Slice Savings Account (Wallet Discontinued)

[Dr.AMAN]

Re-read what I had commented.

It is customary for banks to impose a debit freeze not otherwise, in instances of suspicious activities: unauthorised transactions/ fraudulent txns identified by algorithm, in order to prevent any further misuse and safegaurd customers. However, Slice seems to be an exception, who put credit freeze (not saying based on this single case, I have seen others as well), lol. 🤣

The action of imposing a credit freeze by Slice may be deemed reasonable only in case where transaction volumes heavily exceed the income declared by the customer, clearly this is not such case & hence, unreasonable. In this case as well, other banks put debit or total freeze which is also not a good thing, IMO.

Whether to put credit freeze or debit freeze is decided by the AI Algorithm used by the bank. It is not based on somebody's whims or fancies. I m not a an expert in banking algorithms but from wht I have read about credit freezes, there r 2 grades of suspicion of Mule account:-
- Low risk suspicion--> sudden large volume upi transfer from own/ verified bank accounts
- High risk suspicion--> when there is sudden unusually large number of upi credits from multiple unknown/3rd party accounts.
In Pravin's case because he had transferred a large UPI amount from his own bank account so they most probably placed him under low risk category. All his previous credits were fine. Thats y they just did a credit freeze.
If it is low risk then bank will most likely just put a credit freeze and allow debits under monitoring. This is a lower level of freeze.
If he had received the same amount from some 3rd party/ unknown upi numbers then they might have even done a debit freeze. Activities like forex trading/p2p credits/cryptos also come under this high risk category.

 

[Aniket]

Whether to put credit freeze or debit freeze is decided by the AI Algorithm used by the bank.

I have myself said the same. Not only it's identified but also applied by the algorithm itself, it's an automated process, I have never denied that fact.

It is customary for banks to impose a debit freeze not otherwise, in instances of suspicious activities: unauthorised transactions/ fraudulent txns identified by algorithm, in order to prevent any further misuse and safegaurd customers.

I m not a an expert in banking algorithms

Then what's the sense for arguing on sarcasm?

but from wht I have read about credit freezes, there r 2 grades of suspicion of Mule account:-
- Low risk suspicion--> sudden large volume upi transfer from own/ verified bank accounts

What do you mean by Verified bank accounts? Some banks account are opened without verification or due diligence?

- High risk suspicion--> when there is sudden unusually large number of upi credits from multiple unknown/3rd party accounts.
In Pravin's case because he had transferred a large UPI amount from his own bank account so they most probably placed him under low risk category. All his previous credits were fine. Thats y they just did a credit freeze.
If it is low risk then bank will most likely just put a credit freeze and allow debits under monitoring. This is a lower level of freeze.
If he had received the same amount from some 3rd party/ unknown upi numbers then they might have even done a debit freeze. Activities like forex trading/p2p credits/cryptos also come under this high risk category.

No comments on the assumption or random guesses.

Btw, you're again taking the context to a different place without understanding the perspective of my comment. I have suggested someone before Pravin bro account got frozen:




As I have mentioned previously as well, Slice do credit freeze (as far as I have seen), several other users are facing the same, Pravin bro is not the first one.

Credit freeze may seem good as we can withdraw our balance without any headache immediately. But not when potential fraudulent or unauthorised txns are being carried in the view of algorithm.

Even SBI Card & others gives a call as soon as txn is carried out (suspicious to its algorithm) to verify the txn, whether it's authorised or not or report unauthorised on IVR itself, to further block & replace the card.


I have made a sarcastic comment that Slice is putting credit freeze instead of debit freeze to prevent further risk (obviously applied by the algorithm itself) even when it's potential fraudulent or unauthorised txns as per its algorithm because to date, not seen a single case of debit freeze, whereas seen many cases when credit freeze was applied.


The same way how IDFC (used to or still) freezing account (even on Wealth) on just few normal UPI txns. Some bank branch officers acknowledged the concern and said we are aware about about this case and our concerned team is looking into it, suggested to avoid making UPI txns as far as possible.

