Topic: Major Dutch bank blocks bitcoin purchases - page 2. (Read 6004 times)

 oh i didn't know ..

Since banks don't make much money from people who don't earn much money, as a bank if they can just impose enough fees to cause those account holders to close their accounts and go elsewhere, then they save themselves some headache and won't lose any significant business, because low income earners don't save much.

Does that seem acceptable to you?

The reason banks can't simply "cut off" these account holders is that the banking industry is protected from competition -- they are essentially granted a monopoly.  (i..e., You or I cannot start a bank [edit: even one that does not lending] because there is no way outsiders can put together the ginormous capital requirements required by the regulations).

So this is a righteous fight.  How dare they suppress a competitor in this manner.  In taking this action they are limiting my options as a consumer and as a monopoly player they can work together making it impossible for this competitor to serve its customers.

If I can open a bank next door, then I say fine let these financial dinosaurs serve their dying days milking their profitable customer base and whatever else they do, but until then we cannot allow banks to choose to serve only their most profitable customers and force the rest to go elsewhere.


Silence is acquiescence.  Thank you for not backing down.

This is kind of an interesting concept. Since the bank is traditionally the entity that customers trust, it's reasonable to expect that they have a sufficient level of security.

Someone conducting business through  a bank, say a bitcoin business selling bitcoins, trusts that the incoming money is legit, and thus dispatch the bitcoins. Later, when the bitcoin business gets told by the bank that it's a fraudulent purchase, and that the funds needs to be reversed, the bitcoin business has no recourse.

The bank(s) claw back their money, and leave the small bitcoin business with their loss.

A bitcoin business selling bitcoins should have some anti fraud system in place, the same should the bank, and it's only reasonable for the bank and the bitcoin business to cooperate about these anti-fraud measures, however as it's been mentioned earlier in this thread, the banks doesn't care, because bitcoin businesses may be fraud prone, and is not contributing significantly towards the bottom line.

Also I can imagine that most bitcoin businesses doesn't have the financial and legal muscles to meet a bank in court to have cases like these settled.

So from the bank's point of view, the way of least resistance is the easiest one: Reverse the transaction(s) and optionally shut down the account of the bitcoin business.

It didn't really sound like one, anyway the answers are here <3

Are you sure it was a wire transfer and not another type of electronic funds transfer?  Wire transfer used to be the only means to instantly put funds in someone else's bank account apart from physically depositing cash at their bank.  Many banking systems now have other means of doing that so a lot of people think that any instant transfer is a wire transfer, but that's not the case.

I dealt with banks in both France and Latvia, and always had the same experience, they'll ask you if you're ok to reverse a transfer but they won't do it without your consent. We accepted most reversals because we correctly smellt something fishy going on and locked the funds, but in one case where there was fraud we had to refuse the reversal because that would have resulted in a net loss for us (and no we didn't feel really good about that, but after all, phishing fraud is the bank's problem for having insecure systems in the first place)

i don't know man im pretty sure i was able to reverse a transfer. . I fact i'm pretty sure i've done it .. I ' don't know if there was a specific time limit but i'm pretty darn sure i was able to reverse a transfer  . without consent.

The reason people are questioning this statement is because their own banking systems will reverse a wire transfer in the case of fraud.  It's true that you can't generally reverse a legitimate wire transfer without the consent of the receiver (if you wired funds to the wrong person, for instance), but fraudulent transactions are treated differently under some banking systems.

Guess not and an unanswered question.  

Quite a nifty shop tho. . do you do more?

I'm not teling i'm asking. Funny you did not get the difference . eh?

Sounds to me like you should be using a more secure system for transacting with Rabobank .... like bitcoin network for example.  

Just get them to hold a bitcoin account with you and vice versa and settle up like that.

A very good point. I've experienced people promising me things, and then not delivering on those promises, and I call back, get a new promise, and same thing. In the end, you wonder - is this a company that you want to work with ? Perhaps sometimes it's the only choice you have.

Yeh? How do you know. . Bank transfers can be reversed all the time. And what is the difference a bank doing it or an account holder who requests the bank do it for what ever reason.

Thing is, you can use this attitude and be nice at the same time, just be consistent.
"Okay, you'll look into it ? No worries at all, take your time, you understand my problem. You call me back in a week ? No problem". And a week later you call back because they won't. You don't have to be belligerant at all. When people feel you won't let it go they'll get up their asses, just to be left alone

While i absolutely love this attitude and this method of operating, I've done it quite a few times myself, what I find is that doing it this way creates enemies, and sometimes just plain out add to me having a weaker case overall. But then again, doing nothing makes nothing happen, so perhaps some middle ground is the best way to go about it ?

Surely, if a business is not on a case, it can't expect anyone else to do the job.

Is that a SEPA-wide principle, and you're sure local laws cannot be different?

I had a similar issue with a German bank, I wasn't even allowed to open a bank account with them. The application was rejected for 'undisclosed reasons and the decision cannot be discussed further'. That's pretty rude.