You Be The Judge! :-( | Tangerine Bank | Discussion forum

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —




— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

No permission to create posts
sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
You Be The Judge! :-(
June 7, 2021
9:35 am
Dean
Valhalla Mountains, British Columbia
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 664
Member Since:
January 12, 2019
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

.
This just in from CBC :

.
It's Tangerine's Silence that's Most concerning ❗
.

    Dean

sf-cool " Live Long And Prosper " sf-cool

June 7, 2021
10:08 am
Bill
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2449
Member Since:
September 11, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

She used an account not intended for business purposes for business purposes. They in fact did tell her the reason, it was recalled by a foreign bank. And the account agreement she agreed to via opening the account gives the bank the right to do this without authorization or alerting the client.

It's all irrelevant, not even a portion of blame accepted by customer, just go public in some way and you get a "goodwill gesture" 100% restitution because the bank just wants the bad publicity to stop. Ho-hum, next one.

June 7, 2021
10:43 am
LK
British Columbia, Canada
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 103
Member Since:
July 9, 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I think Tangerine needs to reply to the question as to whether things would have been different if she had a business savings account.

"Tangerine's chief operating officer Guaurav Singh said the bank would reimburse her money, but added that her account was not intended for business purposes. Go Public asked repeatedly whether a different account would have provided more protections — when a spokesperson finally replied, she declined to address the question."

June 7, 2021
10:44 am
HermanH
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 117
Member Since:
April 14, 2021
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I don't consider Erica Johnson a highly reputable journalist. A significant fact was overlooked or ignored.

Isn't the Hold Period supposed purpose to prevent such clawbacks and recalls? The article did not mention whether or not the reversal occurred within the designated hold period.

The timing was good, thought the Vancouver mother of two — right before the Christmas holidays and the expenses that come at that time of year.

She checked her bank account with Tangerine — an online subsidiary of Scotiabank — and confirmed that her customer had transferred $1,600.

She then shipped the coveted Gucci handbag, thinking all was well.

But in January, Pui checked her bank statement and saw that the money was gone. When she called Tangerine, Pui says she was only told the payment had been recalled by a bank in South Korea.

June 7, 2021
11:35 am
Norman1
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 4116
Member Since:
April 6, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Wire transfers, Interac e-transfers, and direct deposits cannot be "recalled". They are considered final, unless the recipient consents to the funds being returned.

It doesn't matter whether the bank account is a personal account or a business account. The rule is the same.

Sounds like Tangerine Bank screwed up by taking the funds back without obtaining her permission first.

$1,600 sounds more like a settlement rather than a "goodwill gesture".

June 7, 2021
1:03 pm
LK
British Columbia, Canada
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 103
Member Since:
July 9, 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Here is some parts of the Tangerine T&C that might be relevant.

Applicable to all Tangerine accounts...

Deposits or withdrawals from your Account may be reversed if the deposit or withdrawal request cannot be delivered to your other financial institution or is returned for any reason.
* * *

When you make a deposit by cheque, electronic funds transfer, or other negotiable item in Canadian currency, for funds drawn from a financial institution’s branch located in Canada, we may hold the funds for up to five (5) business days after the day you make the deposit. For all other negotiable items, the hold may be up to thirty (30) business days. During this hold period, we may limit your right to withdraw funds deposited by these means, and we may refuse to accept any deposit to an Account.
* * *

You are required to review the Account activities and transactions (including fees charged) (“Account Activities”) at least once every 30 days and verify that all Account Activities were properly recorded and authorized and that there are no omissions. Account Activities can be reviewed by telephone, online on our website (tangerine.ca), through Mobile Banking, or by reviewing your Account statements if applicable.

Account Activities for the prior calendar month are deemed to have been reviewed on the earlier of (i) the day that you actually reviewed your Account Activities; or (ii) the 15th day of the calendar month following the month in which those Account Activities occurred (the “Review Date”).