In the same way, I believe, Slice has just started the banking journey, new in this field, so their algorithm is bit weird for the moment. Their coders could have asked to apply credit freeze intentionally or unintentionally on some cases. That's all. Hope, they will learn and improve.

 

[Dr.AMAN]

I have myself said the same. Not only it's identified but also applied by the algorithm itself, it's an automated process, I have never denied that fact.



Then what's the sense for arguing on sarcasm?

What do you mean by Verified bank accounts? Some banks account are opened without verification or due diligence?

No comments on the assumption or random guesses.

Btw, you're again taking the context to a different place without understanding the perspective of my comment. I have suggested someone before Pravin bro account got frozen:
View attachment 103680

View attachment 103681

As I have mentioned previously as well, Slice do credit freeze (as far as I have seen), several other users are facing the same, Pravin bro is not the first one.

Credit freeze may seem good as we can withdraw our balance without any headache immediately. But not when potential fraudulent or unauthorised txns are being carried in the view of algorithm.

Even SBI Card & others gives a call as soon as txn is carried out (suspicious to its algorithm) to verify the txn, whether it's authorised or not or report unauthorised on IVR itself, to further block & replace the card.


I have made a sarcastic comment that Slice is putting credit freeze instead of debit freeze to prevent further risk (obviously applied by the algorithm itself) even when it's potential fraudulent or unauthorised txns as per its algorithm because to date, not seen a single case of debit freeze, whereas seen many cases when credit freeze was applied.


The same way how IDFC (used to or still) freezing account (even on Wealth) on just few normal UPI txns. Some bank branch officers acknowledged the concern and said we are aware about about this case and our concerned team is looking into it, suggested to avoid making UPI txns as far as possible.

In the same way, I believe, Slice has just started the banking journey, new in this field, so their algorithm is bit weird for the moment. Their coders could have asked to apply credit freeze intentionally or unintentionally on some cases. That's all. Hope, they will learn and improve.

Aniket bro dont get me wrong. I m not arguing aganist wht u said. Just like others here I m trying to put 1 and 1 together to find out the reason for the credit freeze. The concept of low risk and high risk suspicion is not based on my personal assumptions. RBI has given master guidelines to banks. U can find various articles/reddit posts online. By " verified accounts" I mean a UPI account from which u have already received some money in the past or which is already saved in ur contact/beneficiery list and which has not been flagged for any fraud in the past. If u regularly receive small amounts of money from ur friend's upi then the system knowns that it is not a high risk source. If that same friend sends u a large amount of money then the Bank's system will not red flag it. But receiving a sudden large amount of money through upi from a random 3rd party number will raise red flags irrespective of the bank. Since slice didnt find Pravin's transaction high risk so they put only Credit freeze(due to prior inactivity f/b sudden high value credit). Many people r reporting only credit freezes from slice but it doesnt mean slice will not do debit freeze. I agree with ur point that just like SBI, Slice should give an IVR call before putting credit freeze. The whole point of this discussion is to share our knowledge and learn from others' mistakes/experiences so that we can avoid our own account freezes in future. I might have read 10-20 reddit posts and articles on account freezes before opening digital savings account. Based on that I m saying.

 

[Aniket]

Aniket bro dont get me wrong. I m not arguing aganist wht u said. Just like others here I m trying to put 1 and 1 together to find out the reason for the credit freeze. The concept of low risk and high risk suspicion is not based on my personal assumptions. RBI has given master guidelines to banks. U can find various articles/reddit posts online.

The types of risks, you're referring to, by texts and screenshot (RBI guidelines, to be precise, Master Direction for KYC) is majorly for the periodicity of Re-KYC, for which I am already aware. Just for your refrence:


We, account holders are categorised either as low risk or medium risk or high risk, based on few parameters (even on the bank's discretion, because reason and categorisation are kept confidential, you can not even question, not only that they can also take consideration of internal kyc policy) which are listed in the Master Direction of KYC. Such categorisation is made when to mandatorily due Re-kyc. High risk, Medium risk & High customers are asked to carry out Re-KYC atleast once in 2, 8 & 10 years respectively.

