Sentry new payment method, they want your bank sign in information
@Sentry Marketing:
The IAV system is quite literally marketed as a way to cut costs and save time for businesses.
Perhaps you should read the sales material that you were given by whomever signed you up for this... sounds like I did more in-depth research than you did.
The IAV system is quite literally marketed as a way to cut costs and save time for businesses.
Perhaps you should read the sales material that you were given by whomever signed you up for this... sounds like I did more in-depth research than you did.
Again, please explain your assertion that Sentry is benefiting financially from IAV. How does our company gain financially from offering our shoppers an alternate method of verifying their bank account without waiting for micro-deposits to process?
It seems as if you don't really know what you are talking about.
It seems as if you don't really know what you are talking about.
@ColoKate63 wrote:
@Sentry Marketing:
The IAV system is quite literally marketed as a way to cut costs and save time for businesses.
Perhaps you should read the sales material that you were given by whomever signed you up for this... sounds like I did more in-depth research than you did.
@Sentry Marketing
From my very first paragraph:
Here’s what I found:
1. IAV is, at its core, a money-saving device for the organization requesting your bank login name and password. It works instantly, unlike micro-deposits, which require the organization’s employees or contractors to physically make the deposit and do the verification.
From my very first paragraph:
Here’s what I found:
1. IAV is, at its core, a money-saving device for the organization requesting your bank login name and password. It works instantly, unlike micro-deposits, which require the organization’s employees or contractors to physically make the deposit and do the verification.
Please cite your source so we may view the comment in its full context. For all I know, that comment is simply the author's opinion.
Again, I would ask you to explain how Sentry is benefiting financially by offering IAV as an alternative to micro-deposit verification.
quote=ColoKate63]
@Sentry Marketing
From my very first paragraph:
Here’s what I found:
1. IAV is, at its core, a money-saving device for the organization requesting your bank login name and password. It works instantly, unlike micro-deposits, which require the organization’s employees or contractors to physically make the deposit and do the verification.[/quote]
Again, I would ask you to explain how Sentry is benefiting financially by offering IAV as an alternative to micro-deposit verification.
quote=ColoKate63]
@Sentry Marketing
From my very first paragraph:
Here’s what I found:
1. IAV is, at its core, a money-saving device for the organization requesting your bank login name and password. It works instantly, unlike micro-deposits, which require the organization’s employees or contractors to physically make the deposit and do the verification.[/quote]
Why won't Sentry do what other MSC do, accept Pay Pal or do a direct deposit using the shopper's routing and account numbers?
@johnb974 wrote:
Why won't Sentry do what other MSC do, accept Pay Pal or do a direct deposit using the shopper's routing and account numbers?
They do. You have a choice. I am currently waiting for my two small deposits to be in my bank account.
@Sentry Marketing
Where did I get that information?
Why, from the developers’ own website, of course:
[www.dwolla.com]
“... enables third party applications to verify users’ bank accounts ... avoids the burden of the business having to handle that data... applications are able to avoid the manual entry of account and routing numbers...”
So, essentially, Sentry Marketing is requesting bank login information from its shoppers in order to save the data entry time (the “burden,” according to the developers) it takes to manually enter the micro-deposits and then verify the accounts.
My opinion: I’m pretty weary of certain companies underestimating the intelligence of their shoppers. Do you truly think that we cannot research and understand straightforward concepts like IAV?
I’m also strongly cautioning my fellow shoppers against sending their bank logins and passwords to Sentry Marketing. Given the multiple risks involved, including the very real possibility of hacking and decryption, it’s a poor choice.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/29/2019 12:57AM by ColoKate63.
Where did I get that information?
Why, from the developers’ own website, of course:
[www.dwolla.com]
“... enables third party applications to verify users’ bank accounts ... avoids the burden of the business having to handle that data... applications are able to avoid the manual entry of account and routing numbers...”
So, essentially, Sentry Marketing is requesting bank login information from its shoppers in order to save the data entry time (the “burden,” according to the developers) it takes to manually enter the micro-deposits and then verify the accounts.
My opinion: I’m pretty weary of certain companies underestimating the intelligence of their shoppers. Do you truly think that we cannot research and understand straightforward concepts like IAV?
I’m also strongly cautioning my fellow shoppers against sending their bank logins and passwords to Sentry Marketing. Given the multiple risks involved, including the very real possibility of hacking and decryption, it’s a poor choice.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/29/2019 12:57AM by ColoKate63.
