Keep Two Bank Accounts To Beat Cyber Attacks, Says Bank of England Adviser (thestack.com) 172
An anonymous reader writes: Everyone should keep two bank accounts so they can still access their money if one bank is hit by a cyber attack, a former Bank of England adviser has warned. "I'd certainly rather have two [accounts] in case my bank was attacked. I would want to know I could still get money out of the other one," banking expert Peter Hahn said in an interview with BBC's Today, ahead of the Bank of England's latest Financial Stability Report. According to the report, cyber risk is one of the five greatest dangers facing the UK banking industry.
standard (Score:3)
Always keep at least two accounts in two non-related banks in at least two different countries.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Dollars in the bank, euros in your paypal, pesos under the mattress, and rubles in the coffee tin.
Re: (Score:3)
Until the internet of things allows them to hack your mattress as well.
Re: (Score:2)
The Internet of Things will never include the buckets of gold coins and ammunition buried in my back yard.
No, not really.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for that. I now need to design an internet enabled bullet that can identify and broadcast its terminal action.
"Shot into air. Landed in remote sandy location"
"Shot at fast moving man. Hit brick wall"
"Travelled 800 metres before dismembering slow moving woman"
"Shot at paper target. Almost hit."
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it has long been advisable to have more than one account if you have more than the maximum protected amount. It used to be £35k, but they increased it to IIRC £75k. If you have more than that in an account and the bank goes bust or is robbed, you only get £75k back so you should split your money over a few different banks. It gets more complicated because many banks have the same parent company and the £75k is split between all the child banks.
Re:standard (Score:4, Insightful)
The US has FDIC which works simularly where in case of robbery or bank closing up to 100k USD will be covered.
Now most people I know including multi-millionaires don't keep over 100k in the bank. The bank is only good for holding money for high liquidity.
But for most people having multiple accounts will not make their money any safer as it will just be insured.
However on the government/insurers point of view having multiple bank accounts means less of a payout on the odd bank collapse.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Even those limits can be worked around. Banks that participate with CDARS [cdars.com] for instance allow you to to effectively have a single account that exceeds the normal insured amount fully protected. The funds automatically get split up among multiple participating banks on the back end.
Re: (Score:2)
Now most people I know including multi-millionaires don't keep over 100k in the bank. The bank is only good for holding money for high liquidity.
You'd be surprised. Call your bank and ask for the interest rate when the balance stays above 100k or even 250k. In many banks this VIP rate beats money market instruments like certificates of deposit.
This is a good solution in a few situations, such as wealthy senior individuals, who have plenty of other assets and no long term incentive to invest.
Re: (Score:2)
Call your bank
Unfortunately, if we're still talking about the UK here, your comment deserves (+5, Funny) for that suggestion alone...
"We are experiencing very high call volumes and all our agents are busy at the moment. Your call is being held in a queue and you are number three... hundred and... fifty... six... thousand... four... hundred and... ninety seven. Your call is important to us, and we will answer it as soon as possible."
Later, in a thick, probably Scottish or Indian accent, barely audible: "Hello, my name is
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, if we're still talking about the UK here, your comment deserves (+5, Funny) for that suggestion alone...
Lets just say that my annual income crossed a very specific threshold and my bank (that I've been with for over twenty years) contacted me to let me know that I'm now a very valued customer; here's a new contact number, here are some additional services we'd like to offer you, here are some benefits we'll grant to you for no fee.
It's fairly safe to say that someone with over 100k in the bank will get all that and rather a lot more. Banks LIKE money.
Re: (Score:2)
TSB used to have theirs in Wales. I could imagine it was Nerys Hughes on the other end sometimes.
Then they moved it to India.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd be surprised. Call your bank and ask for the interest rate when the balance stays above 100k or even 250k. In many banks this VIP rate beats money market instruments like certificates of deposit..
It definitely does.
Re: (Score:2)
For most people getting a bank account in two different countries is quite difficult. I would further argue that two different bank accounts is overkill.