Whereas usually when freeze is applied by algorithm, it's due to suspicious or unusual or inconsistent txns (nature of such txns are feeded by the coders/developers taking consideration of regulatory compliance: on going due diligence & monitoring (it's directly proportional to risk category) and internal policies as well: like sudden odd timing of txns, repetitive number of txns within short span of time, multiple failed txns due to incorrect pin, excessively high amount of txns all of sudden or just after account opening, same amount credit & debit (may suggest to money mule or benami account) & vice versa, etc.

Not only that profile mismatch (declared occupation/ profesion & income).

In former case, it has become the customary & also reasonable to put debit freeze to prevent further probable risk/loss, in customer's interest until the verification is complete that the txns were authorised by the account holder.

By " verified accounts" I mean a UPI account from which u have already received some money in the past or which is already saved in ur contact/beneficiery list and which has not been flagged for any fraud in the past. If u regularly receive small amounts of money from ur friend's upi then the system knowns that it is not a high risk source. If that same friend sends u a large amount of money then the Bank's system will not red flag it. But receiving a sudden large amount of money through upi from a random 3rd party number will raise red flags irrespective of the bank.

Since slice didnt find Pravin's transaction high risk so they put only Credit freeze(due to prior inactivity f/b sudden high value credit).

This again amounts to nothing, because your understanding of riks categorisation is not fully incorrect in this regards.

Banks use Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning to monitor txns closely to mitigate risks and also because of regulatory compliance, no doubt.

Sometimes bank give notice to refrain from using savings account like a business (current account) or without giving notice, account gets closed by citing business nature txns or something similar. Hope, you've heard or read about that & banks are conferred with such rights to use discretionary power.

Many people r reporting only credit freezes from slice but it doesnt mean slice will not do debit freeze.

I am just saying, the freeze is made and later revoked after verification because the algorithm got triggered and put the credit freeze on account of suspicious txns, for which the reasonable step & custom in banking industry is to put debit freeze, instead, until verification is made or customer informing the txns were authorized, instead.

Marking freeze again within a day of revocation of previous freeze is also something strange, isn't it?

I agree with ur point that just like SBI

That's in case of Credit Card txns, see SBI Card algorithm also get triggered even for txns of normal nature. It all depends upon how they are internally designed to act.

In case of credit card, banks act more cautiously and responsibly, as they think that's their money and may have greater burden of liability.

Slice should give an IVR call before putting credit freeze.

In case of savings account, suppose if one actual unauthorised txn is carried out, algorithm got triggered but before freezing if it's designed to make an IVR call, customer is supposed to respond, needs to press correct number from IVR menu. Till then unauthorised person/ fraudster will wait or will try to carry out next txn, if unaware about the remaining balance? That's why, in such situation debit freeze is a reasonable action.

Also, if credit freeze gets applied instead of debit freeze, then how customer's money get prevented to be withdrawn further which is not authorised by him or caused due to negligence on part of the customer or bank or both?

The whole point of this discussion is to share our knowledge and learn from others' mistakes/experiences so that we can avoid our own account freezes in future.

Yes, I agree on that. But one also needs to open minded enough to hear out others comment, without being condescending. Just because one is a putting contrary comment, doesn't necessarily mean it must be incorrect or unreasonable.

I might have read 10-20 reddit posts and articles on account freezes before opening digital savings account. Based on that I m saying.

So do I.

As of today, I never went into such situation, hoping the same to be continued. 🤞

View attachment 103682

Already addressed in previous paras.

Now, it's time to rest this topic (atleast for me) as it may continue to proceed further, will divert from the primary topic.

 

[Dr.AMAN]

The types of risks, you're referring to, by texts and screenshot (RBI guidelines, to be precise, Master Direction for KYC) is majorly for the periodicity of Re-KYC, for which I am already aware. Just for your refrence:
View attachment 103683

We, account holders are categorised either as low risk or medium risk or high risk, based on few parameters (even on the bank's discretion, because reason and categorisation are kept confidential, you can not even question, not only that they can also take consideration of internal kyc policy) which are listed in the Master Direction of KYC. Such categorisation is made when to mandatorily due Re-kyc. High risk, Medium risk & High customers are asked to carry out Re-KYC atleast once in 2, 8 & 10 years respectively.

