Talk:Faster Payments

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

What's In A Name?

for that later. --nathanbeach 19:55, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've also seen "Faster Payments Scheme" and "Faster Payments Plan" used on various web sites. 93.96.82.10 (talk) 10:54, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Expand Table

The table which shows what each bank offers should be revamped to allow easier determination of the status of payments to credit cards and via Standing Order - HSBC's recent move to pay HSBC branded MasterCard accounts the same day being an example. It may be easier to produce a seperate table for each.

Harry The Bustard (talk) 11:33, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Building Societies

Whilst the Nationwide is listed, I feel it is a special case (since it operates current accounts and offers Visa Debit. Is it right to list all the building societies on the payments list that only offer savings- should they be separated out as they aren't clearing banks? Flyingscot (talk) 23:27, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The table would seem useful for someone who might, for example, be comparing "instant access" savings accounts and wanting to know which really are instant access, and which are 3-4 working days access. 81.187.97.69 (talk) 16:18, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It would seem logical to include any institution that offers a day-to-day current account (where FPS is most useful). Many Building Societies have full current accounts with debit cards these days, so I don't think it's wise to restrict it to big banks.. That said, some lower-tiered institutions route via other banks and I'm not sure if that slows down the process. Rcalvert (talk)

Dead?

www.fastpayments.co.uk is down. Is the whole thing dead? Sockseh (talk) 03:16, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, Sockseh. The address is http://www.fasterpayments.org.uk/ as linked from the article and is very much alive. That website claims that all UK banks and building societies now participate. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 13:40, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The site has a list of 10 "current members" including one named as a "building society". Pol098 (talk) 11:46, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Revisions

I have gone in and trimmed a couple sections (Technology and Delays) that were not particularly useful to the contemporary reader. I also updated the statistics and citations to refer to The Payments Council and the Faster Payments website. There is more to be done here, including a proper description of the settlement process, but that information can be found easily through the external links. This should address the immediate problems of outdated information. Payments Geek (talk) 21:02, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Time

For anybody editing the article re times: I recently added the exceedingly important information that FP time is not guaranteed. While this is original research and not appropriate for the article, the text should not rule out real-world cases such as one that affected me: I made a payment from one Barclays account to another that was credited, I think, the next day. I then made a payment between the same accounts on a Thursday; it had not been credited by the Sunday, and actually became available on the following Monday (a bank holiday!) I don't know how the delay was distributed by the sending and receiving institutions. So the article should not imply that FP is suitable for must-be-in-time transactions, despite its claim to be "the only UK payment system available day and night, 365 days per year ... quickly and reliably". Pol098 (talk) 11:42, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Faster Payments Service. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140507011838/http://www.paymentscouncil.org.uk/files/payments_council/publications_2013/annual_clearing_statistics_2013.pdf to http://www.paymentscouncil.org.uk/files/payments_council/publications_2013/annual_clearing_statistics_2013.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:48, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merger

I propose a new article New Payment System Operator as the destination of a merger of the following pages:

This is because of the consolidation of Bacs Payment Schemes Ltd (BPSL), Cheque and Credit Clearing Company (C&CCC) and the Faster Payments Scheme Ltd (FPSL) into the new organisation NPSO Limited. NPSO took over responsibility for the operation of the BACS and Faster Payments retail payment systems in the UK on 1st May 2018, and for C&CCC on 1st July 2018

I propose to name the newly created merger destination page New Payment System Operator, as this is who the entity is commonly referred to by itself, by the organisations it subsumed and by the Bank of England. I suggest the following pages should also be created as redirects to New Payment System Operator:

NPSO the common acronym that currently has no page on Wikipedia EN
NPSO Limited the name registered at Companies House (see footers of https://www.newpso.uk/)
NewPSO because this is the name they use in their domain

I also propose some initial content for the new page in: User:Artemgy/New Payment System Operator, above and beyond the content that is merged in from the proposed articles.

This talk page should be the single location for the merger discussion, and is referred to by the talk pages of the source candidates.

Artemgy (talk) 12:45, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don't merge – Proposed destination does not exist, and outwardly there is evidence that all three services are still conducting operations under their names. By all means create the article and reference these services, and I'd suggest reconsidering a merger when the article is established and/or circumstances change. AtomCrusher (talk) 23:28, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose merger until the New Payment System Operator article is created and contains meaningful, substantive content. Ntmamgtw (talk) 08:21, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]