The Clearing House Payments Company L.L.C. and third parties. Proposed features, functionality, implementation details, requirements and timetables are in development and subject to change at any time. 2 | Executive Summary 01 |Executive 02 | Use Case 03 | Proposal 04 | Part A1: 05 | Part A2: Use 06 | Part B: 07 | Self Summary Coverage Assumptions Solution Case Description Business Assessment Description Considerations Table of Contents Contents 1: Executive Summary 3 2: Use Case Coverage Domestic Coverage 5 Cross-border Coverage 6 3: Proposal Assumptions 7 4: Part A.1: Solution Description Introduction 8 Initiation 13 Authentication 21 Payer authorization 22 Approval by payer’s provider 23 Clearing, Receipt & Settlement 25 Reconciliation 27 Summary 28 5: Part A.2: Use Case Description Use case description (P2P) 30 Use case description (B2B) 31 Use case description (B2P) 32 Use case description (P2B) 33 Use cases by effectiveness criteria 34 6: Part B: Business Considerations Introduction 36 Implementation Timeline 38 Value Proposition and Competition 40 Integration Effort 41 Legal & Governance 44 7: Self Assessment Ubiquity 49 Efficiency 51 Safety and Security 53 Speed (Fast) 56 Legal Framework 57 Governance 58 8: Appendix The Clearing House Payments Company L.L.C.
    [Show full text]
  • UK Payments Landscape
    The rising tide of change across the UK payments landscape The Rising Tide of Change across the UK Payments Landscape “With great change brings new choices, with new choices brings new opportunities, with new opportunities, brings new ways of developing, managing and innovating payment processing needs.” Neelam Jobanputra, Head of Electronic Payments, UK The biggest change to UK payments change to the way in which payment processing There is little clarity, yet, on what the future since Ring Fencing are governed. 2 key development phases architecture will look like when it comes to core are recognised: and non-core services provisioned under the new The UK is venturing on the largest change Phase 1 – the creation of the New Payments Pay.UK governance model. With limited clarity it programme for UK domestic payment processing System Operator Pay.UK – the outcome of the makes it tough to establish what the framework it has seen since the Cruickshank Report in 2000 consolidation of the Bacs, Faster Payments, of change will look like and where investment announced the need for speed and mandated mobile and cheque Imaging payment schemes to decisions might be made. One thing is for sure, at the industry to deliver a Faster Payments service govern UK electronic payment processing. Barclays we have the ‘finger on the pulse’ working in the UK. Under the authority of the Payment with Pay.UK and the schemes it now governs Phase 2 – the creation of a robust and resilient Systems Regulator established in 2015 the UK to protect the future of our client’s payment technical “UK plc” payments platform for payments landscape is on the tipping point of processing needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Barclays International Banking Tariffs Guide
    International Banking International Banking tariff guide Barclays Private Clients International Limited May 2015 Contents 2 Service charges • Services currently available to new applicants • International Banking Service fees in other currencies 3 Day-to-day banking charges • General services • Counter services • Other account service charges 5 Payment charges • General payments • Bill payments/Faster Payments Service (FPS) • CHAPS payments 6 International payments • SEPA Credit Transfers (SCT) 8 Debit card charges • Debit card charges • Deferred Debit card charges • Barclays Wealth card charges 11 Overdrafts and Emergency Borrowing – sterling account • Overdrafts • Overdraft Daily Fee • How much are the Overdraft Daily Fees? • Representative Example • Emergency Borrowing • Unpaid Transaction Fee • Buffers • Only one type of fee a day • How it all works 14 Overdrafts – euro and US dollar • Overdrafts • Unpaid Transaction Fee • Overdrafts 16 Other information • Charging dates • Cheque clearing • Unpaid cheques • Direct debits • Faster Payments Service (FPS) • SEPA Credit Transfers (SCT) • Standing orders • Further information • Contact details 22 Appendix • Services no longer available to new applicants This guide relates to all individual clients using International Banking services (excluding Private Banking) and new clients offered the services set out on page three. It excludes tariffs for accounts held in Cyprus and applicable interest rates. Our interest rates can be found at barclays.com/international/interestrates Where fees and charges in this guide are quoted in sterling and debited in another currency, the sterling equivalent will be exchanged at the applicable daily exchange rate.* To be read in conjunction with our terms and conditions, product and service specific information. Please ensure you advise your account holding centre or Relationship Manager immediately if your personal details change.
