'My son spent £3,160 in one game'

Last week we told the story of the family whose children emptied their parents' bank account buying players in the video game Fifa.

It generated a big debate about whether parental controls are sufficient, how much responsibility lies with mum and dad - and the ethics of encouraging young players to spend money within games and apps.

Following the BBC's report, deputy Labour leader Tom Watson tweeted calling for "tighter regulation" in gaming, saying there were "considerable fears that gaming is a gateway to gambling".

This alarming case of children racking up huge debts on FIFA highlights considerable fears that gaming is a gateway to gambling, with boys and girls hooked in at ridiculously young ages by loot boxes. The case for tighter regulation is overwhelming.https://t.co/vuMl5mNHTZ

— Tom Watson (@tom_watson) 9 July 2019

Damian Collins, chair of the DCMS select committee, which is currently investigating technology and addiction, told the BBC he believes the issue is "a real problem".

"I think there should be an obligation for the company to warn people about suspicious activity, like large increases in spending, just as banks warn their customers about unusual transactions," he said.

Here are some of the stories you shared with us.

My son spent £3,160 in one game
I have a 22 year-old disabled son, who has cerebral palsy, complex epilepsy, autism, learning difficulties and the approximate cognitive ability of a seven-year-old child.

He is unable to do any bilateral activities so relies heavily on his iPad and PlayStation for entertainment and educational activities.

He has recently been playing a game on his iPad called Hidden Artifacts which involves finding various items and matching them to the description.

He has been charged £3160.58 between 18 February and 30 May 2019, clearing out his entire savings.

I contacted iTunes, who were extremely helpful but were unable to refund the amount and suggested I contact Blastworks Ltd, the app developer and game provider. [Under European rules, Apple users in the EU can request to cancel an order within 14 days of purchase].

I have phoned and emailed several times but have had no response.

It is extremely distressing that vulnerable people, such as my son, become victims of what is thought to be an educational game.

I have tried tirelessly to recoup his life savings but constantly come up against a brick wall.

Susie Breare, Hampshire

Basketball game cost our family £2,000
My 16-year-old son spent nearly £2,000 of my money on EA's NBA basketball game.

He used my bank card and I didn't realise until I had a payment declined.

He accessed the app via Google Play.

EA made no response to me and Google Play has a disclaimer about kids using parents' bank details without permission.

My daughter had to use her university savings to pay the bill for this and it has caused huge damage to our family.

Susan Taylor, Scotland

My 4-year old grandson downloaded an app and payed for it with his mother's credit card.

— Ordinary Punter (@IfiwereQueen) 9 July 2019

I used to do small town tech support and about 2/3 cases a week were about how to stop purchases on an Xbox (360 at the time).

For anyone looking:https://t.co/dUNydt4Ia9

— 𝔄𝔩𝔢𝔵ℜ𝔞𝔱𝔪𝔞𝔫 (@alexratman) 9 July 2019

Our son spent £700 on Clash of Clans
This happened to us a few years ago when we were very new to all this. We are technically savvy but didn't think to put a password on and my son, who was 12, ended up spending around £700.

It was on his own phone and he managed to download Clash of Clans through a Google Play account, enter his own children's bank card details and buy lots of in-game items.

We didn't realise until we checked his bank statement and it was virtually empty. He did not realise the connection, that it was real money leaving his bank account.

We never got our money back, apart from a token amount as a gesture of goodwill.

Anon, West Sussex

Hmmm...it’s not as simple as parents should have known better, perhaps parental controls should also be stronger...I have my account tapped up every so often by an accidental purchase!

— Mike Hall (@Lazyeyeguy) 9 July 2019

My daughter installed the same game three times
My 11-year-old daughter has spent over £100 of my money in a day downloading apps that are the same.

I had Google Play blocked from accessing money from my account but recently they changed settings that somehow allowed my girl to spend money unauthorised. I had to contact the fraud team on three occasions to get money back.

The games my daughter was installing were horse games and Minecraft. She installed the same game three times.

I had no idea until I found my bank account was empty and checked my online statement.

My daughter is now [using] a closed system back on a PS3. No fraud, no online grooming and no bullying.

Julia Pennycuick, Edinburgh

I think all these add-on in-app type of things should become opted out by default (ideally banned but hey ho) and then it needs parental consent to opt-in/purchase. Sure there are controls there but not everyone understand them or is even aware them

— Si Gillespie (@SiGi1969) 9 July 2019

"He was completely inconsolable"
I installed Mini Golf King on my phone for my son who is five. He knows he's not allowed to spend money in games, yet this game successfully tricked him into spending £300 on in-app purchases.

Fortunately, my card issuer blocked some of the transactions, but a purchase for £75 went through, along with a few smaller ones.

When my son realised that he'd spent real money, he was completely inconsolable, saying he was so sorry for being naughty and he thought they were pretend coins.

My refund request via Google Play was automatically rejected.

I explained that my son is autistic, and his disability makes him vulnerable (he doesn't really understand the concept of being manipulated and he wouldn't necessarily understand why people who make games want money).

Google said I should contact Mini Golf King, which said it did not generally refund in-app purchases once the purchased items had been used.

It offered to delete the account and submit a refund case to the store from which the purchases had been made, but said this would be non-reversible.

I have heard nothing since.