What you need (and what I do) is three different credit cards from completely different suppliers. That is I have one Visa card from one bank and a separate Mastercard from another bank. These live in my wallet. I have a third credit card that lives heat sealed in a draw in an metallized antistatic bag between two sheets of cardboard.
The idea is that the tw
Re: (Score:2)
For most people getting a bank account in two different countries is quite difficult.
Only if you're American as there are some banks that refuse to do anything with Americans now because of draconian requirements such as FATCA.
Even as an American, it isn't very difficult because Mexico and Canada aren't very far away, not to mention the Caribbean.
If you have all three cards in one country, per your example, and you have your ID stolen and/or the IRS/Inland Revenue decides your a bad guy (even if you aren't), then you're screwed.
Re: (Score:2)
For most people getting a bank account in two different countries is quite difficult.
Only if you're American
It has become difficult in the UK to get a bank account in the UK. I have had two applications refused in the last year because the version of my address in the database that the bank uses to auto-complete my address when I type it into the application form is different from the version it then looks up in the electoral roll. At another bank the manager only succeeded in opening an account for me by fiddling the computer somehow.
Re: (Score:2)
"I have had two applications refused in the last year because the version of my address in the database that the bank uses to auto-complete my address when I type it into the application form is different from the version it then looks up in the electoral roll."
This seems odd, addresses are broken down into discrete fields in UK credit reference data so unless the bank is doing something really odd then it sounds more like one of these databases (the credit data, or the ER data) has a completely different a
Re: (Score:2)
You shouldn't really be having problems opening a UK account if you're a UK resident and if you are that does point to either a bad financial history or some invalid data on you that needs correcting somewhere.
Unfortunately banks seem remarkably incompetent at doing that. My wife and I run a business together, and I have lost track of how often we have physically visited the bank and told the person across the desk that she changed her name when we married several years ago. Every time they say they can't find anything on their system in that name, yet every month they persist in sending statements for one particular aspect of our business banking in her old name. This is literally going to cost them our business
Re: (Score:2)
This seems odd, addresses are broken down into discrete fields in UK credit reference data
Stop there. That is the problem - my address does not fit into those fields.
I live on a country road that has no name. The address I give is House name - Nearest Town [10 miles away] - County - Post code That is how it is in the Electoral Register and in the Royal Mail database too.
However, when I (or a bank staff member) fill in a computerised application form, the computer insists on a road name or it will not proceed. (As you say, there are discrete fields). So I make a [plausible] road name u
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I would further argue that two different bank accounts is overkill.
Why? What is your argument? I have several UK bank accounts in order to keep under the 75k guarantee limit - not cheque accounts for ready money but long term investment bonds.
What you need .. is three different credit cards from completely different suppliers. That is I have one Visa card from one bank and a separate Mastercard from another bank ....
A bit off-topic (unless it is different where you are), as in the UK at least a credit card is nothing to do with a bank account (although a bank may "front" it). I could get a credit card from my old uni for example. There are bankers in the background of course, but it is not your bank.
Anyway, you have three credit cards? I
Doesn't always work (Score:3)
I've effectively got 2 banks: a credit union and a stock brokerage account I can pull money out of quickly.
Re: (Score:2)
Some 30 years ago the ATMs on the west coast went toes up. Seems a backhoe had dug up a line on the east coast, without that line ATMs didn't work. Doesn't the dumbass bank have redundancies, you ask? Turns out the dug up line was the backup. A week earlier a heavy snowstorm had collapsed the roof of a building that banks needed to run the network.
That was most if not all of the entire US. (Or, a similar outage happened in '88 or so.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In other news... (Score:2)
This is a perfect example of what happens when people who have more than enough money believe they are communicating with the rest of the world.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but $500 a month invested in the stock market at 7% average returns would be worth $610,000 at the end of the 30 years so you're up a half million. It only works if you're disciplined, but if you're not then it's unlikely you'll be able to handle the 15 year mortgage payments anyways.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry forgot about the 1600 a month over the last 15 years, it's still a net gain of 322k in the investment scenario.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but $500 a month invested in the stock market at 7% average returns would be worth $610,000 at the end of the 30 years so you're up a half million. It only works if you're disciplined, but if you're not then it's unlikely you'll be able to handle the 15 year mortgage payments anyways.
