Talked about June meeting attendance trends
REAL TIME IN REAL LIFE PROJECT CALL NOTES April 1, 2015 11:00 - Noon ET
Kathy Levin welcomed the participants to the Real Time in Real Life project team meeting announced that the March meeting notes have been posted on the project home page and the summary of the member collaboration session on Real Time that was held at the LA Alliance meeting will be available shortly as well. She then briefly walked through the project’s major milestones to ensure all participants have a sense of the anticipated timing of the project. I.
Review of foundation document
Kathy reviewed the foundation document and the assumptions to be used for the rest of the team’s discussions. The group agreed a real time payments system consists of: The authorization to make a payment (the message from sender) Posting / Funds Availability (FIs and corporate receivers can rely on authorization of message to post / make funds available) Settlement (deferred or real time) Kathy reviewed the following characteristics of a real time or instant payment, for the purposes of this project: Credit transfers only Available to send a payment 24x7x365 (If system is not open, sender receives message saying payment message will go through when system reopens) “Real Time” funds availability for use by receiver (less than 60 seconds) Certainty of settlement (Settlement of real time items is certain, but the details of the settlement process are considered out of scope for this paper. Irrevocable (no returns, no reversals, only rejects for unpostable items) Real Time confirmation and posting of funds, but settlement could be real time or deferred model The group agreed with these characteristics, but noted that the team will need to further discuss the assumption that the payment is irrevocable within the paper, and what that would mean for users of the real time messaging system. Kathy reviewed the team’s working definition of a real time messaging system: • a component of real time payments system • an asynchronous messaging system with request and response capabilities between the sender and receiver of immediate payments that includes both positive and negative responses Real Time in Real Life Project Team Conference Call April 1, 2015
1
•
•
Messages transmitted by this system provide authorization for transfer of funds from one account to another. It is not a general messaging system and is used only for payment instructions with remittance information, and notifications of acceptance/rejection and of posting/funds availability. For the sake of international interoperability, the use of ISO 20022 is recommended, with no limits on the amount of remittance data
While the group agreed with the definition, and felt that ISO 20022 use should be recommended, it was noted that “with no limits on the amount of remittance data” should be removed so as to ensure interoperability with other systems around the world. Kathy walked through the flow of the messaging system, both for a generic real time payment, and for the C2B use case. The group felt that a graphic depiction or diagram of the flow of the messages would be helpful for the team and the reader of the paper. It was suggested that third parties should be shown in the diagram as well as have a portion of the paper devoted to their use of the system. The group also agreed that the paper should discuss fraud/security issues related to a real time messaging system. In the C2B use case, the group discussed how different this model is from today, in terms of parties involved in the transaction, and billers knowing and informing the consumer sender that their payment has posted in real time. II.
Sections of paper
The group discussed what should be included in the paper and determined the following sections and topics should be covered:
Section One: Introduction and background information on global move to real time Section Two: General information about a RT messaging system o Assumptions used in paper regarding RT payment system, RT payment and RT messaging system o Discussion on irrevocability of payment o Graphic showing flow of RT messaging system o Overview of 3rd parties and their role o Authentication/Fraud/Security issues for RT messaging system Section Three: Use Case – Consumer to Business Section Four: Use Case – Person to Person Section Five: Use Case – Business to Consumer Section Six: Use Case – Business to Business
Each of the Use Case sections will include: Identification of stakeholders and their roles and responsibilities Value of RT messaging system to each High level implications of RT messaging system to each Content of messages and specific message flow Real Time in Real Life Project Team Conference Call April 1, 2015
2
For end users of RT messaging system in this use case o Changes needed to send and receive messages o Possible exceptions and how are they handled o Suggested best practices / recommendations
NEXT STEPS: Project Team members will select sections of the paper and participate in small group calls during April to discuss those sections. NACHA staff will post notes from this meeting on the project home page. NACHA staff will create outlines for each section based upon small group discussions and distribute to entire project team prior to the next call.
NEXT MEETING: Friday, May 8 from 11:00 to noon ET
MEETING PARTICIPANTS Pam Kennaley – American Express Centurion Bank Jessica Cheney – Bottomline Technologies Doug Kreviazuk – Canadian Payments Association Nasreen Quibria – CGI Group Frank D’Amadeo – Con Edison Anita Patterson – Cox Enterprises, Inc. Laura Weinflash - EWS Les Smith – Jack Henry & Associates Leo Lipis – Lipis Advisors Kathy Levin – NACHA Joi McKoy-Toombs - NACHA George Throckmorton – NACHA Chad Hauff – Safety Insurance Company Eric Lim – U.S. Bank Muneeb Shah - Wipro
Real Time in Real Life Project Team Conference Call April 1, 2015
3
Kathy Levin welcomed the participants to the Real Time in Real Life project team meeting announced that the March meeting notes have been posted on the project home page and the summary of the member collaboration session on Real Time that was held at the LA Alliance meeting will be available shortly as well. She then briefly walked through the project’s major milestones to ensure all participants have a sense of the anticipated timing of the project. I.