People will say "well, you should be supervising him". I was! I was in the room.

But the game is a children's game, rated PEGI 3 [suitable for players aged three and above].

I would allow him to watch a U-rated film and I assumed PEGI 3 games were safe to play with casual supervision.

Claire, West Yorkshire

even I've been caught out, not by a huge amount (well £80) but it's NOT as simple as "known better"

— Brian B (@brackb01) 9 July 2019

My boy spent almost £1,000 on Fortnite
When he was 15, my boy spent almost £1,000 on Fortnite.

The issue was it was small cumulative amounts that don't seem significant until you add them up over eight months.

He doesn't have Fortnite any more... and my car will be clean for the next 15 years!

Naz, Dubai

Our daughter's "free trial" cost £93
Last week my wife got a suspicious email from PayPal, £93 for some mobile app that takes a photo and converts it to a 3D emoji.

I checked my online banking app and sure enough the money for a "free" trial had been taken.

It turned out my wife had left herself logged into Google Play on her old phone that she'd given to our youngest daughter, who had signed up for the free trial, which after a week expired and took the funds.

Thankfully Google were very quick to refund the amount, within 30 minutes of raising the issue with them.

Damian Cox, Leicestershire

Google told the BBC that it advises parents to set up its Family Link tool.

"This gives you the ability to set various types of permissions per person in the family," said a spokesman.

"For example, you can use password protection so that a password needs to be entered each time a purchase is made, including for in-app purchases billed by Google Play, like buying coins in games."

The BBC also contacted Blastworks, EA, Mini Golf King and Supercell for comment.

Games analyst Piers Harding-Rolls, from IHS Markit, said that 56% of consumer spending on games in the UK is forecast to be on micro-transactions, in-app purchases and paid downloadable content (outside of full games) in 2019.

"It is clear that there need to be safeguards for younger players," he said.

"Educating parents around controls that can be used on devices to help mitigate these incidents occurring, and awareness of age rating for content, is a good starting point.

"I'd also like to see the industry self-regulate to do more to safeguard younger players and overuse of games."

(Source: BBC)

How much pocket money should we give our kids?

If parents can afford to give pocket money to their children, then much more often than not they will pay them in cash.

One survey suggests that 84% of British parents give notes and coins to their children, typically an allowance - including some discretionary spending - of £7 a week.

Yet, by 2028, banks predict that for every 10 occasions when adults buy something, they will only use notes and coins once. For the rest, we will mostly use cards or digital payments.

So what will that mean for the nation's children? Will today's youngsters be learning about money using currency that is close to obsolete? Will parents have to find a new way of paying pocket money, or decide not to bother paying at all?

Experts say that paying a small amount, however infrequently, can help youngsters learn about money and budgeting.

It seems that the children themselves agree, especially if pocket money depends on completing chores.

Nine-year-old Yusuf says: "It is making you feel like when you are older and get a job - when you do stuff and get paid for it.

"But obviously you are going to get more when you are older, rather than just 50p a day."

Pocket money surveys rarely agree on the going rate for children's allowances. The Halifax, part of Lloyds Banking Group, has been running such a survey since 1987, which is one of the most well-established.

Its latest findings suggested a wide range of average amounts in different parts of Britain. Others suggest the Halifax estimate of the typical weekly payment is rather high, but there is general agreement that cash is currently the preferred choice.

Research has suggested that money habits are set by the age of seven. At a meeting of head teachers and authorities on Wednesday, some will call for better financial education in primary schools.

Whatever children are taught at school, a few pennies at home - starting in cash - can go a long way, according to Sarah Porretta, of the government-backed but independent Money and Pensions Service.

Her advice for parents includes:

• Get children started with money as young as possible
• Don't worry how much to give in pocket money, or how often
• Parents who have no money at the end of the week should still talk to their children about the financial choices they make

For those parents who no longer carry cash - just using payment cards and smartphones - the mother-of-two says: "The trick is to go and get some coins, just so your children have the opportunity to interact with them.

"Then talk about what you are doing with money. If you are paying with a card or with a phone talk to children about that and link it back to those coins they have handled."

A growing band of pocket money smartphone apps suggest a different answer.

"The way we interact with money has changed. Pocket money is changing. We pay for things with the touch of a button," says Will Carmichael, father-of-two and chief executive of one of those apps - RoosterMoney.

"Traditionally pocket money sits in a jar at home, you add your coins, you can see it build up, and then you take that down to the sweet shop. That is no longer the case. You may use it for [video game] Fortnite online. You might use it to pay for a pair of trainers from an online shop.

"We are bringing pocket money online and making it more tangible again."

The RoosterMoney app allows youngsters to set savings goals

The app starts for four year-olds with an online reward chart, it moves on to a pocket money tracker which allows youngsters to set savings goals. Top of that list, according to the company's data, is Lego, followed by phones, and holiday money.

Eventually, it allows them to move on to spending with a pre-paid card. Data shows most pocket money is still spent on sweets, although books are second. The app also allows them to donate some of the money they have saved to charity.

However, the more advanced features cost a fee - an extra expense not suffered by parents who pay their children in cash.

Mr Carmichael argues that the charge costs parents far less than swimming or music lessons, but still teaches youngsters a practical life skill.

