Guess what’s printed on every single paper check you write? Your bank account and routing number. You trust all the people you send checks to with this info already. The folks processing your paper checks could keep your numbers. So what’s different?
The paranoia is great. Don’t tell people using PayPal, or every single bank’s billpay system, or the IRS, or any of the major facets of life where people use bank account and routing numbers.
As always, if there’s an error the banks are happy to correct it.
A paper check is vulnerable only while in transit since it [usually] gets destroyed once cashed. Even if the recipient is has nefarious intent, they can't do anything with the bank info, since you didn't agree to have them take stuff out of your account electronically.
Letting a payee you've authorized to withdraw money electronically from your account store that account information permanently, leads to a permanent vulnerability. Sure, when my mortgage bank once accidentally took out my mortgage payment twice, they corrected their mistake. But they didn't pay me back the penalty I had to pay my bank for unknowingly writing a rubber check.
Guess what’s printed on every single paper check you write? Your bank account and routing number. You trust all the people you send checks to with this info already. The folks processing your paper checks could keep your numbers. So what’s different?
The paranoia is great. Don’t tell people using PayPal, or every single bank’s billpay system, or the IRS, or any of the major facets of life where people use bank account and routing numbers.
As always, if there’s an error the banks are happy to correct it.
A paper check is vulnerable only while in transit since it [usually] gets destroyed once cashed. Even if the recipient is has nefarious intent, they can't do anything with the bank info, since you didn't agree to have them take stuff out of your account electronically.
Letting a payee you've authorized to withdraw money electronically from your account store that account information permanently, leads to a permanent vulnerability. Sure, when my mortgage bank once accidentally took out my mortgage payment twice, they corrected their mistake. But they didn't pay me back the penalty I had to pay my bank for unknowingly writing a rubber check.
Sure, I'm paranoid. But I have reason to be.
Paranoia's closely related behavior is also diligence and skepticism. These are not bad traits to have, and everyone's tolerance for risk vs. reward is different. There are many ways to mitigate risk, one of which is never give out certain information. This comes at an operational cost.
It is possible the agreement with your mortgage company or the FCRA (or similar) statute requires the mortgage company to pay the rubber check fee. Getting them to do so does of course come at a cost - you have to make demands, and back them up with suing, the latter which might be prohibited because you gave up your rights to do so in favor of arbitration. At the end of the day...it might all be about trust. I trust Apple, but have them all on a short leash. YMMV.
And hey, all over the media sites now are reports that you can opt out of the arbitration requirement by merely asking. Who knew this could be so easy.
A paper check is vulnerable only while in transit since it [usually] gets destroyed once cashed. Even if the recipient is has nefarious intent, they can't do anything with the bank info, since you didn't agree to have them take stuff out of your account electronically.
Letting a payee you've authorized to withdraw money electronically from your account store that account information permanently, leads to a permanent vulnerability. Sure, when my mortgage bank once accidentally took out my mortgage payment twice, they corrected their mistake. But they didn't pay me back the penalty I had to pay my bank for unknowingly writing a rubber check.
Sure, I'm paranoid. But I have reason to be.
I really see no problem with 'opting out' of letting payees get access to a bank account. Regardless of how much information we give via the AC application, there's no need to give them any more if it's not necessary.
Recently, I inquired about gym membership at a national chain and was told, after some very pointed questioning, that payment was only through EFT debiting of my bank account. WTF? Many gyms have attained a level of notoriety by continuing to debit an account after memberships are terminated. WFT! 'Ooops. Sowwy. We'll get to work on reimbursing you.' I know two people who had a very hard time getting the gym to stop the debiting, and get reimbursed. One person had even more hoops to jump through as the gym changed hands during his saga.
So if it's not absolutely necessary for me to give a payee access to my bank account, I'm going to look for an alternative method. Bill pay is one. Another is loading Apple Cash from a debit card and using AC to pay. A tiny bit of extra work, but well worth it in my opinion.