You missed the fact that you CAN set up direct deposit with Sentry with just your routing and bank account numbers. Using the “instant” feature is just an option. I went through the process and chose to set it up instantly. You can choose the other way. I don’t think it matters to Sentry what you choose to do.
Or.... you can not worry about it and not shop for Sentry at all - there are lots of other MSC’s.
Or.... you can not worry about it and not shop for Sentry at all - there are lots of other MSC’s.
@johnb974 wrote:
Why won't Sentry do what other MSC do, accept Pay Pal or do a direct deposit using the shopper's routing and account numbers?
Hard work builds character and homework is good for your soul.
MF,
I missed nothing. I know that there is (for the present) an option to use micro-deposits.
I am stating an informed, well-researched opinion that the IAV technology is a poor choice for a tiny company like Sentry Marketing to use. If they had a dedicated IT security staff with cutting-edge anti-hacking, yes. But in this application: no.
I missed nothing. I know that there is (for the present) an option to use micro-deposits.
I am stating an informed, well-researched opinion that the IAV technology is a poor choice for a tiny company like Sentry Marketing to use. If they had a dedicated IT security staff with cutting-edge anti-hacking, yes. But in this application: no.
@ColoKate63
As you have done throughout your posts on this thread, you are quoting out of context to back into your point. For example, you chose to omit this part of the link:
With tokenization, sensitive financial information is removed from the transaction stream. Within this integration, Plaid functions as a vault, protecting the data, but allowing the distribution of important information to Dwolla without requiring our customers to store it. The tokens are not long-lived and they may be one-time, have an expiration date, and be revoked when necessary.
You also chose to omit this part of the text:
By leveraging bank verification services like Plaid, applications are able to avoid the manual entry of account and routing numbers, therefore eliminating an error-prone process that forces businesses to capture sensitive financial information on their own systems.
You are entitled to your own opinions, however, you are not entitled to your own facts. If you are going to accuse a company of wrong-doing or not taking shopper's interest into consideration, please back it up with facts.
I think your attempts to come on this thread and stir things up are pretty evident and not very cool.
As you have done throughout your posts on this thread, you are quoting out of context to back into your point. For example, you chose to omit this part of the link:
With tokenization, sensitive financial information is removed from the transaction stream. Within this integration, Plaid functions as a vault, protecting the data, but allowing the distribution of important information to Dwolla without requiring our customers to store it. The tokens are not long-lived and they may be one-time, have an expiration date, and be revoked when necessary.
You also chose to omit this part of the text:
By leveraging bank verification services like Plaid, applications are able to avoid the manual entry of account and routing numbers, therefore eliminating an error-prone process that forces businesses to capture sensitive financial information on their own systems.
You are entitled to your own opinions, however, you are not entitled to your own facts. If you are going to accuse a company of wrong-doing or not taking shopper's interest into consideration, please back it up with facts.
I think your attempts to come on this thread and stir things up are pretty evident and not very cool.
I was not responding to you- note the quoted text.
@ColoKate63 wrote:
MF,
I missed nothing. I know that there is (for the present) an option to use micro-deposits.
I am stating an informed, well-researched opinion that the IAV technology is a poor choice for a tiny company like Sentry Marketing to use. If they had a dedicated IT security staff with cutting-edge anti-hacking, yes. But in this application: no.
Hard work builds character and homework is good for your soul.
@Sentry Marketing
Thank you for again making my point for me:
“The tokens are not long-lived and they may be one-time, have an expiration date, and be revoked when necessary.”
There is no guarantee that the tokenization employed by Sentry Marketing HAS an expiration date. They MAY be one-time, or they may not. Were the tokenizers written in Python, C++ or Java? Each has varying levels of security; do you understand the differences well enough to guard against hacking of shoppers’ data? One wonders.
Sentry Marketing has a highly undesirable reputation among shoppers, going back over a decade. Evidence of Sentry’s poor online behavior goes back (at least) to 2007. A simple Google search reveals multiple, multiple problems with your company and its ICs.
This use of IAV is only the latest iteration of your issues with shoppers. It is not “stirring things up” to present a well-researched and verifiable opinion on a topic here.
On a side note, who made this thread “yours” to deem who may post and who may not? LOL, I care not one bit about whether it’s “cool”... I pretty much stopped thinking in those terms when I graduated from high school.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/29/2019 01:42AM by ColoKate63.