Bank basics
The next step for most youngsters is opening a bank account. Savings accounts can be opened from the age of seven, and current accounts from the age of 11.

"These are a great way of introducing your children to the world of banking, allowing them to use 'grown up' features like ATMs to get cash, or increasingly to make contactless payments, and even mobile payments if they have a smartphone," says Brian Brown, head of insight at data analysts Defaqto. "They also make it easier for family members to gift them money.

"Some of the accounts also pay interest, although not at high rates, allowing young people to get into the savings habit from an early age.

"By setting up standing orders you can pay children their pocket money regularly, with no moaning over missed or late payments - or even worse, each parent giving them their pocket money and paying them twice."

(Source: BBC)

In 4 years, banks fined you more than what Vijay Mallya and Nirav Modi owe them

Banks in India have earned at least Rs 10,391.43 crore by charging you for just two things--failure to maintain minimum balance in saving accounts and carrying out more than the permitted number of free ATM transactions in a month.

Of course, you have heard the name Vijay Mallya. The liquor baron who once had a majority stake in United Beverages, the face of Kingfisher Airline and Royal Challengers Bangalore, and a host of other things? Aaah! You remember. Good.

Vijay Mallya owes approximately Rs 9,000 crore to various Indian banks. He defrauded them over years and now is in the United Kingdom. India says it wants him to be deported and efforts are on.

Another name that you must have heard of is Nirav Modi. The diamond businessman who defrauded Indian banks to the tune of more than Rs 11,300 crore?

But this is not an article about India’s fugitive billionaires. Forget them for a while. This article is about you and your money.

In less than four years (April 2015 to September 2018), banks in India have earned at least Rs 10,391.43 crore by charging you for just two things--failure to maintain minimum balance in saving accounts and carrying out more than the permitted number of free ATM transactions in a month.

This amount is more than what Vijay Mallya owes, and is 92 per cent of the amount owed by Nirav Modi. Hold on and take a breath because this amount is just the one collected by public sector banks. It doesn't include the earnings made by private banks by collecting fines.

(Penalty for non-maintenance of minimum balance is much higher in private banks as compared to public-sector banks. For example, between 2015-16 and 2017-18, India’s three private banks Axis Bank, HDFC Bank and ICICI Bank earned Rs 4,054.77 crore by fining their customers for not maintaining minimum balance in their savings account. More on this later.)

Banks have been defending themselves by arguing that they are providing services to people and like any other service provider, they too have a right to charge for services rendered by them. (Photo: Reuters)

In less than four years (April 2015 to September 2018), banks in India have earned at least Rs 10,391.43 crore by charging you for just two things--failure to maintain minimum balance in saving accounts and carrying out more than the permitted number of free ATM transactions in a month.
This information was shared by the Union finance ministry in the Lok Sabha on December 21 in response to a written question submitted by Dibyendu Adhikari, a Trinamool Congress MP.

But why should we compare money owed by frauds with the money that banks have earned legally? Correct. We shouldn't and we aren't. This is just to give you an idea of the enormity of the amount that banks earn by charging customers for just two of their many services.

To better appreciate the size of this amount, let’s take a different example. The amount earned by banks by collecting these two fines is more than the Rs 10,000 crore that the central government approved on Friday (December 28) for India's first man mission to space--Gaganyaan.

Reading the big numbers
Okay. So since now you know that we are talking about big (actually very big) numbers, let’s discuss them in detail.

The central government was asked whether public sector banks levy any charges/fines on saving accounts that do not maintain minimum balance or/and exceed the number of free ATM transactions allowed by banks in a month.

ATM transactions include both financial (withdrawal and transfer) and non-financial (mini statement, pin change, balance inquiry etc).
In its reply, the finance ministry provided data of how much each public sector bank has earned since April 2015 till September 2018 by collecting fines for these two defaults.

Calculating the earnings made by each bank, we find that public sector banks have earned Rs 6,246.44 crore by just charging customers for their failure to maintain minimum balance in their savings account.

Meanwhile, the amount collected as fine for making extra ATM transactions in this period was Rs 4,144.99 crore.

FINE COLLECTED BY TOP 5 PUBLIC BANKS
Bank Amount
State Bank of India Rs 4,447.75 crore
Punjab National Bank Rs 815.94 crore
Central Bank of India Rs 551.49 crore
Bank of Baroda Rs 510.34 crore
Canara Bank Rs 503.35 crore
Source: Lok Sabha

The Punjab and Sindh Bank is the only public sector bank that does not levy any fine for non-maintenance of minimum balance in savings accounts.

The State Bank of India (SBI), which has the largest network in the country and is India’s biggest lender, earned the most (Rs 4,447.75 crore i.e. 43 per cent of the total amount earned by all public banks) by levying fines on these two aspects, the government’s reply revealed.

When it comes to private banks, another reply in the Lok Sabha revealed that between April 2015 and March 2018, three private banks--Axis Bank, HDFC Bank and ICICI Bank--earned Rs 4,054.77 crore by fining customers for non-maintenance of minimum balance.

(We did not include the earnings made by private banks in our overall figure because data of fine collected by them for non-maintenance of minimum balance in the current financial year (up till September) was not available, unlike data for public banks. Besides, the Lok Sabha reply did not include the earnings these banks made by fining customers for extra ATM transactions in past four years.)