    [Show full text]
  • School Bank Account. Terms and Conditions 2
    COMMERCIAL BANKING School Bank Account. Terms and Conditions 2. Communications: General authority to Bank to accept General terms and conditions which internet/iDTV/WAP/email/telephone/fax/any other apply to a School Bank Account electronic communications Subject to the following sub-clause, we may accept your instructions even if they are not given in conventional written paper form such as 1. Terms which apply to your account(s) by letter or on cheques. This would cover any form of electronic or 1.1 This document together with the information given with your telephonic communication, including those not currently available. It application and any Charges Brochures (together, the “Agreement”) applies to all present and any future business on your accounts. set out the terms and conditions which apply to your business 2.1 The Authority enables us to accept instructions given by electronic account(s), including business current account(s) and to “Your authority communications from you. It does not imply that we can or do currently to operate accounts” (“the Authority”). In addition, specific terms and actually accept all the types mentioned. We will tell you what types we conditions will apply to certain business accounts and services and will accept. these will be supplied to you if you apply for such accounts 2.2 Note that there may be no signature, security or password and services. protection for email, phone, fax and other future forms of electronic Where you apply for the provision of banking services: communication. You should bear this in mind if you decide to permit us ► by bank card, debit card, charge card, credit card or any other card to accept those types of instruction.
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief History of Payments
    A Brief History of Payments October 2015 A Brief History of Payment Year Up to 1799 13th Century In Venice bills of exchange were developed as a legal device to allow international trade without the need to carry gold 14th Century First known reference to bills of exchange in English law as a means to carry funds abroad 17th Century Bills of exchange were being used for domestic as well as international payments. One of the earliest handwritten cheques known still to be in existence was drawn on Messrs Morris and Clayton, scriveners and bankers based in the City of London, and dated 16 February 1659. It was for £400 (about £43,000 today) made payable to a Mr Delboe and signed by Nicholas Vanacker . 1694 At the very first meeting of the Court of the Bank of England on 27 June 1694, it was decided that customers who deposited money would have the choice of three types of account. One of these allowed customers to draw notes on the Bank up to the extent of their deposits. 1727 The Royal Bank of Scotland invented the overdraft, one of the most important banking innovations. The bank allowed William Hog, a merchant, to take £1,000 - the equivalent of £63,664 today - more out of his account than 2015 Consulting Polymath he had in it. Source: Source: 1717 The Bank of England pioneered the use of printed forms, the first of which were produced in 1717 at Grocers’ Hall, London. The printed slips had scrollwork at the left-hand edge which could be cut through, leaving part on the cheque and part on the counterfoil – the real “check” – which is how the cheque got its name.
    [Show full text]
  • FPS MEMBERSHIP AGREEMENT Between FASTER PAYMENTS
    Redacted Version FPS MEMBERSHIP AGREEMENT Between FASTER PAYMENTS SCHEME LIMITED and BARCLAYS BANK PLC CITIBANK N.A. CLYDESDALE BANK PLC HSBC BANK PLC LLOYDS BANK PLC NATIONWIDE BUILDING SOCIETY NORTHERN BANK LIMITED SANTANDER UK PLC THE CO-OPERATIVE BANK PLC THE ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND PLC -1- TABLE OF CONTENTS Clause Page 1. INTERPRETATION ............................................................................................................................... 4 2. THE SYSTEM OPERATOR .................................................................................................................. 7 3. THE MEMBERS .................................................................................................................................... 8 4. TERMINATION ...................................................................................................................................... 8 5. LIABILITY ............................................................................................................................................ 10 6. ASSIGNMENT AND TRANSFER ....................................................................................................... 11 7. EXTERNAL INTERVENING EVENT ................................................................................................... 12 8. NOTICES............................................................................................................................................. 12 9. WHOLE AGREEMENT ......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Competition and Choice in the Banking Sector