Thank you for again making my point for me:
“The tokens are not long-lived and they may be one-time, have an expiration date, and be revoked when necessary.”
There is no guarantee that the tokenization employed by Sentry Marketing HAS an expiration date. They MAY be one-time, or they may not. Were the tokenizers written in Python, C++ or Java? Each has varying levels of security; do you understand the differences well enough to guard against hacking of shoppers’ data? One wonders.
Sentry Marketing has a highly undesirable reputation among shoppers, going back over a decade. Evidence of Sentry’s poor online behavior goes back (at least) to 2007. A simple Google search reveals multiple, multiple problems with your company and its ICs.
This use of IAV is only the latest iteration of your issues with shoppers. It is not “stirring things up” to present a well-researched and verifiable opinion on a topic here.
On a side note, who made this thread “yours” to deem who may post and who may not? LOL, I care not one bit about whether it’s “cool”... I pretty much stopped thinking in those terms when I graduated from high school.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/29/2019 01:42AM by ColoKate63.
@ColoKate63
While it is true that Dave has mixed it up with shoppers online and has come across poorly in the past, he has been exceptionally patient here. Moreover, you are now accusing them of being careless and putting our money at risk - which is completely different than mixing it up online. Your accusations are completely off-base. Completely. He has patiently showed you the context out of which you have taken quotes to show that Plaid is not some vile program.
You give every MSC your SS#, name, address, phone number and, often ID. They keep these things on record for tax purposes. This information alone is enough for some person with nefarious intentions to get into your bank account, apply for credit cards in your name and more. For any MSC for which you have direct deposit, you also provide your routing and bank account numbers. The simply nature of working for somebody involves trusting them with such sensitive information.
If you don't trust Sentry with that information, don't shop for them. However, suggesting that they are attempting to set their employees up to get into your bank account is just wrong. You can dislike the MSC and/or the owner all you like, but your accusations are inappropriate.
No, I do not work for Sentry. No, I have never even done a shop for Sentry. No, I don't know and have never met Dave.
While it is true that Dave has mixed it up with shoppers online and has come across poorly in the past, he has been exceptionally patient here. Moreover, you are now accusing them of being careless and putting our money at risk - which is completely different than mixing it up online. Your accusations are completely off-base. Completely. He has patiently showed you the context out of which you have taken quotes to show that Plaid is not some vile program.
You give every MSC your SS#, name, address, phone number and, often ID. They keep these things on record for tax purposes. This information alone is enough for some person with nefarious intentions to get into your bank account, apply for credit cards in your name and more. For any MSC for which you have direct deposit, you also provide your routing and bank account numbers. The simply nature of working for somebody involves trusting them with such sensitive information.
If you don't trust Sentry with that information, don't shop for them. However, suggesting that they are attempting to set their employees up to get into your bank account is just wrong. You can dislike the MSC and/or the owner all you like, but your accusations are inappropriate.
No, I do not work for Sentry. No, I have never even done a shop for Sentry. No, I don't know and have never met Dave.
Hard work builds character and homework is good for your soul.
Once again, Kate, you quote the text out of context to back into the point you are trying to make. We take the security of our shopper's information very seriously and security was a top consideration when creating this application. That's the reason we that all sensitive information is tokenized, the site is secured with an SSL and we employed Two Factor Authorization as part of the login process.
Your contribution to this is not well-researched or applicable to our application. Rather, you are doing nothing more than trying to stir things up for your own reasons.
We've had over 3,000 shoppers register for direct deposit payment and very, very few people have had questions about IAV. You can come on here and slander Sentry and Dwolla, but it doesn't make what your claiming accurate or true.
One wonders if you have expressed the same level of concern about all of the companies that pay you via direct deposit. Did you go into the same level of detail several months back when a mystery shopping company withdrew money from their shopper's bank accounts instead of depositing money?
For the companies that pay you via direct deposit, have you asked what security procedures they employ? Do you know if your bank account details are encrypted or kept in a spreadsheet on an unsecured laptop? If you haven't inquired, why?
Your contribution to this is not well-researched or applicable to our application. Rather, you are doing nothing more than trying to stir things up for your own reasons.
We've had over 3,000 shoppers register for direct deposit payment and very, very few people have had questions about IAV. You can come on here and slander Sentry and Dwolla, but it doesn't make what your claiming accurate or true.
