E-mail List Archives

Re: Check Images

for

From: Glenda
Date: Jan 21, 2005 1:46PM


Michael,

I usually have some suggestions for solving problems, at least a starting
point for finding a solution. In this case I don't. Without knowing all
the applicable laws, the bank may argue the blind customer wrote the cheque
[using whatever means] so why do we now need to make it accessible? On the
other hand, as you mentioned, the signature and any bank stamps are added
later and are inaccessible.

The question may be: how are canceled paper cheques returned to blind
customers? Are they put into any kind of alternate format?? Maybe that
would fullfil the bank's obligations??

Interesting topic.

Cheers,
Glenda

-----Original Message-----
From: michael.brockington [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ]
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 1:41 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Check Images



Glenda,
I (partially) agree with you. Clearly what you are talking about is related
to the article, though not directly.
However: as stated by myself and others, what would you do about it?

My model of the issue is:
Bank is providing a 'remote view' of a physical object that they hold.
The individual pieces of information on the cheque are mostly already
presented to the user, with the exception of:
Signature,
any over-stamps
The latter could also (theoretically) be OCR'd so that it could be presented
as a description.

However the primary reason that I would want to view a canceled cheque is so
that I could check that the amount had not been tampered with, and that the
signature was mine.
Can anyone explain how you would represent that textually?

To use an analogy, would you expect a computer system to be able to describe
the Mona Lisa, a Picasso self portrait, and a twelve-year-olds
self-portrait,
and then even be able to distiguish between them, let alone appreciate the
relative 'quality' of the three?

Mike

> -----Original Message-----
> From: glenda [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ]
> Sent: 20 January 2005 22:27
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Check Images
>
>
>
> Jumping in on this thread without reading it all first, so I
> may be shooting myself in the foot, in which case just delete.
>
> With my online banking service, I am now able to view
> canceled cheques that I have issued. If I was a blind person
> using a screen reader, that service would be inaccessible to
> me. Isn't this an American lawsuit waiting to happen?
>
> Cheers,
> Glenda
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: aknock [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 2:19 AM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Check Images
>
>
>
>
> Aren't we making a lot of fuss over nothing?
>
> Read the article first. As I understand it, currently banks
> receive checks (or cheques) from customers, enter them on a
> system, then send it back to the issuing bank for
> verification that the check is valid. Since checks are
> entirely visual, the existing system requires a sighted user,
> as Mike B says. All the proposed system replaces in this
> exercise is the need to physically post/courier checks from
> one bank to another; instead, they are transferred
> electronically. Nothing changes with the verification stage
> except the verifier is looking at a screen rather than a
> piece of paper.
>
> Yes, it's inaccessible, and it's always been inaccessible,
> but it isn't customer facing and if a blind person was
> accepted for the job of verifier/cashier, the bank would make
> adjustments to allow that person to do their job effectively.
> An easier way of proceeding is to get rid of checks
> altogether, which is what the banks are trying to do with
> electronic payments anyway.
>
> Incidentally, I was confused about this thread initially
> since I thought it was about image validation. Should've
> stuck to Blighty spelling eh!
>
> Have a nice day,
>
> Alistair
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: mburks952 [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ]
> > Sent: 15 January 2005 02:19
> > To: WebAIM Discussion List
> > Subject: [WebAIM] Check Images
> >
> >
> >
> > I wonder how the banks intend to make these accessible? Or
> maybe they
> > have not considered this yet?
> >
> > Wells Fargo Buys Into Check Image Sharing
> >
> > Wells Fargo is making an investment in Viewpointe Archive
> Services LLC
> >
> > and plans to begin using the company's image archive and exchange
> >
> > service to send electronic check images to other banks.
> >
> http://www.computerworld.com/newsletter/0,4902,98966,00.html?nlid=AM
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Mike Burks
>
> ----
> To subscribe or unsubscribe, visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
>
> ----
> To subscribe or unsubscribe, visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
>
> ----
> To subscribe or unsubscribe, visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.1 - Release Date: 1/19/05
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.1 - Release Date: 1/19/05
>
> ----
> To subscribe or unsubscribe, visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
>
>


********************************************************************

This email may contain information which is privileged or confidential. If
you are not the intended recipient of this email, please notify the sender
immediately and delete it without reading, copying, storing, forwarding or
disclosing its contents to any other person
Thank you

Check us out at http://www.bt.com/consulting

********************************************************************

----
To subscribe or unsubscribe, visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.1 - Release Date: 1/19/05

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.1 - Release Date: 1/19/05