The State Bank of India (SBI), which has the largest network in the country and is India’s biggest lender, earned the most (Rs 4,447.75 crore i.e. 43 per cent of the total amount earned by all public banks) by levying fines on these two aspects
However, an analysis of the two replies of the government in the Lok Sabha shows that the earnings made by the three private banks by fining customers for non-maintenance of minimum balance is more than the collective earnings of 20 public sector banks (excluding SBI).

For instance, between April 2015 and March 2018, the three private banks earned Rs 4,054.77 crore by collecting fines for non-maintenance of minimum balance.

In the same period, public sector banks (excluding SBI) earned Rs 2,823.42 crore. For SBI, the earning was Rs 2,433.87 crore in this period.

Private banks' earnings from fine for non-maintenance of min balance
Bank Amount
Axis Bank Rs 1,300.44 crore
HDFC Bank Rs 1,757.90 crore
ICICI Bank Rs 996.43 crore
Total Rs 4054.77 crore
Source: Lok Sabha

What are RBI’s guidelines
This is not the first time that banks have been criticised for levying fines on customers for failure to maintain minimum balance or for making extra ATM transactions.

Banks have defended themselves by arguing that they are providing services to people and like any other service provider, they too have a right to charge for services rendered by them.

Speaking to news agency Press Trust of India (PTI) on December 21, 2018 SBI’s Managing Director PK Gupta justified the charges levied by banks. He said banks have invested heavily in technological upgradation of system and that this upgradation provides safe and secure banking facilities in the country.

"With substantial investment in infrastructure and technology, it becomes imperative for the bank to recover at least a part of the cost," he was quoted as saying.

As an advice for customers, he said the bank requests them to use digital channels as much as possible "since ATM operations are becoming costlier day-by-day".

The Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) circulars/guidelines empower banks to self-determine the minimum balance that savings account should maintain and how much fine should be collected for non-maintenance.

With substantial investment in infrastructure and technology, it becomes imperative for the bank to recover at least a part of the cost
- PK Gupta, Managing Director, SBI

In regard to ATM transactions, the RBI guidelines say banks should allow their customers to carry out five free transactions from ATMs of home banks every month. For six metropolitan cities--New Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata, Hyderabad and Bengaluru--the RBI has allowed three free transactions from ATMs of other banks, in addition to the five transactions from ATMs of home bank, every month.

ATM transactions include both financial (withdrawal and transfer) and non-financial (mini statement, pin change, balance inquiry etc).

The RBI has exempted basic saving bank deposits (BSBD) accounts and accounts opened under the Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana (PMJDY) from the minimum balance clause. However, these accounts can be fined for extra ATM transactions.

(BSBD accounts and PMJDY accounts are saving accounts that have a cap on the amount that can be transacted from them. They are aimed at providing banking services to low-income groups.)

As already mentioned, the RBI has left it to the banks to decide what will be the minimum balance that a normal savings account should maintain, and also what should be the fine for non-maintenance.

RBI’s guidelines, as per the government’s reply in Parliament, only say that the fine should be "reasonable" and "not out of line with the average cost of providing these services".

For ATM transactions, the RBI leaves it to the banks to decide how much they want to charge for every extra transaction, with the condition that this fine can’t be more than Rs 20 per transaction.

Charges levied by some banks
Bank: Minimum Balance Required- Fine for minimum balance- Fine for extra ATM transactions
SBI Rs 1,000-Rs 3,000 Rs 5-Rs 15 Rs 20
BoB Rs 500-Rs 1,000 Rs 100-Rs 200  Rs 20 (for financial) Rs 10 (for non-financial)
HDFC Rs 2,500-Rs 10,000 Rs 150-Rs 600 Rs 20 (for financial) Rs 8.50 (for non financial)
ICICI Rs 1,000-Rs 10,000 Gramin accounts: 5% of shortfall of min balance
Other accounts: Rs 100+5% of shortfall of min balance Rs 20 (for financial) Rs 8.50 (for non financial)

How rational is the fine collected by banks
Fines for non-maintenance of minimum amount and extra ATM transactions are just two of the many types of charges that banks levy on customers. Other charges include annual ATM maintenance fee, fee for RTGS, fee for NTFS, free SMS alert, internet banking fee, among others.

Here too, there is no fixed rate for these charges, and they vary from one bank to another.

With a majority of public sector banks running in loss due to piles of non-performing assets (NPA) accumulated over years, are banks trying to find a way out to at least meet their operational costs by charging ordinary customers?

As per another written reply of the central government in the Lok Sabha, the non-performing assets of all public sector banks was worth Rs 9,62,621 crore as on March 31, 2018.

Between March 31, 2014 and March 31, 2018, the non-performing assets of public sector banks saw an increase of 74 per cent from Rs 2,51,054 crore to Rs 9,62,621 crore.

Infographics: Mukesh Rawat/IndiaToday

So, instead of getting their acts in place to find ways to reduce their NPA and ensure that big corporate repay the loan taken by them, are banks fleecing money from ordinary people by charging them for things like non-maintenance of minimum balance and carrying our extra ATM transactions to withdraw their own hard-earned money?

Between March 31, 2014 and March 31, 2018, the non-performing assets of public-sector banks saw an increase of 74 per cent from Rs 2,51,054 crore to Rs 9,62,621 crore.

It’s not rocket science for banks to understand and empathise that the accounts that are not maintaining the minimum amount are not owned by millionaires, but by very ordinary people, many of whom would be positioned in the economy at a place where maintaining the minimum balance is a far cry.The banks are well within their rights to levy fines because the law provides it. But it remains an open-ended question as to how rational and justifiable these charges levied on common people are when juxtaposed to heaps of NPAs which the banks have miserably failed to address.

(Source: India Today)

Indian funds in Swiss banks rise by 50%, Pakistan's falls by 21%

Indians have reasserted their love for Swiss banks. Despite NDA government's tall claims of taking decisive action against parallel economy, the money parked by Indians in Swiss banks rose by over 50% to Rs 7,000 crore in 2017.

This reverses a three-year downward trend which the Centre has been presenting as a result of its vigorous clampdown on suspected black money stashed abroad.

The Indian case stands out. As against the 50 per cent rise in funds from India, the total funds held by all foreign clients of Swiss banks rose by just 3 per cent to Rs 100 lakh crore in 2017.

Interestingly, while the money stashed by Indians in Swiss banks rose, its neighbour Pakistan's fell by over 21 per cent to a record low of Rs 7,700 crore. However, Pakistani nationals still have more money stashed in Swiss bank than Indians.

This could well be a setback for BJP government's attempt to keep black money under check.

Swiss banks are most preferred by Indians. This was revealed by the official annual data released on June 28 by Swiss National Bank (SNB) - the central banking authority of Switzerland.

A retired senior finance ministry official, who was a part the note ban exercise and signing of treaties for flow of information to India from tax havens said, "I am surprised. This can happen only if the number of people who have honest money have started depositing overseas using the liberalised rules by RBI, or this can be a case of misuse by people who are desperate."

A finance ministry official said, "I-T department has information about this. Its teams are scrutinising the data which is flowing over a period. Right now, the ministry can't say how much of this is black money or how much of it is accounted for."

In 2016, deposits by Indians had fallen by 25 per cent. The drop was marking the biggest ever annual plunge to approximately Rs 4,500 crore.

The SNB data shows that funds held directly by Indians in 2017 rose to Rs 6,891 crore. Of this, Rs 3200 crore was in the form of customer deposits, Rs 1050 crore through other banks and Rs 2640 crore A's "other liabilities including securities. Nearly Rs 112 crore was held through fiduciaries or fund managers.

What's alarming officials is the fact that the funds under all categories barring fiduciaries has gone up exponentially reversing trends for the last three years.

No official agreed to comment on the SNB data or queries raised by the Opposition.

If deposits in Swiss banks have witnessed a huge rise then what about the tax havens where information is difficult to access due to client protection rules?

The latest data from Zurich-based SNB came a few months after the new framework was put in place to deliver automatic exchange of information between Switzerland and India to check black money.

Switzerland has shed its past reluctance of sharing client details on evidence of misappropriation or illegality provided by the Indian government.

(Source: India Today)

Women face retirement incomes of £5,000 a year less than men

One in six women retiring this year will have an income below the minimum standard of £9,982 set by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation

Women face retirement incomes of £4,900 lower per year than men, with the gender gap at a yawning 29 per cent, new research has found.

Women’s retirement incomes will hit a record high of £16,900, on average, still well below men who average £21,800, according to Prudential.

One in six women will have an income below the minimum standard of £9,982 set by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation. That compares to one in 10 men.

However, the gender gap for pension incomes has narrowed significantly from 84 per cent, or £9,500, in 2008, the research found.

Men and women are now retiring on higher average annual incomes in 2018 than any other time over the last 11 years in which the yearly report has been produced.

Women retiring this year will be £2,600 a year better off than last year, while men will be £1,150 better off.

Women’s retirement incomes will hit a record high of £16,900 on average, still well below men at £21,800 (AFP/Getty)

Kirsty Anderson, a retirement income expert at Prudential, said that, despite improvements, the retirement income gender gap was still too wide.

“As working patterns continue to change and become more flexible, and shared parental leave is more widely encouraged by the government agenda and employers, the future looks positive for narrowing the retirement gender gap.

“It can be difficult to justify any extra expense when taking a career break, but it is extremely important for anyone taking time out of work to maintain their pension contributions. Saving as much as possible as early as possible is the best way to secure a good quality of life in retirement.”

Despite retiring with a record high income, women are not feeling quite as confident about their finances as in previous years, with 47 per cent stating they are financially well prepared for retirement, compared to 50 per cent in 2017. Nearly six in 10 men, on the other hand, feel financially prepared for retirement.

Samantha Seaton, chief executive of Moneyhub, said that too many people were still not saving enough for their future, with women in particular at risk of not having enough to live on.

She added: “While auto-enrolment has made an impact, there is a real risk that if we fail to engage consumers with the need to save, when contributions increase next year, many will opt out.

“The onus is on providers, employers and government to do more to help people understand their money.”

(Source: Independent)

Sales apprentice buys her own home aged just 20 after working five jobs

Jennie Crockart, 21, credits success to hard work and decision to leave school early

A financially-savvy young woman managed to buy her first home with no help at the age of just 20 - and credits leaving school at 17 to pursue an apprenticeship.

Remarkable Jennie Crockart, now 21, began saving money from the age of just 16, by which point she was working five part-time jobs alongside studying for AS Levels.

By 17, Jennie decided to leave school to pursue her dream of becoming a salesperson - and was quickly able to save up to £500 a month from her apprenticeship.

And just after her 20th birthday, the proud young woman picked up the keys to her very own £120,000 two-bedroom apartment in Yate near Bristol.

Jennie, a Level 3 Advanced Sales apprentice at commercial furnishings company Furnished Homes in Yate, said: “Owning my own home has always been important to me.

“In my opinion, when you're renting, you are just paying someone else's mortgage.

“At 20, I'm in the fortunate position of having no debt, and I've become a homeowner at a time when many young people are struggling to get on the property ladder.”

Jennie added that financial independence was hard-wired into her from a young age.

“Growing up, my parents didn't have lots of spare money but they always told me that when I had my own job I could afford to buy whatever I liked,” she said.

By 16, ambitious Jennie was working five part-time jobs, as a cleaner, a waitress, a cafe manager, a gym assistant and in business development, all whilst working towards her AS Levels.

She said: “As soon as I started earning I started putting £50 aside here and there - or more if I could manage it.

“I didn't have a career plan or want to go to university, as my main goal was to become a salesperson or work in the business sector.

“I knew that I enjoyed sales and the confidence you feel when you're doing well, and I knew that I didn't need a degree to prove I could sell.”

At 17, Jennie made the tough decision to leave school before her A-Levels, and enrolled on a sales apprenticeship scheme with Furnished Homes.

And success came quickly, with the young apprentice generating £500,000 in new business during her first three years.

She said: “At 17, it was a great way to start out. It's a brilliant way to start a career in sales.

“At that point I started saving a lot more, around £500 per month. I also saw my bonuses as just that - a bonus - so I put the money away.

“My savings quickly started to mount up.”

At 18, Jennie sat down with a mortgage consultant for the first time to get an idea of what she could borrow and the sort of deposit she would need to buy her first home.

And by 19, she found a home she wanted to buy and put all her efforts into raising the remainder of her ten per cent deposit.

She said: “It was 'eyes on the prize'. Admittedly at that point I didn't go out that much - but I certainly don't feel like I've missed out on anything.”

Jennie said her two-bedroom apartment needed complete renovation throughout.

But this didn't faze her - instead, she saw it as a “good oppurtunity”, and put all her free time off work into painting and decorating.

And now, proud Jennie believes her flat is worth in excess of £150,000 - some £30,000 more than she paid for it.

She said: “I see where I'm living as a start. It needed work; it's not in the most expensive part of town, but I made those sacrifices because I'd rather own than rent.

“I'd like to think I'll move on in a couple of years.”

And despite her tender age and her frugal saving, Jennie has managed to fit in a decent amount of travelling, with visits to India, New York, Norway, Paris and Austria in the past few years.

She is currently saving to fund a trip around America's west coast later this year.

And she encourages any youngsters considering an apprenticeship to “go for it”.

“Starting my career at such a young age has taught me a lot about life, and I'm exactly where I want to be at the moment,” she said.

“I never wanted to be reliant on anyone else, and knowing I've achieved all this on my own is a brilliant feeling.

“With an apprenticeship they'll take you on, teach you how to sell, show you the ropes.

“It's acknowledged you are learning and so you can progress from the bottom up without the pressure to perform amazingly from the word go.

“I enjoy something new every single day. It's very challenging as you're constantly on your feet, quoting, driving around, making new sales and finding new business.”

She adds she is now considering progressing onto higher education, and pursuing a degree in interior design.

And her Operations and Development Manager, Liz Parsons, says Jennie is “the definition of a 'self-starter'”.

“Jennie is a perfect example of how giving young people a chance to shine can really pay off,” said Liz.

“Her work ethic and energy supersedes our expectations and we feel privileged to have staff of her calibre working for our company.”

(Source: Independent)

Your Aadhaar details on sale for Rs 2-5: How can govt make sure your data is safe?

Nandan Nilekani's trailblazing biometric ID system, apparently modelled on first FBI director J Edgar Hoover's massive central database of fingerprints, is in spotlight after reports of a cyber attack which leaked Aadhaar data. A report by The Tribune had claimed that one of its reporters paid just Rs 500 to an 'online agent' to access names, addresses, PINs, photos, phone numbers and emails of more than 1 million numbers.

However, an India Today investigation has revealed that the Aadhaar data breach racket is not merely online, but could be widespread with agents at several enrolment agencies willing to part with demographic records collected from Aadhaar applicants for Rs 2-5.

Enrolment agencies are entities hired by the Registrars for enrolment of residents during which demographic and biometric data are collected as per UIDAI enrolment process, according to uidai.gov.in.

One such enrolment agency is Alankit Assignments Limited, located in Faridabad. "You can see for yourself," said Alankit's branch head Ishpal Singh when asked is this Aadhar data as he planked an entire file of 250 applicants on his desk.

YOUR CHOICE- SCAN THROUGH OR COPY DATA
"I can give you data of 15,000 applicants for Rs 30,000," a brazen Singh, who is the branch head of Alankit, told India Today reporters, who posed as businessmen seeking to expand their database of potential customers. He was ready to provide an applicant's name, address, birth date, mobile numbers and email for merely Rs 2.

