Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Input Devices The Almighty Buck Technology

Deposit Checks By iPhone 293

kaychoro writes to mention that at least one privately held bank is planning on removing a little bit more legwork for the consumer by allowing the electronic submission of paper checks via a new iPhone app. The app would allow users to take a picture of the front and back of the check and submit that to the depository. "Customers will not have to mail the check to the bank later; the deposit will be handled entirely electronically, and the bank suggests voiding the check and filing or discarding it. But to reduce the potential for fraud, only customers who are eligible for credit and have some type of insurance through USAA will be permitted to use the deposit feature. Mr. Peacock said that about 60 percent of the bank's customers qualify."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Deposit Checks By iPhone

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Checks (Score:2, Insightful)

    by 644bd346996 ( 1012333 ) on Monday August 10, 2009 @01:00PM (#29012669)

    I'm pretty sure that the IRS and the various state treasuries still issue more checks each year than old people.

  • Re:Interesting... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by rm999 ( 775449 ) on Monday August 10, 2009 @01:16PM (#29012943)

    "I wonder how much "reverse fraud" is possible with this? I take a picture of a $1000 check, and the person who wrote the check says 'hey, wait a minute! I only wrote that check for $100, the person who cashed it faked that image!'"

    I'm confused, in your scenario who is committing the crime? I see problems either way. If it is the person who wrote the check, there is still an image of the check. So if the check says "One thousand dollars" on it, he's out of luck - he can't claim it said 100.

    If the person who is scanning the check modifies it, not only is he committing a crime, he is risking his credit rating. It's easy to get caught too - I think about half the people I know who write checks have carbon copies of their checks, and almost all businesses have electronics copies. Anyway, it's possible to modify checks as it is, that crime is nothing new.

  • Re:Checks (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DAldredge ( 2353 ) <SlashdotEmail@GMail.Com> on Monday August 10, 2009 @01:17PM (#29012959) Journal
    Some people like having a physical record that they paid something
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 10, 2009 @01:18PM (#29012987)

    When I voted for Obama, I voted for change. Not the kind that jingles in the purse pocket of the 90 year old lady standing in front of me at the Piggly Wiggly searching for her checkbook in her handbag. I understand that we probably can't leave these grannies without their paper checks, but at some point, probably during the Obama administration, a bunch of them will die off. We should use that as an opportunity to do away with checks completely.

    Electronic bank transfer is where it's at. Paperless society. Swipe and go at the grocery store.

    Please Mr. Obama, implement real change. Get rid of checks.

    you're aware that the US government can't abolish checks, right?

    They don't have the Constitutional authority for the War on (some) Drugs (particularly the asset forfeiture laws) or the bank bailouts or the Federal Reserve or warrentless wiretaps or detaining citizens without charges and due process or collusion with ATT either. Those were stopped by a lack of authority, right?

  • Bank disputes (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tepples ( 727027 ) <tepples@gmail.BOHRcom minus physicist> on Monday August 10, 2009 @01:28PM (#29013169) Homepage Journal

    Some people like having a physical record that they paid something

    You mean like a bank statement?

    In that case, some people like having a physical record that they paid something that they can use in disputes with a bank.

  • by GeckoAddict ( 1154537 ) on Monday August 10, 2009 @01:53PM (#29013601)
    According to this wiki entry [], Apple has roughly 10.7% of the market share of smartphones, while Symbian has 47%, Blackberry has 19.5%, Windows Mobile has 12.4%, and hell, even linux has almost 9%. So to say that the iPhone is is the single most popular is a bit of a stretch (even with the qualifier 'for personal use').

    Arguing ease of development shouldn't really be a factor, because all they're really doing it saving a picture and sending it... it can't be that hard with any of the APIs (ridiculously easy with Win Mobile, for example) . But I think arguing that there's no market for potential users could be a bad argument.
  • Re:Checks (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ljw1004 ( 764174 ) on Monday August 10, 2009 @02:07PM (#29013801)

    Can't you? Doesn't your bank have an online "bill-pay" system? Mine does. They normally do payment by having the bank write a check and posting it to the recipient.

    But if you want to send money to a friend's bank account, then it first gets sent as a check from your bank to your friend's bank, and on subsequent payments they do it electronically if they can.

  • Re:Interesting... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 10, 2009 @02:22PM (#29014039)

    Then you ask "why does your handwriting say One Thousand on the line below the numeric value?"

    You guys are trying to split atoms when you should be tying your shoes.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 10, 2009 @02:40PM (#29014319)

    Since we're on the way-back train here already, how about asking for payment in sheep? That way you cut out the slavery of having to go to the store to buy dinner, you have it right there in your arms!

  • Re:Checks (Score:2, Insightful)

    by SchizoStatic ( 1413201 ) on Monday August 10, 2009 @03:01PM (#29014657) Homepage Journal
    I would seriously change banks then. If your bank is confused by a simple check then they should not be a bank.
  • No you are wrong (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Archfeld ( 6757 ) * <> on Monday August 10, 2009 @03:13PM (#29014795) Journal

    Doing financial business in bits and bytes is ridiculously simple and easy, the cost is nearly nill, the banks are just robbing folks as usual. I worked for several years in a Global Funds Transfer department for a huge bank. GFT technology is OLD OLD OLD, think like telegraph/fax old, that is why it works to anywhere, in Mexico, or say Nigeria, or that little village in Tanzania. You just got screwed because the big banks OWN all the wires, and they have divided up the playing field so they seem to compete but don't really do so...

  • by holophrastic ( 221104 ) on Monday August 10, 2009 @03:58PM (#29015397)

    So, cheques: a piece of paper laced with security techniques to dodge copying/photographing/duplicating/forging is going to be accepted in photographed form? That seems more than idiotic.

Information is the inverse of entropy.