News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on SF payroll firm Rippling unable to pay out after Silicon Valley Bank collapse. Parent comment

Re:SF payroll firm Rippling unable to pay out after Silicon ... by FireBeyond on Friday March 10, 2023 @08:17PM (#35103944)
> We ask that you please reach out to your bank and request that your bank return any ACH transactions debited from your account by Rippling into SVB under the premise that the transaction(s) are unauthorized, since the bank has ceased operations and is unable to honor the payments.

This seems a little ... odd. To be very clear, I'm not on the bank's side at all... but if the ACH is already debited, then your bank would absolutely be in the right to not return it as unauthorized, because the bank ceased operations _after_ the transaction.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SF payroll firm Rippling unable to pay out after Silicon ... by jmvoodoo on Friday March 10, 2023 @08:32PM (#35104104)
Right now, the funds are still showing at least in our online portal. I will be visiting the branch tomorrow and hopefully can prevent the transfer from completing.

Not a fun email to receive either way.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SF payroll firm Rippling unable to pay out after Silicon ... by FireBeyond on Friday March 10, 2023 @10:01PM (#35104732)
Oh no, I can only imagine, and please don't think for a moment that I'm saying that you shouldn't be able to cancel the transfer. And I hope you can!

Just more that it's odd for Rippling to say that people should report the transaction as unauthorized, because on a strict technical timeline, it wasn't, until the bank was closed, so if it had already debited someone's account before then...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SF payroll firm Rippling unable to pay out after Silicon ... by maxerickson on Friday March 10, 2023 @09:28PM (#35104488)
Aren't they telling their customers to cancel transfers into SVB?

(seems like the flow of funds is customer bank -> SVB -> [maybe more] -> payroll payees)

Seems likely enough that those transfers will fail to clear in a couple days, not bad to get ahead of that if possible.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SF payroll firm Rippling unable to pay out after Silicon ... by FireBeyond on Friday March 10, 2023 @09:57PM (#35104700)
Right, but that's my point, not necessarily agreeing with the motivation or such. If the transfer went through before the FDIC shuttered them this AM, it could be argued that the transaction was entirely authorized _at the time_ the ACH debit occurred.

Hopefully banks will sympathize, but I don't know that you can say "the bank was forcibly closed the day after this ACH transaction, so it's unauthorized, because I intended to have those funds flow outbound later".

It would be unauthorized if the ACH debit was _initiated_ after the closure of the bank.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SF payroll firm Rippling unable to pay out after Silicon ... by OJFord on Friday March 10, 2023 @10:15PM (#35104832)
Regardless of the correctness or legality of the advice, it's a bit odd to wade in and give it at all isn't it? Why not steer well clear? Seem friendly/helpful and buy goodwill I suppose?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SF payroll firm Rippling unable to pay out after Silicon ... by maxerickson on Friday March 10, 2023 @10:51PM (#35105077)
It's Rippling's account at SVB. They literally can't steer clear of the transfers.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SF payroll firm Rippling unable to pay out after Silicon ... by tgsovlerkhgsel on Saturday March 11, 2023 @07:44PM (#35114877)
Rippling has received the money, and it then disappeared while in Rippling's account.

If Rippling can get their customers to somehow get that money out and wire it again, Rippling may not be on the hook for replacing the missing money.

[ Parent | on HN ]