Subsequently, Singh advised the India Today reporters to copy down every bit of information from his dossiers right there. "I will give you a bundle of 250 forms (application acknowledgements). I have records of 50,000 applicants. You can note down all the data."

The probe shows how Section 28 of the Aadhaar Act, which states that the UIDAI must ensure the security and confidentiality of identity information and authentication records, is brazenly flouted. "The Authority shall adopt and implement appropriate technical and organisational security measures, and ensure the same are imposed through agreements/arrangements with its agents, consultants, advisors or other persons," Section 28 further states.

PRIVACY GONE FOR A TOSS
Nilekani, the architect of Aadhaar, had vouched for its security last April. "It's a very, very secure system. The level of encryption that Aadhaar has is way above any other system today, including in the private sector. Plus, security keeps getting enhanced," he had said.

Another enrolment centre at Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, was willing to sell data of 4-5 lakh applicants. Senior official Ashish Gupta offered the database not only from this facility, but also from three others under his command in Delhi.

"I'll get the data on an Excel sheet," Gupta replied when asked if he could offer information about all the applicants in Indirapuram. He is ready to provide all this data for Rs3-5 per applicant.

An Aadhaar enrolment centre at Sector 10, Noida, was no different with the main agent, Sonu, demanding Rs 4-5 per applicant. "I have made 40,000 Aadhaar cards so far." He offered PDF copies of acknowledgements of applicant's information.

These agents are operating with blatant disregard for the Aadhaar Act. Section 37 of the Act says "intentional disclosure or dissemination of identity information, to any person not authorised under the Aadhaar Act, or in violation of any agreement entered into under the Act, will be punishable with imprisonment up to three years or a fine up to ten thousand rupees (in case of an individual), and fine up to one lakh rupees (in case of a company)".

WHAT UIDAI CLAIMES
Meanwhile, the UIDAI has reiterated that Aadhaar data cannot be hacked.

A day after The Tribune reported breach of the unique ID records, the UIDAI insisted the system is fully equipped to deal with any leaks.

In a statement, the authority emphasised "there has not been any Aadhaar data breach. The Aadhaar data, including biometric information, is fully safe and secure."

Claims of bypassing or duping the Aadhaar enrolment system, it said, are totally unfounded. "Aadhaar data is fully safe and secure and has robust uncompromised security. The UIDAI Data Centres are infrastructure of critical importance and is protected accordingly with high technology conforming to the best standards of security and also by legal provisions."

But reports of data leaks triggered a strong political reaction from opposition leaders.

In a tweet, communist leader Sitaram Yechury demanded the government roll back its order to link Aadhaar with bank accounts.

The perils of making Aadhaar mandatory and linking it to bank accounts, as insisted upon by Modi govt, are visible here. Do we need more proof to stop this madness? https://t.co/9OEbitCmDO

— Sitaram Yechury (@SitaramYechury) January 4, 2018

Congress leader Randeep Surjewala described the reports of data theft as a "mockery" of the citizens' right to privacy.

‘AADHAR’ data breached yet again!

As every citizen’s personal information is exposed to hackers everyday & ‘Right to Privacy’ is mocked and flouted with impunity, Modi Govt remains immune.

Is anyone listening?https://t.co/UDSfOlSWv9

— Randeep S Surjewala (@rssurjewala) January 4, 2018

(Source: India Today)

Why a new bill by government is terrifying the Indian bank depositor

Ours is a deposit-driven banking system, so borrowing a clause from Western, credit-driven model is laced with difficulties. This bill gives power to a government entity to use depositors’ money to save a bank on the verge of bankruptcy. This government entity can declare the bank doesn't owe you any money though you have deposited your hard earned money with it. 

The Financial Resolution and Deposit Insurance Bill, 2017, first introduced in Lok Sabha in August this year during the Monsoon Session of Parliament, and currently undergoing scrutiny by a joint parliamentary committee, is in the eye of a political storm. A number of columnists and banking sector experts have red-flagged the “bail-in” clause – clause 52 of the draft legislation – to indicate that potential harm to deposits, in the form of savings accounts, might be in the offing with the Bill that will be taken up once again during the Winter Session of Parliament.

The FRDI Bill essentially proposes to create a framework for overseeing financial firms such as banks, insurance companies, non-banking financial services (NBFC) companies, stock exchanges, among others, and in case of insolvency, work out options. The “Resolution Corporation” which is supposed to look after the process and prevent the banks from going bankrupt, will be doing this by “writing down of the liabilities”, in others words, a “bail in”.

Though common in European and American banking systems, the bail-in clause in the Indian banking system that – for the ordinary citizen – is largely deposits-driven, and not as much credit-driven, could be laced with difficulties. Particularly at a time when the growing menace of rising non-performing assets (NPAs) or bad loans has hit an all-time high, with PSU banks writing off Rs 55,356 crore in the first two quarters of the fiscal year 2017-18, about 54 per cent higher than it was last year, the bail-in clause is alarming, to say the least.

What’s the bail-in clause?
A bail-in is different from a “bail-out”, wherein insolvency is averted by infusion of money from external sources, such as tax-payers money that government pours in to recapitalise banks, as happened during the 2009 trillion-dollar Wall Street bail-out, one of the first decisions taken by former US president Barack Obama. However, unlike a bail-out, a bail-in involves transferring the bank’s liabilities and assets – through different means and restructuring of its debt.