Within 30 days of the Review Date, you must give us notice of any Discrepancies. This 30-day period is known as the “verification period”. If we don’t receive notice from you during the verification period, after the verification period:
(a) we are then entitled to treat the Account Activities that were to be reviewed during the verification period (“Verified Transactions”) to be accurate and authorized by you;
(b) you will have no claim against us relating to any Verified Transactions, even if you didn’t actually authorize the signature, instruction or authorization, or the transaction was induced or affected by fraud, forgery, was unauthorized, incorrect or was improperly made for any other reason whatsoever (unless such loss was caused solely by our intentional misconduct or gross negligence); and
(c) you release us from all claims whatsoever for Verified Transactions, whether such claims arise from negligence or other non-intentional fault, breach of contract, statutory claim or otherwise, save and except for direct losses to you caused solely by our intentional misconduct or gross negligence.
* * *

If it was a chequing account...

Tangerine may adjust a deposit to your Chequing Account (even if the adjustment creates a negative balance in your Chequing Account) if we discover a discrepancy between the amount noted on the deposit slip and the amount received, or if we suspect any fraudulent, unlawful or improper activity. Any such adjustments will be posted to your Chequing Account. Tangerine shall not be responsible for any inconvenience to you that may result from an adjustment, including, but not limited to, any payments that may not be processed due to insufficient funds in your Chequing Account.

June 7, 2021
1:09 pm
Kidd
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 697
Member Since:
February 27, 2018
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

What grinds my gears.

Marketplace will do a show concerning something that is governed by a federal ministry, it could be environmental, product containing hazardous material, incorrect labelling, whatever.  The matter will be taken directly to Ottawa, and the minister will be prompted to give a response.

"I am shocked. Oh yeah, this be wrong. Let me finish eatin my poutine, and then we talk about this here problem."

The subject matter will be news to the minister, and they will agree the situation needs to be addressed, and corrected ASAP.

A year later, Marketplace will do a follow-up.  The minister will have gravy on their clothing, and cheese curds stuck to the sides of their face.  "Oh yeah, this be wrong. I be busy eatin poutine."

I had to stop watching Marketplace because, i came to the conclusion... canada doesn't need a federal government, or any of their useless agencies.

June 7, 2021
2:46 pm
Dean
Valhalla Mountains, British Columbia
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 664
Member Since:
January 12, 2019
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

.

    Take notes Folks ⬇ ❗

.

Norman1 said

Wire transfers, Interac e-transfers, and direct deposits cannot be "recalled". They are considered final, unless the recipient consents to the funds being returned.

It doesn't matter whether the bank account is a personal account or a business account. The rule is the same.

Sounds like Tangerine Bank screwed up by taking the funds back Without obtaining her permission first.

$1,600 sounds more like a settlement rather than a "goodwill gesture".  

.

And to repeat ... Tangerine did 'Nothing', until the matter went Public. sf-confused

    Dean

sf-cool " Live Long And Prosper " sf-cool

June 7, 2021
4:03 pm
Bill
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2449
Member Since:
September 11, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Re. permission it's not clear to me, as Norman1's first point assertion about permission re. wire transfers, etc (source?) seems to be contradicted, along with by post #6, by the article: "Perhaps surprisingly to many people, customers at most financial institutions — including Tangerine — agree to terms and conditions that allow their banks to move money out of an account. There's no need to get authorization or even alert the customer. "Not all bank agreements are the same, but usually they have language in them that gives the bank a lot of scope for how to handle these type of cases," said Sarah Bradley, ombudsman and CEO of the Ombudsman for Banking Services and Investments. Reasons for not informing the customer could include cases of alleged fraud or money laundering, she said."

Also, if I use a personal bank account for business purposes that's a contravention of the agreement I've entered into when I opened the account, is my understanding.

June 7, 2021
4:27 pm
HermanH
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 117
Member Since:
April 14, 2021
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Kidd said
I had to stop watching Marketplace because, i came to the conclusion... canada doesn't need a federal government, or any of their useless agencies.  

I find their investigative techniques and journalistic standards lacking and shoddy. I get the impression that they think up a conclusion or something they want to push and then go looking for evidence, however flimsy or superficial it may be, to support their pre-conceived notions.

June 7, 2021
5:22 pm
Loonie
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 7130
Member Since:
October 21, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

The reason Tangerine gave for withdrawing the money was that it had been recalled by the bank that sent it in the first place, not that she had used personal account for business. The latter was added much later as a supplementary comment by Tangerine's COO after GoPublic intervened.

