A survey by Moneylife Foundation has found strong public backing for digital payment protection measures such as a ‘kill switch’, even as users expressed concern that blanket transaction delays could disrupt routine payments. The survey, which covered more than 620 respondents, largely senior citizens and their families, showed that over 70% supported delayed transaction mechanisms mainly for high-value transfers, reflecting growing demand for fraud safeguards without affecting everyday digital transactions.
The survey highlights a clear preference for targeted, user-controlled safeguards over broad restrictions that may disrupt routine payments. Based on these findings, the Foundation has submitted its feedback to Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on its
discussion paper on digital payment safeguards.
The central bank has proposed a set of measures to curb fraud, particularly cases where users are tricked into transferring money themselves. These include a possible delay in certain account-to-account transactions, additional authentication for senior citizens, limits on certain accounts and a customer-controlled 'kill switch' to block transactions instantly in case of suspected fraud (Read:
RBI’s Proposed Digital Payment Safeguards: What Do They Mean for You?).
One of RBI’s key proposals is a possible delay in account-to-account transfers above a certain threshold. The idea itself finds broad acceptance. More than 70% of respondents felt such a delay could be useful, especially in situations where fraudsters rely on urgency and pressure.
But this support quickly becomes conditional when one looks at the threshold. More than half the respondents (45.8%) say that a delay would be reasonable only for transactions above ₹25,000, while about one-third (33.7%) preferred even higher thresholds (₹50,000 and above). This suggests that the proposed ₹10,000 level may be seen as too low, potentially affecting routine payments. What emerges is not resistance to safeguards, but a preference for targeted safeguards—ones that apply where risk is higher, rather than across all transactions.
The central bank’s proposal to require a ‘trusted person’ to approve high-value transactions for senior citizens raises distinct concerns. While the intent is protective, the survey responses suggest unease about how it might work in practice.
Some respondents (16.3%) indicated that such a system may be difficult to implement in real-life situations, particularly when a trusted person is not immediately available. More importantly, there is a clear concern about independence. A proportion of respondents (15.3%) felt that this requirement could reduce autonomy and nearly 30% say it should be strictly optional. This reflects a deeper tension in policy design: how to protect vulnerable users without treating them as incapable of making decisions.
In contrast, the proposal for a ‘kill switch’ stands out for the clarity of user support. An overwhelming majority of respondents (85%) viewed it as useful, especially if it is simple to activate (52.4%). What explains this strong response is that the kill switch imposes no friction on everyday transactions. Instead, it gives users control when they need it most. It is a safeguard that is both intuitive and empowering, qualities that many of the other proposals struggle to achieve.
The survey also highlights an important limitation of the current approach. When asked how effective the proposed measures would be in addressing common fraud tactics, such as impersonation calls or high-pressure situations, responses were moderate, at best. Most respondents felt that while the measures may help in some cases, they are not comprehensive solutions. The weighted average score of 2.44 out of 5 suggests that respondents do not view the proposed measures as highly effective in addressing the full spectrum of fraud.
This is reflected even more clearly in what users say they actually need. The strongest demand is not for additional checks before transactions, but for better systems after fraud occurs. Faster reversal of fraudulent transactions (78.4%), accessible helplines (66.3%), and greater awareness emerge as the most important interventions (54%). In other words, users are looking for a system that not only tries to prevent fraud, but is also capable of responding quickly when prevention fails.
The broader message from the survey is a familiar one, but no less important: safety and convenience cannot be treated as opposing goals. Digital payments have grown precisely because they are fast and seamless. Any safeguard that significantly disrupt this experience risk undermining that very success.
RBI’s discussion paper is a welcome attempt to address this challenge. But the findings suggest that the effectiveness of these measures will depend less on their intent and more on their calibration. Safeguards that are flexible, risk-based and user-controlled are far more likely to be accepted than those that are rigid or intrusive.
Moneylife Foundation has submitted its detailed feedback to RBI based on these survey findings.
Housing Society Problems and Solutions: Financial Discipline and Fair Cost Sharing in Societies
Moneylife Digital Team
07 May 2026
Weak governance and lack of transparency continue to be among the most common concerns raised by cooperative housing society (CHS/the Society) members. Whether it is failure to conduct mandatory audits, arbitrary charging of expenses,...
Over 4,200 Home-buyers Get Relief as Supreme Court Restores Insolvency Plans for Earth Infra's Projects
SN Thyagarajan (Bar
and
Bench)
06 May 2026
The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted relief to over 4,200 home and office space buyers of the stalled Earth Infrastructures Limited projects which is currently under corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) (Alpha Corp...
Medical Negligence Claims Can Be Pursued against Deceased Doctor's Legal Heirs Who Inherited His Estate: Supreme Court
Ritwik Choudhury (Bar
and
Bench)
05 May 2026
The Supreme Court on Monday held that medical negligence cases for compensation can be pursued against legal heirs of the doctor after the doctor's death in order to deal with damages that may have to be paid to the complainant from...
Housing Society Problems and Solutions: Ownership, Redevelopment and Member Rights
Shirish Shanbhag
30 April 2026
Cooperative housing society (CHS/the Society) members often face a mix of procedural and legal questions arising from everyday transactions and larger decisions, such as redevelopment. Whether it is updating ownership records after a...