The bail-in clause in the FRDI Bill seeks to absorb the losses of the bank and insurance companies and prevent insolvency by prioritising the restoration of capital and asset of the bank over and above the safety of the depositors’ money. How? Clause 52 of FRDI Bill, 2017 empowers the proposed Resolution Corporation to cancel the liability owed by a bank, and/or change the very nature of a loss-ridden balance sheet by turning part of deposits into bank shares, or another security.

Kapil@kapsology

Modi government's FRDI bill may take away all your hard-earned money! Take a look!

10:36 AM - Dec 6, 2017

•  2222 Replies
 
•  311311 Retweets
 
•  213213 likes

The Bill says that in case of a bank failure, the proposed Resolution Corporation will “provide deposit insurance up to a certain limit”, which has not been specified. Under the existing (1962) law, all deposits up to Rs one lakh are protected by deposit insurance under the Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation Act, but that limit has been removed in the FRDI Bill.

How does it affect security of deposits?
In the wake of demonetisation, when citizens were cut off from accessing their own money in the banks with the daily cash withdrawal limit and long, serpentine ATM queues that proved fatal for about 140 odd Indians, the bail-in clause does send off the alarm bells. As per the FRDI Bill, the Resolution Corporation is entitled to convert a percentage of the deposits with a bank to bank shares and other forms of security, in the name of recapitalisation. This might end up cutting off the small depositors from their hard-earned money, since part of the amount in a savings account can be turned into a fixed deposit or rejigged to become part of bank shares, with the depositor given a miniscule stake in the bank’s doddering fortunes, effectively stalling him/her from withdrawing money as per one’s needs.

AAP

✔@AamAadmiParty

"FRDI has not yet been passed. However the draft bill contains a provision that would allow the Govt to “nationalise” our money to re-capitalise PSU banks.
This is both unjust & immoral and must be opposed and this provision deleted before the bill is passed."- @meerasanyal

9:23 AM - Dec 8, 2017

•  2626 Replies
 
•  422422 Retweets
 
•  490490 likes

Much like demonetisation, the bail-in clause wouldn’t really affect the wealthier sections of society, but for the poorer classes locking up one’s deposits in the name of bank recapitalisation after writing off lakhs of crores worth corporate debt is a stinging rebuke of the sprawling millions, who use the bank less for seeking credit and more as a safe-house for their meagre savings. While the banks can see influx of fresh capital with the little rearrangement, this is going to hurt the lower and middle classes, if invoked.

Meghnad

✔@Memeghnad

Finally got a chance to go through the proposed The Financial Resolution and Deposit Insurance Bill, 2017.

And holymotherofgod what the heck!
BAIL-INs!

10:09 AM - Nov 28, 2017

•  1111 Replies
 
•  140140 Retweets
 
•  100100 likes

"This bill gives power to a government entity to use depositors’ money to save a bank on the verge of bankruptcy. This government entity can declare the bank doesn't owe you any money though you have deposited your hard earned money with it. Yes! Our hard earned money that we have saved for our children and for our future. That's why I have started this petition asking the finance minister, Arun Jaitley to remove the 'bail-in' provision from the FRDI Bill," says a petition by Change.org.

Trends in PSU banks worrisome
The financial jugglery of the FRDI Bill is already facing political heat and is likely to create a storm in the Winter Session of Parliament which starts from next week. Despite reassurance from Union finance minister Arun Jaitley, the trust in the government over matters economic is shaky at best. "The FRDI Bill is far more depositor friendly than many other jurisdictions, which provide for statutory bail-in, where consent of creditors / depositors is not required for bail-in. The FRDI Bill does not propose in any way to limit the scope of powers for the Government to extend financing and resolution support to banks, including public sector banks. The government's implicit guarantee for public sector banks remains unaffected," a government statement said.

Ministry of Finance

✔@FinMinIndia

Certain misgivings have been expressed in the media regarding “bail-in” provisions of the FRDI Bill. The provisions contained in the FRDI Bill, as introduced in the Parliament, do not modify present protections to the depositors adversely at all.

11:02 AM - Dec 7, 2017

•  3333 Replies
 
•  157157 Retweets
 
•  293293 likes

Ministry of Finance

✔@FinMinIndia

The FRDI Bill is far more depositor friendly than many other jurisdictions, which provide for statutory bail-in, where consent of creditors / depositors is not required for bail-in.

11:08 AM - Dec 7, 2017

•  1616 Replies
 
•  5151 Retweets
 
•  9696 likes

Hence, FM Jaitley has indicated that a rethink is on the cards, in which the bail-in clause is going to face a serious challenge from the joint parliamentary committee. Given that not more than 30 per cent of the NPAs from corporate defaulters, often wilful defaulters, is likely to be ever recovered, the humungous burden of bad loan on the PSU banks, to the tune of Rs 15 lakh crore, remains an albatross for the fiscal health of public sector banking.

However, coercing depositors to turning their savings to fixed deposits and/or bank shares and other forms of assets that becomes ready capital for the bank and returns its balance sheet to good health, is not the way to recapitalise banks.

(Source: Daily O)