Skip to main content

Chase Quick Deposit mobile app Fails

I opened a Chase checking account with two purposes in mind: one try out the online bill payment features to compare and contrast with ETrade (my current bank); and two, try the new highly advertised Quick Deposit feature on the iPhone app which allows one to take photos of the check and deposit via those photos.

Getting back from Christmas holiday and looking in the mail box I had 6 checks to try out the new Chase Quick Deposit feature.  This should be fun!  I open up the Chase app on my iPhone 4, sign in and find the feature no problem.  The apps user interface is fairly clean it looks like I enter the check amount and take two photos (front & back of check) to submit the check for deposit.  Appears easy enough - lets try it.

Check number one data entry goes just find, photo imaging works great, the app appears to have a "steady cam" sensor built in - it didn't use the flash (interesting).  Then after a few needless confirmation screens I select Submit and get back the first of a pattern of failure messages.  The message is useless - it tells me to try again, with no reason for the rejection.  Was it my photos - they were very good, did the auto text recognition misread the amount or the routing numbers?  I don't know just try again.  On the second try I get a bit better rejection info - the amount is higher than allowed.  What?  I can submit a check as long as it is below an undisclosed arbitrary amount.  Who's idea of a feature constraint was this bright idea?  And why did the application allow me to go beyond the validation of the first data field (Amount) to take two pictures and waste the bandwidth to upload the two pictures to image processing to make this limit determination?  Poor Chase - this did not meet my expectations, and you wasted my time.  And you don't want to accept $2850.00 of someone else's money into your bank at the first opportunity - sounds like failure to me.

OK let's try again on a lower amount check (wonder what is below their undisclosed threshold)?  Here's a check below $100.  First try failed for some unknown reason but I got a wordy message to "try again."  OK the second attempt worked.  Great, one success in 4 attempts.  I get better odds flipping a coin.  Now I have to track which checks actually work and which do not, this is added work on my part for the 6 check I have to deposit.  Is my life getting easier with this app - not so sure?  Let's try another check.

Third check - fails twice.  OK try a fourth check.

Fourth check fails first time.  OK a little recap:  one success in six attempts, the more I try the worse their success rate.  I spot the trend.  I'm wasting my time.  A walk to the ATM will take me 30 minutes and I get fresh Chicago street air, or I could continue with the Chase one-arm-bandit Quick Deposit machine.    

It is not Quick - unless you hit 7-7-7 on your first spin.  It doesn't deposit unless you have arbitrary low numbers. So altogether I would have to say it is neither Quick nor a Deposit feature.  Chase you are wrong on both terms.
Post a Comment

Most Popular on Agile Complexification Inverter

Elements of an Effective Scrum Task Board

What are the individual elements that make a Scrum task board effective for the team and the leadership of the team?  There are a few basic elements that are quite obvious when you have seen a few good Scrum boards... but there are some other elements that appear to elude even the most servant of leaders of Scrum teams.

In general I'm referring to a physical Scrum board.  Although software applications will replicated may of the elements of a good Scrum board there will be affordances that are not easily replicated.  And software applications offer features not easily implemented in the physical domain also.

Scrum Info Radiator Checklist (PDF) Basic Elements
Board Framework - columns and rows laid out in bold colors (blue tape works well)
Attributes:  space for the total number of stickies that will need to belong in each cell of the matrix;  lines that are not easy eroded, but are also easy to replace;  see Orientation.

Columns (or Rows) - labeled
    To Do
    Work In P…

Exercise:: Definition of Ready & Done

Assuming you are on a Scrum/Agile software development team, then one of the first 'working agreements' you have created with your team is a 'Definition of Done' - right?

Oh - you don't have a definition of what aspects a user story that is done will exhibit. Well then, you need to create a list of attributes of a done story. One way to do this would be to Google 'definition of done' ... here let me do that for you: Then you could just use someone else's definition - there DONE!

But that would be cheating -- right? It is not the artifact - the list of done criteria, that is important for your team - it is the act of doing it for themselves, it is that shared understanding of having a debate over some of the gray areas that create a true working agreement. If some of the team believes that a story being done means that there can be no bugs found in the code - but some believe that there can be some minor issues - well, …

What belongs on the Task Board?

I wonder about these questions a lot - what types of task belong on the task board?  Does every task have to belong to a Story?  Are some tasks just too small?  Are some tasks too obvious?  Obviously some task are too larger, but when should it be decomposed?  How will we know a task is too large?

I answer these questions with a question.  What about a task board motivates us to get work done?  The answer is: T.A.S.K.S. to DONE!

Inherent in the acronym TASKS is the point of all tasks, to get to done.  That is the measure of if the task is the right size.  Does it motivate us to get the work done?  (see notes on Dan Pink's book: Drive - The surprising Truth about what motivates us) If we are forgetting to do some class of task then putting it on the board will help us remember.  If we think some small task is being done by someone else, then putting it on the board will validate that someone else is actually doing it.  If a task is obvious, then putting it on the board will take vi…

A T-Shaped 21st Century Knowledge Worker

Knowledge workers in the 21st Century must have many areas of deep knowledge, while also be capable of collaboration across multiple other domains with dissimilar T-shaped individuals.  This description of a person is a metaphor.  Compare it to the shape of the "I" in the classic saying there is no "I" in Team.

I first read about Scott Ambler's term "Generalizing Specialist" - but it's so hard to remember the proper order of the words... get it backwards and it has an inverted meaning... T-Shaped is easier to remember. 
A generalizing specialist is someone who:
Has one or more technical specialties (e.g. Java programming, Project Management, Database Administration, ...). Has at least a general knowledge of software development. Has at least a general knowledge of the business domain in which they work. Actively seeks to gain new skills in both their existing specialties as well as in other areas, including both technical and domain areas.  General…

David's notes on "Drive"

- "The Surprising Truth about what Motivates Us" by Dan Pink.

Amazon book order
What I notice first and really like is the subtle implication in the shadow of the "i" in Drive is a person taking one step in a running motion.  This brings to mind the old saying - "there is no I in TEAM".  There is however a ME in TEAM, and there is an I in DRIVE.  And when one talks about motivating a team or an individual - it all starts with - what's in it for me.


Pink starts with an early experiment with monkeys on problem solving.  Seems the monkeys were much better problem solver's than the scientist thought they should be.  This 1949 experiment is explained as the early understanding of motivation.  At the time there were two main drivers of motivation:  biological & external influences.  Harry F. Harlow defines the third drive in a novel theory:  "The performance of the task provided intrinsic reward" (p 3).  This is Dan Pink's M…