Whereas usually when freeze is applied by algorithm, it's due to suspicious or unusual or inconsistent txns (nature of such txns are feeded by the coders/developers taking consideration of regulatory compliance: on going due diligence & monitoring (it's directly proportional to risk category) and internal policies as well: like sudden odd timing of txns, repetitive number of txns within short span of time, multiple failed txns due to incorrect pin, excessively high amount of txns all of sudden or just after account opening, same amount credit & debit (may suggest to money mule or benami account) & vice versa, etc.

Not only that profile mismatch (declared occupation/ profesion & income).

In former case, it has become the customary & also reasonable to put debit freeze to prevent further probable risk/loss, in customer's interest until the verification is complete that the txns were authorised by the account holder.


This again amounts to nothing, because your understanding of riks categorisation is not fully incorrect in this regards.

Banks use Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning to monitor txns closely to mitigate risks and also because of regulatory compliance, no doubt.

Sometimes bank give notice to refrain from using savings account like a business (current account) or without giving notice, account gets closed by citing business nature txns or something similar. Hope, you've heard or read about that & banks are conferred with such rights to use discretionary power.

I am just saying, the freeze is made and later revoked after verification because the algorithm got triggered and put the credit freeze on account of suspicious txns, for which the reasonable step & custom in banking industry is to put debit freeze, instead, until verification is made or customer informing the txns were authorized, instead.

Marking freeze again within a day of revocation of previous freeze is also something strange, isn't it?

That's in case of Credit Card txns, see SBI Card algorithm also get triggered even for txns of normal nature. It all depends upon how they are internally designed to act.

In case of credit card, banks act more cautiously and responsibly, as they think that's their money and may have greater burden of liability.

In case of savings account, suppose if one actual unauthorised txn is carried out, algorithm got triggered but before freezing if it's designed to make an IVR call, customer is supposed to respond, needs to press correct number from IVR menu. Till then unauthorised person/ fraudster will wait or will try to carry out next txn, if unaware about the remaining balance? That's why, in such situation debit freeze is a reasonable action.

Also, if credit freeze gets applied instead of debit freeze, then how customer's money get prevented to be withdrawn further which is not authorised by him or caused due to negligence on part of the customer or bank or both?

Yes, I agree on that. But one also needs to open minded enough to hear out others comment, without being condescending. Just because one is a putting contrary comment, doesn't necessarily mean it must be incorrect or unreasonable.

So do I.

As of today, I never went into such situation, hoping the same to be continued. 🤞

Already addressed in previous paras.

Now, it's time to rest this topic (atleast for me) as it may continue to proceed further, will divert from the primary topic.

TLDR lets just agree to disagree brother. I get ur point. Otherwise we will have to change the title of this thread from "slice savings account" to " online account freeze of slice account"😅

 

[tharun]

TLDR

I didn't read too 😂😂 these are very long messages

These guys have good vocabulary and lots of patience to type

 

[pinki]

I didn't read too 😂😂 these are very long messages

These guys have good vocabulary and lots of patience to type

And that is why our @Aniket bhayyyyyy
is a TF PRESTIGE here

 

[Aniket]

TLDR

As if yours one was in few lines. 🤣

Mine one was atleast divided in paras not mixed up everything in one single para to make likely unreadable.

lets just agree to disagree brother.

There's nothing to agree, your understanding with regards to risk was incorrect and the same was proved with some facts and logics. That's all, it could be one of the reason of not being to accept the same.

I get ur point.

Ok

Otherwise we will have to change the title of this thread from "slice savings account" to " online account freeze of slice account"😅

Already mentioned it: 👇
Btw, slice Savings A/c is in itself a border title & you are the one who started it.

Now, it's time to rest this topic (atleast for me) as it may continue to proceed further, will divert from the primary topic.