Review of foundation document
Kathy reviewed the foundation document and the assumptions to be used for the rest of the team’s discussions. The group agreed a real time payments system consists of: The authorization to make a payment (the message from sender) Posting / Funds Availability (FIs and corporate receivers can rely on authorization of message to post / make funds available) Settlement (deferred or real time) Kathy reviewed the following characteristics of a real time or instant payment, for the purposes of this project: Credit transfers only Available to send a payment 24x7x365 (If system is not open, sender receives message saying payment message will go through when system reopens) “Real Time” funds availability for use by receiver (less than 60 seconds) Certainty of settlement (Settlement of real time items is certain, but the details of the settlement process are considered out of scope for this paper. Irrevocable (no returns, no reversals, only rejects for unpostable items) Real Time confirmation and posting of funds, but settlement could be real time or deferred model The group agreed with these characteristics, but noted that the team will need to further discuss the assumption that the payment is irrevocable within the paper, and what that would mean for users of the real time messaging system. Kathy reviewed the team’s working definition of a real time messaging system: • a component of real time payments system • an asynchronous messaging system with request and response capabilities between the sender and receiver of immediate payments that includes both positive and negative responses Real Time in Real Life Project Team Conference Call April 1, 2015
1
•
•
Messages transmitted by this system provide authorization for transfer of funds from one account to another. It is not a general messaging system and is used only for payment instructions with remittance information, and notifications of acceptance/rejection and of posting/funds availability. For the sake of international interoperability, the use of ISO 20022 is recommended, with no limits on the amount of remittance data
While the group agreed with the definition, and felt that ISO 20022 use should be recommended, it was noted that “with no limits on the amount of remittance data” should be removed so as to ensure interoperability with other systems around the world. Kathy walked through the flow of the messaging system, both for a generic real time payment, and for the C2B use case. The group felt that a graphic depiction or diagram of the flow of the messages would be helpful for the team and the reader of the paper. It was suggested that third parties should be shown in the diagram as well as have a portion of the paper devoted to their use of the system. The group also agreed that the paper should discuss fraud/security issues related to a real time messaging system. In the C2B use case, the group discussed how different this model is from today, in terms of parties involved in the transaction, and billers knowing and informing the consumer sender that their payment has posted in real time. II.
Sections of paper
The group discussed what should be included in the paper and determined the following sections and topics should be covered:
Section One: Introduction and background information on global move to real time Section Two: General information about a RT messaging system o Assumptions used in paper regarding RT payment system, RT payment and RT messaging system o Discussion on irrevocability of payment o Graphic showing flow of RT messaging system o Overview of 3rd parties and their role o Authentication/Fraud/Security issues for RT messaging system Section Three: Use Case – Consumer to Business Section Four: Use Case – Person to Person Section Five: Use Case – Business to Consumer Section Six: Use Case – Business to Business
Each of the Use Case sections will include: Identification of stakeholders and their roles and responsibilities Value of RT messaging system to each High level implications of RT messaging system to each Content of messages and specific message flow Real Time in Real Life Project Team Conference Call April 1, 2015
2
For end users of RT messaging system in this use case o Changes needed to send and receive messages o Possible exceptions and how are they handled o Suggested best practices / recommendations
NEXT STEPS: Project Team members will select sections of the paper and participate in small group calls during April to discuss those sections. NACHA staff will post notes from this meeting on the project home page. NACHA staff will create outlines for each section based upon small group discussions and distribute to entire project team prior to the next call.
NEXT MEETING: Friday, May 8 from 11:00 to noon ET
MEETING PARTICIPANTS Pam Kennaley – American Express Centurion Bank Jessica Cheney – Bottomline Technologies Doug Kreviazuk – Canadian Payments Association Nasreen Quibria – CGI Group Frank D’Amadeo – Con Edison Anita Patterson – Cox Enterprises, Inc. Laura Weinflash - EWS Les Smith – Jack Henry & Associates Leo Lipis – Lipis Advisors Kathy Levin – NACHA Joi McKoy-Toombs - NACHA George Throckmorton – NACHA Chad Hauff – Safety Insurance Company Eric Lim – U.S. Bank Muneeb Shah - Wipro
Real Time in Real Life Project Team Conference Call April 1, 2015
3
