I don't mean to engage in gratuitous negativity, I really don't, but nothing about this makes sense to me.
Looking at the rest of the thread, this seems like a credible offering from credible people, but the reasons you've given don't align at all with my experience using the banking system.
>ACH doesn't work for paying out because the recipient needs to verify account
CapitalOne, Volkswagen Credit, and my university all gladly pull my money over ACH with just an account/routing number submitted over a web form and no verification process. CapitalOne clears overnight.
The requirement on recipients to verify account ownership, if it exists, is violated in vanilla transactions with vanilla consumers at massive scale every single day by household names. I have a hard time believing the banking industry would institute a requirement and then let everyone flaunt it like that.
>Small Banks/Credit Unions that may not be ACH enabled
Really? Is that a thing? I have seen checking account offerings missing all sorts of things - branches, mobile apps, online banking, bill pay gateways, even check-writing capability - but ACH is the one true constant.
Some institutional payees like CapitalOne and Comcast won't even process a check as a check, they'll take the account/routing number and do it over ACH instead. Lots of employers also won't cut checks - it's either ACH or a shitty debit card loaded with fees.
People using non-ACH-capable banks were left out in the cold by everyone else years ago; I'm surprised there's a business in accommodating them.