Recurring Payments Warning! discussion

bobblebob

Also while we're on this subject. the $10 taken from my account comes from America. They email me when its taken out and i can see it as a pending transaction on my available balance. When it finally shows on my account, the pending transaction stays on my available balance for a few days, then drops off. This has only started to happen in the last few months.

Anyone know why?

Not_So_Naff

I 'thought' that my payments to Skype were by Direct Debit but after termination of the Contract payments continued to be taken from my BS Account. The BS said they could do nothing about it so began a round of contact with Skype. Communicating with a 'communications' company proved to be very difficult. No simple Telephone Number or eMail Address. You have to read the 'small print' to discover that very careful navigation to a five times nested page was necessary in order to make contact with the correct department.
By the time this stage was reached, a few interchanges had taken place with Skype, then I lost the Plastic Card involved. Eventually they did confirm that they had ceased collecting payments and the withdrawals did stop. Still not sure if it was the changed Plastic details or Skype playing ball.

I would be very interested to learn how DebtKiller who posted above got on.
My advice to anyone even thinking about using this method of payment should seriously look elsewhere for a business prepared to provide what you need via an acceptable method of payment.
Think about it, you might be signing up for a major cash loss, even if you 'know' the company [local or otherwise] by the time you get to grips with the situation your cash could be bled dry.
Of course you may wish to 'breed' rather than kill debt?

ggugvrunt

Don't cancel the card or have the number changed since it seems payments can still be taken. Just report the card lost in order to get another with a different number - payments cannot be taken from a card that has been reported lost.

Paul_Herring

ggugvrunt wrote: »

Don't cancel the card or have the number changed since it seems payments can still be taken. Just report the card lost in order to get another with a different number - payments cannot be taken from a card that has been reported lost.

I don't think that's going to cancel any recurring payments set up against the account during any period when the card isn't stolen. All the CC company's going to do is redirect the payments to the account with the new card number.

clairecymru

I had a recurring payment with a company who sent me an email saying that my card is about to expire and to update my card details.

As I was about to cancel the subscription with them I just didnt bother to update my card details and assumed that my payments with them would stop.

On checking my bank balance they have still been taking money out of my account although my previous card had expired three months ago.

How have they done this without the new expiry date and the three digit number on the back of the card?

Paul_Herring

clairecymru wrote: »

How have they done this without the new expiry date and the three digit number on the back of the card?

Because the recurring payment was set up against your CC account using a (then) valid card, not against the card itself.

Your CC company simply continue charging any payments using the old number to your account.

cottager

This has never happened to me luckily, but it does appear something should be changed in the procedures here: it doesn't seem sensible that a card can be formally cancelled and then 'resurrected' indefinitely if these recurring charges are presented.

In view of the number of instances of this and the complaints resulting, surely a more logical approach (assuming it were possible) would be for banks to erect a 'brick wall' against all further incoming requests for payment once a card is cancelled, so that they cannot get through and have to bounce back?

OK, maybe 7-14 days to allow for transactions which were genuinely made by the customer immediately prior to the card being cancelled (it would be unfortunate if an unwanted recurring charge arrived in that time), but after that a total 'Stop'. At this point the bank bows out, having made it quite clear and confirmed to the customer that all payment requests on the cancelled card will be refused.

It would then become entirely a matter for the customer and the company to resolve or argue the toss. Those seeking to take the recurring payment who were 'chancers' would soon get the message; and those who feel justified in making a legitimate charge will pursue it with the customer.

Not_So_Naff

All good points cottager but the situation is as Paul_Herring says, this unsatisfactory arrangement exists with the cooperation of the Financial Institutions.

In my case when signing up I was convinced that a Direct Debit had been agreed to. 18 months later when I wanted to cancel it came as rather a shock that it was very difficult to stop the Recurring Charges being taken from my account.

I think the real point in question is:

Why do 'Suppliers' need to use the Recurring Charges system when Direct Debit would do the same, or at least very similar, job?

Perhaps the costs of DD are higher than RC?

It is clear that if RCs were eliminated Customers would have all the protection they need under the DD rules, end of story.

Paul_Herring

Not_So_Naff wrote: »

Why do 'Suppliers' need to use the Recurring Charges system when Direct Debit would do the same, or at least very similar, job?

I'm assuming that's not rhetorical.

With a Standing Order, the customer is in total control. The amount the customer states gets pushed out of their account on the date they state. They can be canceled with a day's notice.

With a DD, the customer is ultimately in charge of it, however the supplier can change (within reason, and with sufficient notice) the amount and the date it comes out, but the customer can cancel it (with their bank) with 3 days notice, and that's (usually) the end of it.[1]

With a recurring charge, neither the customer, nor their bank/CC company are in charge of anything. The only party that can cancel it is the supplier.

Now, why do you think suppliers prefer to use recurring charges rather than (say) DD's or SO's?


[1] Some companies have been known to use AUDDIS to re-instate DD's, but just claim on the DD guarantee if this happens.

jace2000

we need to stop people from taking money from our accounts

Please sign the recurring payment Petition at the Prime minister,s Office web site.

petitions.number10.gov.uk/recurringpayment/

Then we may be able to stop this.