Awesome. This all reminds me of the retirement schemes that are heavily stock market oriented. Man you'll always be rolling in the dough, a 5Xmillionaire when you retire. You are always going to get a 7 percent return all the time.
Why? Because, in the long run the stock market ALWAYS goes up.
And bedamned if that isn't the truth.
But as many of my co-workers found out, it doesn't matter a tinkers damn. What is important is where the stock market is, and where you have your money on the date you inten
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
1. Affordability. People may not be able to afford the monthly payments on a 30 year mortgage
2. Taxes. Depending on what other deductions you may have, the interest may be tax deductible.
3. Other loans: A smart person pays off the highest interest loans first.
4. Security: it may be a good idea to pay off a loan more slowly if it means that you hav
Re: (Score:2)
200,000 dollars mortgaged at 5%.
Seriously, using a calculator is being a troll?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Especially in this day and age when you have online mortgage calculators, mortgage comparison websites and a wealth of information out there on how to get an effective one, yet so many people just get a mortgage from their bank without even shopping around, never mind calculating.
Well, that is how the subprime lending crisis caught so much steam. The first ads for the huge mortgages with the ridiculously low monthly payments told me what was coming. The interest only loans were impossible to believe. Further research showed me that it was much worse than even that. Towards the end, there were ancient people with 50 year mortgages. And they still have them! http://www.nationwidemortgages... [nationwidemortgages.net] People act like that one guy who foresaw the collapse was some kind of genius. Dunno what th
Re: (Score:2)
Did it ever occur to you that many people will never qualify for a mortgage based on any number of factors such as location?
It occurs to me very much. But then, that was part of the reason I don't live in places where I cant afford to live. Pretty simple math.
After all, a fair portion of the people who live in San Diego or New York City will never make enough to buy within 50 miles of where they work - but they probably understand the math that you laid out intimately.
One of my favorite parts of this recurring conversation is that people always have a litany of excuses. But in reality- it is simple. If your career doesn't pay you enough to live in a certain area, then perhaps you don't want to live in that area.
Besides, if you can't afford a house in those areas, it really doesn't matter, because you won't have a mortgage anyhow.
Remi
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I completely agree with you in as far as living in locations where the cost of living is moderate. I also accept that many people cannot do that due to family constraints or other priorities which keep them anchored.
As far as retirement, I sincerely hope that neither of us have to fight against the kind of inflation we witnessed during the Ford and Cater Administrations but understand that this could happen.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I can talk and talk, but the other side has to listen. But so few people take telling.
You sound like a complete fucking moron... No doubt people ignore you.
Yup. I do believe you believe I'm a complete fucking moron.
Re: (Score:2)
I can talk and talk, but the other side has to listen. But so few people take telling.
Yep. What do you tell a woman with two black eyes? Nuthin! The bitch already been told twice...
Ehrmagherd! That reminds me of the old days on alt.tastless.jokes. Thanks for th flashback!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Better is subjective. I don't judge myself above others, in fact, this is why I expect everyone to be able to do anything I can do.
Indeed, better is subjective, unlike having the ability to comprehend and then act on knowledge which was passed on to you as part of your being raised by educated and caring parents or through a decent school system. Then there is that ugly issue of mental health which some estimates range as high as afflicting one in four Americans.
In my case, because I take a lot of risks, it will likely be a rollercoaster of having money, no money, money etc. But, I go forward doing these things and lead a happy life.
The reality is that in the next thirty years your life will likely transition into something wholly unrecognizable from today's perspective. If we look at the increasingly
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He does. Have you considered learning the language of the place you live in? Or failing that, using google?
Re: (Score:2)
He does. Have you considered learning the language of the place you live in?
I am also in the UK and also struggled to understand what the GGP meant by "secured", and I don't consider there is much wrong with my English apart from the occasional typpppppo.
