Tuesday, February 27, 2007

Business Case for Back Office Conversion (BOC)-Webinar


Thursday, March 15, 2007 (click here to register)
Time: 2:00 – 3:00 pm EST 1:00 – 2:00 pm CST
12:00 – 1:00 pm MST 11:00 am – 12:00 pm PST
FREE Webinar for TAWPI PCC members and Payments in Transition conference attendees!

Beginning March 16, 2007 many retailers and billers will be allowed to convert eligible checks to ACH debits in the back-office. Known as back-office conversion, or BOC, the new rules will enable financial institutions to provide additional value to their customers in a business environment where many checks are still used. Back-office conversion will also allow financial institutions to convert eligible checks received in image files to ACH debits.

This webinar will review:
Rules of the BOC application.
Potential BOC workflow(s).
Benefits and challenges of implementing BOC for RDFI, Receiver, Originator, ODFI.
Customer service training and awareness techniques.

If you are getting ready for BOC implementation, you need to participate in this webinar.

THE SPEAKERS: Kristine Oberg, VP, Product Development Group Manager, U.S. Bank

Amy Gutierrez, VP Strategic Market Development, NOVA Information Systems


WHO SHOULD ATTEND: Business, operations, IT and product strategists responsible for payments and cash management within an organization.

Monday, February 26, 2007

Moving Money-Treasury Management Group looks to Tackle Remote Capture

by Harvey Spencer contributing editor and published in TAWPI's TODAY Magazine click here for a complimentary subscription to TODAY.

Back in 1980 when I worked for NCR in Dayton, OH, I was responsible for implementing one of the early PC based Treasury Workstations. This software kept track of a company’s investments and then dialed the corporation’s bank accounts before the Treasurer arrived. By the time he arrived at 8:00 am, he had a complete cash position laid out and could make investment decisions faster. We were going to sell this to the banks so that they could sell them to their customers. As my Beta site, I installed this into NCR’s Treasury Department – then a $5 billion company – and the Treasurer reckoned that he gained two basis points in the market through having faster access to this information a lot of money. This all came back to me as I contemplated the impact of Check 21 and the push to install Remote Capture systems by Banks in corporations. As with Remote Capture, the banks thought that since the Treasury Workstation would give better control to their customers, they could create a closer liaison with them by selling these systems. This proved fallacious as large corporations, such as NCR, wanted to control their own relationships and did not want the banks’ systems in their Treasury areas. We are now seeing the same scenario played out –the banks want to put remote capture stations into corporations.
They cite the major reasons as being:

_ Improved Float Elimination of transportation/courier costs
_ Branch Account Consolidation
_ Fewer Processing Errors
_ Convenience and Safety
These are clear benefits, and from the bank’s viewpoint it saves
major costs, since their customer is effectively performing the
expensive proof and encode operation instead of them. However,
the problem with this approach is that it ignores the needs of the
corporation. What happens if the company wants to change its
major banking supplier? Must it return its Remote Capture system?
While I think that Remote Capture as supplied by Banks will be
successful in the SMB market, I doubt that it will fly in large corporations
over the longer term. As with the Treasury Workstation,
large corporations will want their own systems and will use the X9
standards to deliver standardized images to the banks they choose
or to a 3rd party service.
Clearly, they will vary this in order to:
_ Reduce costs
_ Reduce bank accounts
_ Optimize cutoff times
_ Improve float

The banks will compete fiercely on this, but they now have a different playing
field from the traditional paper based one. For instance at – a Kansas bank – told me that they had extended their Check 21 today value cutoff to 6:00 pm Central
Time. Well that is fine if you on the East Coast, but if you are in California,
it is 4:00 pm – not much better than traditional times and a West Coast bank who makes their cut-off at 6pm gives East Coast companies up until 9:00 pm to deposit their check images. Services are appearing to facilitate this flexibility and decide how best to clear items. For example CheckFree introduced a service to enable automated clearing decisions to be made in order to leverage the new NACHA BOC rules which allow a small quantity of business checks to be cleared through lower cost ACH. SWIFT – used by banks to enable the secure movement of transactions internationally which corporations could only access through bank partnerships announced an enhanced Corporate Access capability named SCORE, which allows publicly listed corporations to electronically interact with a closed group of participating financial organizations. It is slowly reducing banking control. In addition, Remote Capture effectively means that a two-step operation must be performed:

1. Scan and balance the payments sending the check images
and cash letter to the bank
2. Post the payment to the AR system

