I was quite pleased today to learn that NACHA is expanding the types of consumer checks eligible for conversion to the ACH. The concept of allowing consumer check
deposits to be eligible for conversion has been contemplated since the inception of ARC (and later BOC) as valid ACH transaction types.
Low value consumer check deposits are a logical extension of ARC and BOC and RCK. The Federal Reserve’s 2010 Payment Study revealed that businesses and consumers issued 24.5 billion checks in 2009 to pay bills and each other. That number does represent a 7.1% reduction from 2006, but there is still a huge opportunity to either convert commercial and consumer payments to the ACH or leverage the ACH from the very beginning.
A lot of smart folks have been working diligently to educate businesses and consumers on the benefits of ACH: It is convenient, safe, secure and cost-effective. While progress has been made with particular success in the small business market due to the efforts of companies like Intuit, Bill.com and banks offering electronic bill payment solutions, middle market and especially large corporate companies have significant legacy investments in accounts payable and accounts receivable programs that are well-honed and highly integrated with controlled disbursement systems that make electronic payment adoption difficult. Electronic payment usage is slowed further by existing contracts that state payment terms.
On the consumer side, electronic bill payment offerings are fast replacing the traditional check book but the lack of critical mass participation and end-to end electronic P2P payment offerings has failed to put a significant dent in the billions of paper check consumers still write today.
That is why I am so excited about financial institutions being able to convert consumer checks deposits to ACH payments. If every check written from a consumer payer to a consumer payee, 2.8 billion of the checks , or 9.7% of 24.5 billion paper items, could clear via the ACH and reap the same rewards that drove the creation of ARC and BOC. Those benefits include for the FI, reduced clearing and settlement costs, improved risk management through faster receipt of returned items, as well as not having to bear the costs to physically store or electronically archive all those checks.
And for consumers, your risk management practices will improve too because you will know sooner (than later) who not to trust to reimburse you for their portion of the dinner tab or cover their portion of the rent. You are now going to be able to mitigate your payment risks by demanding Johnnie or Susie to reimburse you with a more secure form of payment like (and I cannot believe that I am going to write these next words) a cashier’s check, money order or cash. Better yet, enroll in a P2P program (like PayPal or Tabbedout). The money does not move into your account if the sender (Payer) doesn’t have it. In banking terms that is called a “good funds model” –which is when a payment receipt only happens when the payer has enough money in an account to send the money.
I am so glad to see the idea of converting consumer checks at the bank of first deposit come to fruition, even if it is an opt-in program today. It is something that has been on the NACHA table for a long time. But comfort and confidence in ARC and BOC had to come first, along with concrete evidence of their benefits. That is why I am so glad to see NACHA (supported by its FI membership) taking this next step to allow consumer checks to move onto the ACH rails for clearing and settlement. It allows FI’s to achieve greater efficiency and reduce operating costs. At the same time, it is another significant step to help consumers become more comfortable with electronic bill payments and hasten the development of convenient, multi-channel electronic P2P (C2C) product offerings and their eventual adoption by consumers.
nshantin
April 7, 2012
In India, ACH should be live in 12-18 months. NPCI has called for the tenders for the ACH System.
ACH should adapt fast in India.
Safe ePayments – Awareness Campaign http://goo.gl/XXIZr
Eric Dotson
May 19, 2012
Marcie…please write another article to better communicate the distinction between businesses that “convert” checks to ARC and BOC and banks of first deposit that “create a collection transaction” for clearing an item through ACH following the DCT program. It is a key distinction because an ARC and BOC follow NACHA rules and a TRC (used for the DCT program) follows check law. Since Aptys Solutions has been offering the technology to drive the DCT program many. Have expressed confusion by this concept and ask why someone would want to convert items from check to ACH law when it opens up more risk. In reality, because you don’t convert…you create a collection transaction to clear via ACH…it remains under check law. For more info, contact us at Info.aptyssolutions.com.
Marcie Haitema
May 22, 2012
Eric,
Great observation and idea for a more complete explanation of the differences between ARC, BOC and DCT. I am working on gathering the facts so that I can indeed write an article that speaks to DCT and how its use differs from other check conversion programs and what it means to both the bank and the depositor.
Thanks for taking the time to provide some very good feedback!
Marcie J. Haitema
All Things Payments
http://allthingspayments.net