I think what the GGP meant by "secured" is "obtained". In UK English, "secured" generally means "made safe", hence the trans-Atlantic confusion. It is particularly ambiguous in this discussion which is in fact about making money safe.
I believe that what the GGP is saying is that many people do not have enough money to wor
Re: (Score:2)
Words can have more than one meaning. And it was obvious, at least to me, which one was intended.
Re: (Score:2)
He does. Have you considered learning the language of the place you live in? Or failing that, using google?
I think he refuses to on principle, because that would just make him one of us fat cats who have money.
What I am surprised at is that anyone would need to be told to have their money in more than one bank. I've had mine in several banks since long before the intertoobz.
But then again, we live in a world where many people think it is smart to take out 30 year mortgages rather than 15 year ones. Then wonder why they don't have any money.
Re: (Score:2)
I think it is smart to have a 30 year mortgage rather than a 15 year one because my rate is much less than I expect from my investments, and the difference in payments is being invested.
Yes, this does mean that I am somewhat more leveraged, but if the house value really drops enough to be less than I owe on it, well the reason the bank is charging me more than prime is because they are taking the risk of getting the house instead of the money in that case.
Paying off a loan is only a good return if the loan
Re: (Score:2)
I'm too drunk for this, but..
I think it is smart to have a 30 year mortgage rather than a 15 year one because my rate is much less than I expect from my investments, and the difference in payments is being invested.
So.
Monthly payment: M
Principle (amount borrowed): P
Interest rate (monthly): i
Number of repayments: n
M = P [ i(1 + i)^n ] / [ (1 + i)^n â" 1]
(stolen from https://www.nerdwallet.com/blo... [nerdwallet.com] )
So 30 year mortgage:
T = P(i(1+i)^360) / ((1+i)^360 -1)
vs 15 year mortgage:
F = P(i(1+i)^180) / ((1+i)^180 -1)
Frankly that's a pain in the arse for me to calculate while drunk - and wolfram alpha can't tell me the difference between T and F. So lets assume
i = 4% annually, so 0.04/12 = 0.003
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe my maths is broken. I'm not terribly good at it and I'm drunk, but frankly it's looking pretty unlikely for you.
Your maths are fine. I had people coming down to brag about how much money they made and put into their retirement investments all the time.
They stopped doing that in 2000 when the tech bubble burst.
Some others did the same until the housing market drug us into the great recession in 2007-2008.
They stopped too.
And through conservative investments, saving and paying my bills off as quickly as I could, I am where they would have been. They are all still working and looking forward to a severely lessed
Re: (Score:2)
The five big fears of banks (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Getting bank regulation that deserves that name
2. Not getting bailed out next time the gambling backfires
3. A country being able to pay back its debts and thus free to make a move on them
4. People catching on how things worked out for Iceland and Iceland becoming a role model
5. Anyone with some clout declaring "this bank is bankrupt". Because that can bankrupt any bank. No matter the size.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I have to argue that the government owning certain things leads to a healthier economy. With certain basic facilities being provided by the government rather than private businesses, it can be ensured that businesses have to compete on an even ground rather than businesses enjoying advantages due to owning basic facilities, thus creating a de facto monopoly situation.
If phone lines were owned by government facilities that have to, by law, let them to every ISP on the same conditions, we'd see far
Re: (Score:2)
2. Not getting bailed out next time the gambling backfires
Okay, this one bothers me. While partially true, its unfair the way you have stated it. The recent #2 is a direct result of #5
You realize that the bank 'failures' were not because the banks were actually failing, right? Its because the government changed the laws that governed how much of their assets could be out 'on loan' and how much they actually had in cash so that all the loans they had made recently put them in a situation that was illegal.
It wasn't illegal when they made the deals. The governmen
Re: (Score:2)
You're not claiming that governments told banks to go on high risk businesses and basically betting their complete financial well being on venues that amount to nothing short of gambling, are you?