It seems that it would be much more effective to integrate the posting with the capture. Two solutions I saw were Remitco, which is offering customized solutions to enable this integration, and, Creditron, a small Canadian that company has integrated into Microsoft Dynamics (formerly Great Plains). Trintech, specializing in transaction verification, is expanding into integration. From the perspective of TAWPI members, this seems like an emerging opportunity. On one side we have Invoice or AP processing starting to be installed – these systems, particularly when linked with procure-to-pay solutions allow far better and faster management of outgoing payments. On the other side we have Remittance or AR which is changing with the advent of remote capture, ARC and Check 21 and is becoming more integrated and distributed. Together the Corporate Treasurer can gain better and faster control over both the outgoing and incoming cash. At present, most Treasurers get end of day cash reporting – but more advanced companies are getting intra-day reporting. The business future will require real-time reporting but that is some way off according to Bent Benjaminsen, Senior Vice President Strategic Initiatives at Avantgard, a subsidiary of Sungard Systems. Linking AP and AR systems provides potentially huge benefits to major corporations and it seems that many AP and AR inputs will continue to be paper based. Like the Treasury Workstations of old, the bank controlled Remote Capture solution will not hold up in
major corporations, but its adoption will open doors to systems from those companies who capture paper and integrate with the AR systems as well as order-to-cash. But I predict that those who can provide integration of both AP and AR systems automation will be the big winners.

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

eChecks- Improving your work process on the receiving end...


As a TAWPI Member you gain full access to our listserve; a community of practitioners and providers bouncing ideas and working on ways to improve their work process in the check and document automation industry. This listserve question came in which generated some interest and may be something your operation is struggling with as well:

Question: "We are a Utilities Company who is struggling with echecks. We currently receive hundreds of paper "echecks" from our customers. These checks I am referring to are ones where the banks offer bill payment services. It works great for our customers, however on the receiving end of the echeck, it is very time consuming and allows much room for human error, as these payments are posted to the customers accounts without a remittance stub and not through our automated system, but through a customer service representative's cash drawer. We are looking to change that. What is the best way to go about capturing all or most of these echecks and sending us some kind of posting file?

==============

Answer (given by an end-user Utility Co.) : It depends on where these are coming from. If they are from one "consolidator" (someone who issues the checks from a variety of banks), it is best to work with the operations department of that consolidator to receive a electronic file.
We had numerous checks that we used to receive in this manner, but over time they gradually become consolidated through other means. The bank may have become consolidated under Checkfee or Paymode for example. It is sometimes difficult and tedious to create a electronic file, but in the long run it also helps the customer.

Answer (given by a TelCo end-user) "I work for a telecommunications company in Canada and we receive electronic payment files from the banks for all our APA payments except nonscannable. The payment stub is sent from the processing sites for the FI's (here some of the processing sites process for more then one financial institution) to out lead banks processing site. We receive a file daily of the scannable stubs and the non scannable stubs are sent to our mail processing site for processing. As we move to truncation (equivalent to your Check 21) the paper stubs of course are eliminated and we're just receive the file that has been centralized through our lead bank. Our company eliminated the processing of APA payments without a stub a few years ago. As we currently have more then one billing system that we process payments for the FI's have the scanline definition for each of them and have a different electronic payment file layout for most of them to they can be transmitted to us. All our payment files including APAs and telephone/internet banking payments are send to our Payment Gateway. The Payment Gateway is part of our centralized process and at the end of the day transmits payments files from all sources to each of the billing systems. The comment below about setting up the electronic file and testing etc being long and tedious is true but we found it well worth it. It helped make the truncation process seamless to us and our customer. Also we are in the process of consolidating our billing systems and are able to do this with little or no impact to the customers as we move them from one billing system to another and in some cases change their account information."
/
Answer: (given by Insurance end-user) "Our company has arranged for a service from Chase bank that Chase calls "ACH Receiver Services."For their "ACH Receiver Services" product, Chase has arrangements with the large companies (e.g., CheckFree, Metavante, MasterCard RPPS) that are the back end service provider for many bank bill payment services.We provided information to Chase (such as our remittance processing addresses and account number formats). We worked through Chase to set up the arrangements with bill payment providers CheckFree, Metavante and MasterCard RPPS. At start-up, we exchanged some files with the bill payment providers to convert existing mutual customers to the electronic payment feed process.When new customers enter us as a "payee" at their bank and provide our remittance address and account number, the bill payment provider sends the payments to Chase electronically and Chase sends the payments to us electronically (as ACH transactions).We now receive over 30,000 payments a month that used to come to us as "check only" transactions through ACH Receiver Services.We chose the Chase product rather than making arrangements with each bill payment provider to avoid the challenge of negotiating trading partner agreements to start the program and managing multiple inbound transmission from each bill payment provider."
/
Answer: (given by an end-user Service Bureau) "We have worked with the vendors like checkfree, online resources, metavante, cass etc...to have them send those payments to us in an electronic file, we then pull in the electronic file with our mail payment file and send to client for posting to their receivable system. This works very well for us, and reduces the human error factor. "
==================
Let us hear from you.....What are your recommendations or struggles?