Guess what’s printed on every single paper check you write? Your bank account and routing number. You trust all the people you send checks to with this info already. The folks processing your paper checks could keep your numbers. So what’s different?
The paranoia is great. Don’t tell people using PayPal, or every single bank’s billpay system, or the IRS, or any of the major facets of life where people use bank account and routing numbers.
As always, if there’s an error the banks are happy to correct it.
A paper check is vulnerable only while in transit since it [usually] gets destroyed once cashed. Even if the recipient is has nefarious intent, they can't do anything with the bank info, since you didn't agree to have them take stuff out of your account electronically.
Letting a payee you've authorized to withdraw money electronically from your account store that account information permanently, leads to a permanent vulnerability. Sure, when my mortgage bank once accidentally took out my mortgage payment twice, they corrected their mistake. But they didn't pay me back the penalty I had to pay my bank for unknowingly writing a rubber check.
Sure, I'm paranoid. But I have reason to be.
Paranoia's closely related behavior is also diligence and skepticism. These are not bad traits to have, and everyone's tolerance for risk vs. reward is different. There are many ways to mitigate risk, one of which is never give out certain information. This comes at an operational cost.
It is possible the agreement with your mortgage company or the FCRA (or similar) statute requires the mortgage company to pay the rubber check fee. Getting them to do so does of course come at a cost - you have to make demands, and back them up with suing, the latter which might be prohibited because you gave up your rights to do so in favor of arbitration. At the end of the day...it might all be about trust. I trust Apple, but have them all on a short leash. YMMV.
But you’re not trusting Apple. They’re not the ones actually managing the banking, Goldman Sachs is, so you’re really trusting Goldman Sachs, not Apple
You will not be able to get this card unless you have a drivers license. Millions of iPhone users will not be eligible for this card because the corporate dummies at Apple and Goldman Sachs thought everyone in the USA drove a car. Tim, some of us (as in several millions in Manhattan alone) live in cities with excellent public transportation and have no need for a car. The person(s) that overlooked this detail should be fired or at least get only a 6 digit bonus in December.
While some applicants are being asked to scan a state-issued photo ID (not specifically a driver's license), not all are.
I was not asked to scan an ID. I received the Apple Card about two weeks ago. If you are a Manhattan resident and don't drive a car, I'd highly recommend you still take a trip to the DMV to get a RealID (you can get a non-drivers license ID under the RealID program) sooner rather than later. You'll need it next year if you fly in the US and given the lines at the DMV already, I can imagine it will only get worse.
Comments
Letting a payee you've authorized to withdraw money electronically from your account store that account information permanently, leads to a permanent vulnerability. Sure, when my mortgage bank once accidentally took out my mortgage payment twice, they corrected their mistake. But they didn't pay me back the penalty I had to pay my bank for unknowingly writing a rubber check.
Sure, I'm paranoid. But I have reason to be.
It is possible the agreement with your mortgage company or the FCRA (or similar) statute requires the mortgage company to pay the rubber check fee. Getting them to do so does of course come at a cost - you have to make demands, and back them up with suing, the latter which might be prohibited because you gave up your rights to do so in favor of arbitration. At the end of the day...it might all be about trust. I trust Apple, but have them all on a short leash. YMMV.
Recently, I inquired about gym membership at a national chain and was told, after some very pointed questioning, that payment was only through EFT debiting of my bank account. WTF? Many gyms have attained a level of notoriety by continuing to debit an account after memberships are terminated. WFT! 'Ooops. Sowwy. We'll get to work on reimbursing you.' I know two people who had a very hard time getting the gym to stop the debiting, and get reimbursed. One person had even more hoops to jump through as the gym changed hands during his saga.
So if it's not absolutely necessary for me to give a payee access to my bank account, I'm going to look for an alternative method. Bill pay is one. Another is loading Apple Cash from a debit card and using AC to pay. A tiny bit of extra work, but well worth it in my opinion.
Thanks for the physical address.