Requires Money (Score:2, Insightful)
In order to have two bank accounts, one needs to have money. So, Peter Hahn, where do I get all this magic money you speak of? Working full time does not do it. Maybe you could give us all some so we can open multiple bank accounts?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The core principle of capitalism is laziness: rather than working, you make money by investing money. Surprisingly, it works better than one might expect, but it's far from perfect.
This contrasts socialism, which has the core principle that one gets what one needs by actively working. A good dose of socialist principle helps a country, but pure socialism tends to invite corruption.
(Oddly, the right-wing press swap the two around, and claim that socialism is for the lazy. The point in socialism - which is in
Re: (Score:2)
I have a better idea (Score:2, Insightful)
Keep zero bank account and invest in a good safe.
"Cyber attacks" might be among the biggest threats to the banking system, but the banking system is the biggest threat to people's worth.
Re: (Score:3)
Mice a a vastly bigger risk to your home safe than the banks are to your savings.
When was the last time someone lost their FDIC insured account balance?
Go home, buy some gold, and put your tinfoil hat on you nutter.
This "beats" cyber attacks? (Score:2)
Drumming up new business (Score:2)
What does it cost for a bank account in the UK? Are they pursuing collecting two monthy fees from each consumer?
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it's unlikely this will net the banks any additional profit and will in fact lower profits per-bank. If you stay in credit in the UK then they simply skim the interest paid by the central bank on your proportion of their holdings and pay themselves with that.
Say for example you had £100 in your account for a year, and central bank interest rates were 3% then they'll just take that £3 as payment. I believe the average rolling holdings in a UK current account is something like
Re: (Score:2)
What does it cost for a bank account in the UK? Are they pursuing collecting two monthy fees from each consumer?
It costs nothing. In fact UK banks used to give interest even on cheque accounts (but no more)
Having said that, some banks have "Gold" accounts (or some such name) which do charge a fee in return for allowing a bigger overdraft or "personal attention" from the manager whatever that involves. I pay no fees, don't need personal attention, never need an overdraft, but am constantly bombarded with hype urging me to "upgrade" to a "gold" account. My banks also have a Byzantine system of fees for stuff like
Re: (Score:2)
There, that's sorted.
What's wrong with cash? (Score:2)
What's wrong with cash? Or is that too independent / liberty-y for the brits? Using two banks just doubles your risks of card / account / user/pass getting stolen.
If you go the "two banks" route, check which core processor they use for their accounting first. In the US, there are about 5 companies that smaller institutions use to run their account and transaction data. If the breach is one of the core processors, you don't want to have your two redundant banks on the same processor.
Of all the things
Re: (Score:2)
"What's wrong with cash? Or is that too independent / liberty-y for the brits? Using two banks just doubles your risks of card / account / user/pass getting stolen."
You wont get interest paid on cash held, so it'll lose value over time compared to that held in a savings account.
In the UK, having your banking details stolen is not too big a deal. Unless the bank can prove you were seriously negligent (which they basically have never been able to do unless you really did something stupid like posted your plai
Availability vs Security (Score:2)
You run multiple disks spreading and duplicating data so that your availability is higher in case one (or more) disk(s) goes down.
For every disk you add, the chance that something will happen goes up, but the chance of you recovering your data can go up as well.
For your bank account I claim the same to be true. Two banks with different systems double the chance of you experiencing one that has a break-in.
Each bank may have different systems leading to differ
Probability (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Let them eat cake (Score:4, Insightful)
Typical advice from an out-of-touch banker. This is impractical for those most at risk of serious consequences if their bank closes for a few days. It's not like getting an extra hard drive and copying your money to the backup bank. You have to split your limited assets and make sure you meet the minimum requirements of two institutions. And heaven help you if each requires you to have direct deposit in order to avoid monthly fees.
Re: (Score:2)
"You have to split your limited assets and make sure you meet the minimum requirements of two institutions."
Those requirements are hardly difficult to achieve though. The government has an agreement with banks such that even homeless people can get basic bank accounts (with no frills things like overdrafts excluded) - this was to allow the government to pay welfare digitally rather than have to maintain a process of having to provide, manage, and secure, cash handouts.
