Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by fakedang 2078 days ago
Somebody who uses/deals with cheques in this day and age though kinda deserves it in my books. Cheques are themselves bad UX today.
4 comments

> Somebody who uses/deals with cheques in this day and age though kinda deserves it in my books. Cheques are themselves bad UX today.

Nobody deserves to get scammed. This is puritan thinking, to blame the victim. People aren't supposed to understand every single thing and systems, and banks should do a proper job at educating their clients, if they care about good PR. Obviously, Chase and many more do not.

Local/county governments and landlords tend to pressure people to use checks in my experience (northeast US). Property taxes where I live, for instance, you can pay with a credit card or EFT but the fees are absurd. I don't know why people don't want to at least take an e-check, but that's the way it is.
In the United States, cheques remain the most reliable free-to-the-user way to move amounts of money above about $2000 from one individual to another. There are a bunch of companies that effectively give you ACS access, but they tend to have low limits due to KYC concerns. There's wire transfers, but those are pricy ($50/transaction is normal) unless you have very large deposits with the bank. Most banks will let you do transfers online, but often only to other account holders at the same institution, or else with Zelle or one of its clones, usually with the aforementioned ~$2k limit.

The use case here is paying rent. I write exactly one cheque a month, and I haven't found a better way to do it that wouldn't either be expensive or require action on the landlord's part to set up a portal or something.

> There's wire transfers, but those are pricy ($50/transaction is normal

Holy crap Americans are getting scammed ( for reference, bank transfers in the SEPA space are free). How the heck did N26 and others fail at such a broken market where the competition is stuck in 1995?

Please don't blame the victim.