    House of Commons Treasury Committee Competition and choice in the banking sector Written Evidence Only those submissions written specifically for the Committee and accepted by the Committee as evidence for the inquiry Competition and choice in the banking sector are included. Ordered to be published 16 September, 12, 19 and 26 October, 16 November 2010, and 2 February 2011 List of written evidence Page 1 Campaign for Community Banking Services 3, 8 2 Unite 9 3 David Johnston 14 4 Mr and Mrs Ralph 16 5 Ian Kerry 17 6 Consumer focus 18 7 Barclays 27; 266 8 Virgin Money 32 9 Nationwide 41 10 Vocalink 51 11 Building Society Association 54 12 Kensington Mortgage Company 61 13 Intellect 65 14 Consumer Finance Education Body 77 15 Payments Council 82 16 Yorkshire Building Society 85 17 Paragon Group 92 18 Toynbee Hall 97 19 Association of British Credit Unions Ltd 101 20 Which? 108 21 Co-operative Financial Services 134; 253 22 Tesco Bank 141 23 RBS Group Plc 146 24 Lloyds Banking Group 153; 258 25 David T Llewellyn, Professor of Money and Banking, Loughborough University 162 26 Financial Services Authority 171; 244 27 New Economics Foundation 184 28 Financial Services Consumer Panel 193 29 Which? 196 30 Competition Commission 202 31 Sir Don Cruickshank 211 32 Office of Fair Trading 218; 246 33 Financial Services Consumer Panel 227 34 Metro Bank 235 35 Cut Loose 249 36 eBay 252 37 Callcredit 261 38 Santander 263 39 HM Treasury 270 3 Written evidence submitted by the Campaign for Community Banking Services (CCBS) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Branch dependent individuals and small businesses in over 1000 urban and rural communities effectively have no choice of banking provider and as the banks and building societies continue to close branches this number is expected to increase because of the post crisis pressure on profits and further consolidation within the industry.
    [Show full text]
  • Multibank Moneymover Service
    PhoneBank Terms and Conditions Multibank Moneymover Service. These Terms and Conditions together with the General Terms and Conditions which apply to the Customer’s Accounts and any other terms and conditions referred to in this Agreement shall apply to the Multibank Moneymover Service. In the event of any conflict between these Terms and Conditions or any other terms and conditions referred to in this Agreement and the General Terms and Conditions these Terms and Conditions shall prevail. Definitions the Executing Bank and the Customer from time to time. The “Account” means the Customer’s accounts which are subject to the Executing Bank has the right not to execute any particular Multibank Moneymover Service (as specified in the application for the instruction where it is reasonable to do so, for example if the Multibanking Transaction Initiation Agreement). Customer is in breach of this Agreement or any of the terms and conditions for the Account(s), or the Executing Bank (or the “Business Day” means 9am to 5pm Monday to Friday other than public systems it uses) reasonably suspects the payment is fraudulent and bank holidays in the United Kingdom unless we notify you at or the Executing Bank is otherwise unable to make a payment different times for the processing of payments out of the Customer’s under this Agreement. If the Executing Bank has declined the Account(s). instruction or is unable to act on the instruction the Executing “EEA” means the European Economic Area. Bank will, subject to legal and regulatory requirements, where “Lloyds Banking Group” means the Lloyds Banking Group plc and its it is reasonable or it is required to do so, and unless notification subsidiaries for the time being.
    [Show full text]
  • Extended ISCD Technical Specification (Tab Delimited File) VERSION HISTORY
    Extended ISCD Technical Specification (tab delimited file) VERSION HISTORY Version Date Details 1.00 3 May 2006 Issued. 2.00 19 September 2006 Baselined document released. 2.01 1 February 2007 Updated to correct field references. 2.10 15 July 2007 Branding updated from Voca to VocaLink. 2.20 18 September 2008 Baseline version following the closure of CHAPS Euro. 2.30 26 April 2013 Change to remove note relating to SWIFT suppressing sort codes when option 5 is in the Print Indicator field (field 14). 2.40 8 May 2013 Change to remove reference to the UK Clearings Directory (UKCD). 2.50 15 May 2013 Change to field 11 to refer to the PRA/FCA rather than the FSA. 2.60 6 January 2017 Section 5.3: Updated description of field 42. Version: 2.60 Extended ISCD – Technical Specification (tab delimited file) 2 CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: USING THE ISCD....................................................................................................................................... 5 1ABOUT THIS GUIDE.....................................................................................................................................5 2INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................................6 2.1 OVERVIEW OF THE EXTENDED ISCD ..........................................................................................................6 3 ISCD SERVICE FILES ....................................................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]