undefined | Better HN

0 pointsEpicEng9y ago0 comments

It sounds to me like you added a lot of detail around a core message of "yes, you may be violating your bank's ToS by using our service, please verify this by reading through page upon page of legalese in your spare time."

Well... no thanks. I (and likely many others) would only consider using such a service if I had a guarantee, both from you and my bank, up front.

from your ToS:

>"We are not liable for any loss or damage that may result from your use of our services. This includes any direct, indirect, or consequential losses; any loss or damage caused by tort, including negligence, breach of contract or otherwise."

Oh geez.

0 comments

4 comments · 2 top-level

djsumdog9y ago· 1 in thread

Yea, unless you're developing jointly with banks, with lots of oversight and liability insurance, this is a disaster waiting to happen.

brango9y ago

It wouldn't surprise me if it wouldn't stand up in court either. Short of having a huge banner that says "WE WON'T ACCEPT ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY LOSSES IF YOU USE ARE SERVICES, TYPE 'I AGREE' TO CONTINUE" I imagine someone could probably claim that the risks weren't sufficiently highlighted.

There's a reason every investment-related advert has to state that "The value of your investment may go down as well as up", etc.

dnh449y ago· 1 in thread

At least in the U.K. Banks are starting to provide API's so bookkeeping platforms can securely download bank feeds without having to give a 3rd party login credentials.

EpicEngOP9y ago

Sure, and when they're in place (well, a US version I suppose) I would consider using a service like this. Until then, no way.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse