[brnt]

You can only transfer to a number, you can't (easily) charge back already effectuated transfer, nor can you (with a consumer account) debit a number. All of these things are covered.

Buyer protection has rarely been something one needs. Some (many nowadays?) banks offer insurance for this.

[ajkdhcb2]

>Buyer protection has rarely been something one needs.

I disagree, I think it is the biggest factor. I used it several times and I know other people who have too.

>you can't (easily) charge back already effectuated transfer

I promise if you try to do something involving bank transfers without doing some form of 'Know Your Customer' you'll get people try to use bank accounts that are compromised in some way. You'll be getting calls from your bank and potentially lose money, and may get your bank account closed if you persist with that behavior

[brnt]

> I disagree, I think it is the biggest factor.

You probably think that because of the insecure nature of the alternatives you're familiar with. It simply doesn't occur that much, fraud, and when it does, the recourse options you have seem to work. Take a closer look!

> KYC

Yes, and this has increased over the past few years. An account number can't be private, in fact, many banks double check the name of the owner before they let you transfer (they'll show you the mismatching name).

[ikr678]

The countries with more advanced banking generally have stronger consumer protection laws across the board. Less need for buyer protection as a service of your credit card or non-bank payment platform, when the regulatory environment discouraging bad actors with fines/enforcement action.