Since Tangerine has refused to answer the question, one must assume that a business account would not have offered any additional protection to the account holder.

It seems to me the problem needs to be addressed at the level of international banking protocols, and the rules communicated clearly to domestic clients. If she had known the money could be recalled, she likely wouldn't have mailed the handbag yet. If there was no Hold on this money on her account information (unclear, but unlikely), she had no reason to think it could disappear. It's also unclear whether it disappeared within the required 30 days.

Bottom line, she is an inexperienced entrepreneur, now somewhat wiser. It would be interesting to know where she has moved her accounts to. Bricks and mortar will not necessarily make things better for her.

As for Tangerine, there is no reason why they couldn't add a short note to explain such a reversal, e.g. "funds recalled by XYZ Bank". And if a deposit has not truly cleared, then they should clearly say so, so there are no surprises.

June 7, 2021
7:32 pm
Winnie
Ontario
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 342
Member Since:
December 7, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"So there were no red flags when Pui received an inquiry from South Korea about a Gucci bag and was then asked if the payment could be made by electronic funds transfer (EFT). Unlike e-transfer, which uses email, EFT moves money directly from one person's bank account to another's and doesn't require a trip to the bank, like sending a wire transfer — or the associated costs."

I had no idea, that is possible to do EFT from one person to another.
I was under impression, that you can transfer only between your own accounts at different banks (Tangerine to Simplii, EQ to Tangerine, etc). Your name must be the same at all banks, no EFT to another name (person) allowed.

June 7, 2021
7:51 pm
HermanH
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 117
Member Since:
April 14, 2021
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Winnie said
I had no idea, that is possible to do EFT from one person to another.
I was under impression, that you can transfer only between your own accounts at different banks (Tangerine to Simplii, EQ to Tangerine, etc). Your name must be the same at all banks, no EFT to another name (person) allowed.  

That was my impression, as well; the names on the sending/receiving accounts are supposed to be the same, AFAIK. I think that when I try to create eFT links, they ask the same in their setup procedures.

June 7, 2021
7:55 pm
HermanH
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 117
Member Since:
April 14, 2021
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Loonie said
It seems to me the problem needs to be addressed at the level of international banking protocols, and the rules communicated clearly to domestic clients. If she had known the money could be recalled, she likely wouldn't have mailed the handbag yet. If there was no Hold on this money on her account information (unclear, but unlikely), she had no reason to think it could disappear. It's also unclear whether it disappeared within the required 30 days. 

This sounds a bit like the 'overpayment' or 'Nigerian' scam, whereby an NSF cheque is sent for deposit and the depositor unknowingly sends back a portion of the amount, thinking that the cheque was good in the first place. The depositor is naive and unaware of the hold or payment clearing procedures.

June 7, 2021
8:58 pm
LK
British Columbia, Canada
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 103
Member Since:
July 9, 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Video link to the article posted by Dean:

Re EFTs, it appears that different FIs in Canada say different things, but all seem to be "in Canada only" and do something else (wire transfer, global money transfer, etc) for international EFT. Examples:

EQ says: https://www.eqbank.ca/education-center/article-detail?urlName=money-moves-eft-v-interac-e-transfer
One further distinction is that EFTs can only be used to transfer money between bank accounts in your name, whereas Interac e-Transfers can be used to send money to a third party—like the colleague who spotted you lunch money the day you forgot your wallet.

ScotiaBank says: https://www.scotiabank.com/ca/en/small-business/business-banking/payments-and-merchant-services/eft-sco.html
Streamlines domestic payables and receivables (CAD/USD). Money is transferred between different users’ bank accounts within Canada.
Versatile – Pay expenses, employees, suppliers. Collect rent, membership fees, insurance premiums.
Funds can only be sent within Canada.
Separate EFT service agreements must be set up if both USD and CAD EFT transactions are required.

June 7, 2021
9:17 pm
Norman1
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 4116
Member Since:
April 6, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

EFT's can be done between different people's accounts. Pay is routinely sent to employees by EFT. Quite certain the name on the sending account does not match the name on the employees' bank accounts.

Same when CRA does an EFT to my bank account for my income tax refund.