One wonders if you have expressed the same level of concern about all of the companies that pay you via direct deposit. Did you go into the same level of detail several months back when a mystery shopping company withdrew money from their shopper's bank accounts instead of depositing money?
For the companies that pay you via direct deposit, have you asked what security procedures they employ? Do you know if your bank account details are encrypted or kept in a spreadsheet on an unsecured laptop? If you haven't inquired, why?
@MFJohnston
I think that you missed the part in this thread where I pointed out that, by using the IAV technology (as you admitted you did on the Sentry website), and agreeing to the Terms Of Use, you have probably relinquished any recovery options in the event that the Dwolla-Plaid tokenization code is hacked.
Providing a bank/routing number combination only allows a MSC access to a single account. I use that one account solely for mystery shopping; I monitor it daily, and I’m not too worried about it. Likewise, I monitor my credit “hits” and score closely; I’m not worried. I minimize my risk.
The part that I don’t think that you are comprehending is this: if your bank account and password, given to Sentry Marketing, are hacked and your accounts are drained... you are S.O.L. When you clicked on that “Accept” link for the IAV, you gave up the ability to file for recovery through your financial institution.
There’s an excellent reason that Sentry Marketing is literally the ONLY mystery shopping company using IAV and requesting bank passwords from its ICs: it’s a risky choice and the other companies value their shoppers. Sentry Marketing does not appear to share those values.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/29/2019 02:10AM by ColoKate63.
I think that you missed the part in this thread where I pointed out that, by using the IAV technology (as you admitted you did on the Sentry website), and agreeing to the Terms Of Use, you have probably relinquished any recovery options in the event that the Dwolla-Plaid tokenization code is hacked.
Providing a bank/routing number combination only allows a MSC access to a single account. I use that one account solely for mystery shopping; I monitor it daily, and I’m not too worried about it. Likewise, I monitor my credit “hits” and score closely; I’m not worried. I minimize my risk.
The part that I don’t think that you are comprehending is this: if your bank account and password, given to Sentry Marketing, are hacked and your accounts are drained... you are S.O.L. When you clicked on that “Accept” link for the IAV, you gave up the ability to file for recovery through your financial institution.
There’s an excellent reason that Sentry Marketing is literally the ONLY mystery shopping company using IAV and requesting bank passwords from its ICs: it’s a risky choice and the other companies value their shoppers. Sentry Marketing does not appear to share those values.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/29/2019 02:10AM by ColoKate63.
@ColoKate63
I understand quite well. I am going to gracefully bow out of this and stand by my previous posts.
I understand quite well. I am going to gracefully bow out of this and stand by my previous posts.
Hard work builds character and homework is good for your soul.
@ColoKate63
I stand by what I've written. Your comments in this thread are misleading and out of context. Very clearly, you are trying to create a controversy where no exists. That's why you ignored my questions about your level of concern of other companies that pay via direct deposit.
We value the safety and security of our shopper's data as evidenced by the multiple layers of security we've included in our application.
IAV is a safe and secure method of verifying a bank account. It's also OPTIONAL.
I stand by what I've written. Your comments in this thread are misleading and out of context. Very clearly, you are trying to create a controversy where no exists. That's why you ignored my questions about your level of concern of other companies that pay via direct deposit.
We value the safety and security of our shopper's data as evidenced by the multiple layers of security we've included in our application.
IAV is a safe and secure method of verifying a bank account. It's also OPTIONAL.
MF,
I’d rather be watching “The Office,” myself. This is my last post on the topic; its a circular argument and it’s boring me to tears.
I have no all-consuming interest in this, other than I have some time to burn due to a snowstorm here and a slew of postponed work.
I have friends and family members who make excellent livings designing and analyzing internet security systems, and I value their opinions highly. I reached out to them for informed opinions on IAV.
I also called my financial institution and asked about handing over my banking information together with my password to a third party for IAV, read the developers’ website, and put my results up here.
Edit to add: This thread isn’t about other companies, PayPal, unsecured laptops, or other straw man topics. I don’t do “whataboutism,” it’s a waste of time.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/29/2019 02:25AM by ColoKate63.
I’d rather be watching “The Office,” myself. This is my last post on the topic; its a circular argument and it’s boring me to tears.