Basically anyone in the UK should be ab
Ha, silly Brit (Score:2)
Only a banker (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I already use more than one account (Score:2)
I have one account with fiat money, one with Bitcoins.
And one with Dogecoins, one with Litecoins, etc.
Jokes on them (Score:2)
Sounds Out of Touch (Score:2)
not always possible (Score:3)
There have been times when I've had multiple bank accounts. However, eventually, one bank ended up buying the other, leaving me with two accounts at the same bank.
Re: (Score:2)
Fuck everything, we're doing five back accounts.
http://www.theonion.com/blogpo... [theonion.com]
Re:Make it three (Score:5, Insightful)
This advice is actually supposed to protect the banks, not the customers. If a bank is hacked it has to repay any losses you suffer. Say a business has its account locked and can't pay wages, or someone moving house can't pay for their new home and the sale falls through. The knock-on financial losses could be huge. Hundreds of employees having regular payments fail, black marks on their credit records that they have to get removed, a whole chain of house buyers falling apart, fees for late payments etc.
So if you have two accounts you can use the other one to make payments, thus lessening the bank's financial liability.
Re: (Score:3)
a business has its account locked and can't pay wages, or someone moving house can't pay for their new home and the sale falls through.
It is unlikely that the business/mover will be able to keep enough money in both accounts to pay in the scenarios that you envision. Having two bank accounts gives you guaranteed access to at most half your money: it will normally work for getting some ready cash, and will often suffice for paying monthly bills, but not the really big items.
The other hazard is the other things that your bank keeps for you: all the payment details, amounts, dates that are used. The redundant bank (i.e. the one not normal
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd go a bit further and suggest, having listened to those wiser in the subject than I, that a multiple account scenario with using both banks and credit unions (preferring the latter) is a prudent thing to do if one wishes to maintain access in varied situations, avoid certain legal issues, or minimize risks. You don't get to choose what the holder does, necessarily, but you can act in your own self-interest.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not worried about cyber attacks against banks.
I'm worried about the fairly regular bank outages.
They haven't hit my bank yet, but with cost cutting I'm sure it will eventually.
Re: (Score:2)
One day you'll meet the right woman.
Wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
The others:
1) Bankers
2) Banking
3) Lying
4) Cheating
Those aren't dangers - they're just business as usual
Re:Duel Bank accounts (business) (Score:5, Funny)
Is that a typo and you actually meant "Dual" or are you actually suggesting we have banks fight each other to the death? Because I'm OK with either.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's just clever spam - paid forum posting is a thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just put your money under your bed, you'll get better interest rate, right now the real interest rate is negative. Don't use a bank, simple.
You still have to contend with inflation with cash.
With an account, you have fees.
In a lot of ways you are better off buying non-perishable commodities that you will use eventually. Most of the time the price goes up as somewhat of a hedge against inflation. That way you can purchase utility now for price X where it will be used when it is costing price X plus Y fudge factor.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A safe location? If even the bank is not a safe location, what do you think is a safe location? What if there's a fire? Somewhere safe where, for instance, it will all be instantly seized if law enforcement happened to figure out where it was? I mean you never know, your kid could be a pot smoker and they could bring drug/currency dogs to sniff around your house. And a large pile of cash would be instantly seized, because "everyone" knows only drug dealers and criminals have large piles of cash, right?
I m
Re: (Score:2)
A cyberattack on a bank isn't going to keep you from accessing your safety deposit box.
Re: (Score:2)
Your employer doesn't allow you to send your direct deposit to multiple accounts or you're living paycheck to paycheck and hence have no reserve savings?
Re: (Score:2)
If you buy less crap and watch your expenses it is not hard to build up a decent balance in your savings plan. Most folks instead choose to buy lots of junk and services, then freak out when they need to replace the roof, or have a car repaired. They can mostly manage to pay the loan payments and credit card bills used to cover those "emergencies", but can never manage to put regular contributions to their savings account.
In our house we have put all bonuses into savings, and have put most of every raise