header-logo header-logo

12 September 2013 / Stephen Mason
Issue: 7575 / Categories: Opinion , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Is your number up?

Stephen Mason & Nicholas Bohm take issue with the PIN requirements of Santander

Santander UK plc has recently imposed on its UK banking customers the requirement that the personal identity number (PIN) for their accounts must be unique. This is coupled with a prohibition against the recording of the PIN: a combination which we believe places customers in such difficulty that the terms are unfair.

A unique PIN

Clause 9.7(k) of Santander’s General Terms and Conditions Current Accounts and Savings Accounts (effective from 1 January 2013) provides that the customer must “take reasonable steps to keep your PIN or Personal Security Details unique to the accounts that you hold with us”. Although it is not clear what “reasonable steps” the customer must take, the PIN must be unique to the accounts that the customer holds with Santander.

Memory

There is a considerable amount of published research on the topic of memory, and the human need to write down complex passwords (for a general introduction, see Wendy Moncur and Dr Grégory Leplâtre, “PINs, passwords

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
back-to-top-scroll