I have no all-consuming interest in this, other than I have some time to burn due to a snowstorm here and a slew of postponed work.
I have friends and family members who make excellent livings designing and analyzing internet security systems, and I value their opinions highly. I reached out to them for informed opinions on IAV.
I also called my financial institution and asked about handing over my banking information together with my password to a third party for IAV, read the developers’ website, and put my results up here.
Edit to add: This thread isn’t about other companies, PayPal, unsecured laptops, or other straw man topics. I don’t do “whataboutism,” it’s a waste of time.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/29/2019 02:25AM by ColoKate63.
@ColoKate63 - Be sure to ask your bank why they allow their accounts to be verified via IAV if it is not a safe and secure method.
Also, verifying an account via IAV does not involve "handing over my banking information together with my password to a third party".
Also, verifying an account via IAV does not involve "handing over my banking information together with my password to a third party".
@Sentry Marketing wrote:
@ColoKate63 - Be sure to ask your bank why they allow their accounts to be verified via IAV if it is not a safe and secure method.
Also, verifying an account via IAV does not involve "handing over my banking information together with my password to a third party".
Because if anyone does hack an account, because the person shared their log on information, the bank is no longer responsible for whatever happens to your money.
@Sentry Marketing
What happened when I spoke with my bank today? Glad you asked!
When I talked to the security division of my bank today, telling them that I was asking about the safety of using a Dwolla-based IAV, they advised me that Dwolla was criminally prosecuted recently by the US Federal government. They didn’t give me specifics, but after the call I looked it up.
Turns out that Dwolla was prosecuted by the Feds for misrepresentation of their data encryption (some sensitive consumer information wasn’t encrypted at ALL) and other misdeeds.
Here’s the source material. It isn’t an opinion piece, but it’s an official government link. I am pretty confident that I can’t be accused of taking ANYTHING “out of context” when you read the complete details...
[www.consumerfinance.gov]
What happened when I spoke with my bank today? Glad you asked!
When I talked to the security division of my bank today, telling them that I was asking about the safety of using a Dwolla-based IAV, they advised me that Dwolla was criminally prosecuted recently by the US Federal government. They didn’t give me specifics, but after the call I looked it up.
Turns out that Dwolla was prosecuted by the Feds for misrepresentation of their data encryption (some sensitive consumer information wasn’t encrypted at ALL) and other misdeeds.
Here’s the source material. It isn’t an opinion piece, but it’s an official government link. I am pretty confident that I can’t be accused of taking ANYTHING “out of context” when you read the complete details...
[www.consumerfinance.gov]
For those of you who don’t want to click the .gov link, here’s the first bit about Dwolla:
CFPB Takes Action Against Dwolla for Misrepresenting Data Security Practices
MAR 02, 2016
Payment Processor Deceived Consumers About the Data Security Risks of Using Its Online System
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau today took action against online payment platform Dwolla for deceiving consumers about its data security practices and the safety of its online payment system. The CFPB ordered Dwolla to pay a $100,000 penalty and fix its security practices.
(And it goes on, and it’s pretty serious data security misrepresentation.)
CFPB Takes Action Against Dwolla for Misrepresenting Data Security Practices
MAR 02, 2016
Payment Processor Deceived Consumers About the Data Security Risks of Using Its Online System
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau today took action against online payment platform Dwolla for deceiving consumers about its data security practices and the safety of its online payment system. The CFPB ordered Dwolla to pay a $100,000 penalty and fix its security practices.
(And it goes on, and it’s pretty serious data security misrepresentation.)
On February 27, 2016, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFP
released its first data security-related enforcement action against Dwolla, Inc. Relying on its UDAAP-related authority, the CFPB alleged that Dwolla failed to maintain adequate data security practices despite representations made on the company website and in communications with consumers that the company has implemented practices that exceed industry standards. Among other requirements, Dwolla has agreed to settle and must cease making any misrepresentations about its data security practices.
released its first data security-related enforcement action against Dwolla, Inc. Relying on its UDAAP-related authority, the CFPB alleged that Dwolla failed to maintain adequate data security practices despite representations made on the company website and in communications with consumers that the company has implemented practices that exceed industry standards. Among other requirements, Dwolla has agreed to settle and must cease making any misrepresentations about its data security practices.
@ wrote:
Because if anyone does hack an account, because the person shared their log on information, the bank is no longer responsible for whatever happens to your money.