Such EFT's are commonly called direct deposits.

As Tangerine Bank is quoted in the article, the bank receiving the recall request can decide whether or not to accept it:

Tangerine declined to be interviewed. In a statement to Go Public, a spokesperson said she couldn't comment on another financial institution's request to recall the funds, but that when the bank receives these requests, it considers "a variety of factors before making our decision." It declined to specify what those factors are.

June 7, 2021
9:24 pm
Norman1
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 4116
Member Since:
April 6, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

The $1,600 was "pushed" to her account. No cheque was involved. No hold on funds:

Angel Pui was pleased when the business she started in the pandemic, …, made a sale in South Korea.

She checked her bank account with Tangerine … and confirmed that her customer had transferred $1,600.

The buyer in South Korea probably used a service like XE Trade (review) to originate the direct deposit.

June 8, 2021
12:59 am
smayer97
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 378
Member Since:
September 29, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Norman1 said
Wire transfers, Interac e-transfers, and direct deposits cannot be "recalled". They are considered final, unless the recipient consents to the funds being returned.
...
  

Unfortunately, that is NOT correct, at least in the case of Interac e-Transfers, which is a beast unto itself and distinct from wire transfers and direct deposits (though many of the reversal rules are similar).

One example is if the sending account was discovered to be compromised due to no fault of the actual account holder, the fund transfer can be reversed by the bank.

Articles and news reports have been made documenting this very case.

This is why Interac strongly advises that you make sure you know who you are receiving Interac e-transfers and that the sending account is actually theirs. Interac e-transfers are NOT as secure as some are lead to believe. There are vulnerable points in the process.

There are other caveats with Interact e-transfers, like making sure you use secure questions and answers when sending and that your email and cell phone are secure. It has been reported that emails and phones that are compromised can have received e-transfers be redirected to ANY OTHER bank account, since e-transfers are not linked to any individual ... in one respect it is literally like handling cash...

Poor e-transfers answers to security questions may be easily guessed or discovered within the content of your emails, phone info, social media posts, etc.

June 8, 2021
3:43 am
User230
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 176
Member Since:
December 4, 2016
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Likely it was a scam. As HermanH mentioned.

Tangerine should protect their clients from scams regardless of if the business owner was using a personal or business account at their bank.

It did not surprise me that Tangerine did not contact the handbag business owner. Leaving a customer worried and upset, so much so and for so long that they go to the media, is not good customer service.

If I was scammed, I would not expect my bank to bail on me like Tangerine seemed to do. Only to support the customer after being shamed in the media.

The owner of the handbag company might not be disclosing all the information she has about the purchase. Although the article makes it seem that this is not the case.

International buying and selling is difficult on many levels when compared to domestic buying and selling. Especially for higher priced items. For example, increase chance of theft, customs delaying or taking the goods, higher likelihood of damage to the goods, higher probability of fraud, higher probability of scams, higher probability of fake goods. You really need a good bank as a seller and a good credit card company as a buyer to back you up.

In my experience the higher the price of the good the higher the probability of scams. As there is more incentive for fraudsters to scam. There are also more avenues to scam, being international selling and buying. These are some reasons I think the handbag business owner was likely scammed.

June 8, 2021
11:40 am
Norman1
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 4116
Member Since:
April 6, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

smayer97 said

Unfortunately, that is NOT correct, at least in the case of Interac e-Transfers, which is a beast unto itself and distinct from wire transfers and direct deposits (though many of the reversal rules are similar).

One example is if the sending account was discovered to be compromised due to no fault of the actual account holder, the fund transfer can be reversed by the bank.

Articles and news reports have been made documenting this very case.

That's actually not the case.

An Interac e-transfer that has been claimed cannot be reversed. That's why there are Go Public stories like RBC customer out of pocket after fraud: What you need to know….

Had it been possible for Interac e-transfers to be reversed, there would be no reason for RBC not to return the full $1,734 back to the sender in the story.

It doesn't matter if the Interac e-transfer sender's account was hacked. Should the sender's bank decide to reimburse, then the sender's bank eats the loss. That's why the sending bank will refuse in many cases.

No permission to create posts

Please write your comments in the forum.