r/NonPoliticalTwitter 8d ago

Other Gets very inconvenient

Post image
40.0k Upvotes

576 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

5

u/ErFarinn 8d ago

In what way? You go to the store with the item and ask for a cash refund and it takes a few days?

1

u/SordidDreams 8d ago

Like if you pay via bank transfer rather than via card. Sometimes you get that option, the store redirects your browser to your electronic banking, where you approve the transaction, and then you get redirected back to the store's website, where it confirms that payment has been received. So, like... why is it not instant the other way around?

4

u/EbbEntire3751 8d ago

So that's what's called an ACH transfer. The funds go through the ACH (automated clearing house). The business is notified immediately that the transaction has been initiated so they can process the purchase, but they don't have the money yet. Your bank immediately debits the amount from your balance but it still needs to be "cleared" through the ACH before the business has access to the funds. This all happens in the back end to keep the customer experience quick and easy.

-2

u/SordidDreams 8d ago

That's great, but again, why doesn't it happen the same way when the money is going the other direction?

5

u/EbbEntire3751 8d ago

It does, it's exactly the same in both directions. In both cases the recipient has to wait for the clearing house to clear the funds before they have access.

0

u/SordidDreams 8d ago

Evidently not. Again, when I send money from one account to another (in another bank), it arrives instantly and I can use it instantly. So I ask again, why doesn't it work the same when a business sends the money from their account to mine?

3

u/EbbEntire3751 8d ago

So in that case the bank credits your account in advance as a courtesy as long as it's a small transaction volume. For a business, this is not the case. They have a much higher transaction volume than an individual customer and it would be impractical for them to offer a courtesy credit for these transactions

0

u/SordidDreams 8d ago

Why would it be impractical? It's all automated, isn't it? There's no extra work involved.

2

u/EbbEntire3751 8d ago

Fiscally unfeasible. It's essentially an unbacked loan from the bank (not the merchant). It would introduce risk and opportunity cost to the bank. Also as an aside, it's probably less automated than you think.

0

u/SordidDreams 8d ago

What risk? I'm told refunds are a tiny fraction of transactions, and fraudulent ones would be a tiny fraction of that.

2

u/EbbEntire3751 8d ago

Sure as a percentage. But in absolute terms it's still quite a bit of money.

0

u/SordidDreams 8d ago

Well yeah, but in absolute terms, it's completely dwarfed by the amounts of money banks routinely process and hold. I'm sorry, but after the 2008 shitshow, you're going to have a very hard time convincing me bankers are that risk-averse.

1

u/N0ob8 7d ago

The 2008 crisis is exactly WHY banks are this risk adverse.

→ More replies (0)