Yes. That’s EXACTLY what my bank told me today: that if I gave my login and my password for IAV, that I’d have no basis for recovery if it were used unlawfully. Then they asked me what/who needed it. When I told them it was Dwolla-Plaid, they told me about the Federal government getting involved.
I kind of felt embarrassed talking to them; they were pretty incredulous that I even CONSIDER giving out that information...
The CFPB story is old news and not nearly as serious as you are making it out to be. Dwolla was cited by the CFPD regarding some of their security practices. They paid the fine and corrected the issue. Paypal, which is lauded here by many forum members, has also been cited and fined by the CFPB.
It's important to note that "The CFPB never alleged that Dwolla had breached any consumer data". The CFPB made certain allegations against Dwolla and Dwolla agreed to pay a fine and address the concerns brought to their attention by the CFPB.
Dwolla was NOT "prosecuted by the feds". This is yet another misstatement by you.
Dwolla has had no further issues with the CFPB or any other government agency since the issue in 2016.
Sorry, Kate, but it's clear that you are here to stir up trouble and for no other reason. It's not "whataboutisim" to explore your motivations for participating in this thread while ignoring more serious security breaches that have occurred with other mystery shopping companies. It's a clear indication of your bias against Sentry and overall, a pretty transparent attempt to denigrate our company.
It's important to note that "The CFPB never alleged that Dwolla had breached any consumer data". The CFPB made certain allegations against Dwolla and Dwolla agreed to pay a fine and address the concerns brought to their attention by the CFPB.
Dwolla was NOT "prosecuted by the feds". This is yet another misstatement by you.
Dwolla has had no further issues with the CFPB or any other government agency since the issue in 2016.
Sorry, Kate, but it's clear that you are here to stir up trouble and for no other reason. It's not "whataboutisim" to explore your motivations for participating in this thread while ignoring more serious security breaches that have occurred with other mystery shopping companies. It's a clear indication of your bias against Sentry and overall, a pretty transparent attempt to denigrate our company.
... and now I’m going to sit back, watch another episode or two of “The Office,” and wait for @Sentry Marketing to tell me how shoppers should entrust their complete bank login information to Dwolla-Plaid.
Or maybe @Sentry Marketing will tell me that I “don’t understand,” or that I’m “taking it out of context.”
Perhaps @Sentry Marketing will try to deflect and distract by pulling in some whataboutism. There hasn’t been a personal attack yet, so that’s a possibility, too.
I’m patient. I’ll wait.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/29/2019 04:09AM by ColoKate63.
Or maybe @Sentry Marketing will tell me that I “don’t understand,” or that I’m “taking it out of context.”
Perhaps @Sentry Marketing will try to deflect and distract by pulling in some whataboutism. There hasn’t been a personal attack yet, so that’s a possibility, too.
I’m patient. I’ll wait.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/29/2019 04:09AM by ColoKate63.
@Sentry Marketing - Looks like we cross-posted.
Personal observation: now I know how Nancy Pelosi felt last Friday afternoon.
Don’t underestimate the intelligence and ability of shoppers to do our research. In fact, you invited us to do due diligence. Too bad it ended so, so badly for you.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/29/2019 04:14AM by ColoKate63.
Personal observation: now I know how Nancy Pelosi felt last Friday afternoon.
Don’t underestimate the intelligence and ability of shoppers to do our research. In fact, you invited us to do due diligence. Too bad it ended so, so badly for you.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/29/2019 04:14AM by ColoKate63.
If anyone wants to do this, open up an account at another bank and keep the bare minimum in the account.
@johnb974 wrote:
If anyone wants to do this, open up an account at another bank and keep the bare minimum in the account.
I think you’d have to completely lose your last shred of brain activity if you entrusted ANY bank login to these folks. Dwolla is small developer located in Des Moines, Iowa. They have already been subjected to some serious fraud investigations, nonetheless. And paid some substantial fines. That is NOT a track record to be proud of... or to trust.
“Stirring up trouble?” Classic gaslighting technique. Don’t EVEN try that nonsense.
I feel very, very sorry for the 3,000 Sentry Marketing shoppers who, according to the owner’s posts, have blindly entrusted their confidential financial information to the Dwolla-Plaid IAV. Not all of us have the luxury of an involuntary snow day to sit at home, make a phone call, and research before we click “Accept.”
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/29/2019 04:31AM by ColoKate63.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.