AUDDIS SCHEME - Information please?

chantelle87_2

Hi there,

I am currently tryig to find out a few things about the AUDDIS scheme, but there isnt much on the internet :mad:

Situation:

You have signed the aggreement for the DD to confirm you allow money to go out of your account. The organisation then takes this paper work.

Assuming I have understood what I have learnt so far -

It is then the organisations responsibilty to set up payer on their computing system for the data to be sent over to the payers bank. The bank will the make a record of this to allow the payments to go ahead.

If the payer was to query the payment the bank can ask the organisation for a copy of the orginal document signed by the customer, which has to be supplied within 7 days. Or they can send an electronic copy but it must have the payers signature on.

my questions:

• If a doument was signed 16 - 18 months ago and the organisation only decided to set the payment scheme up after this period can it become in valid, does this paper work or scheme has an expiration date?
• If the organisation are trying to threaten you with non payment, even though you have signed all relevant documents - surely this is wrong?
• If they managed to set up the payment 18 months after you have given the documents backs yet said you havent paid sure this isnt fair?
• If they managed to retrieve funds from your account 18 months after signed document was submitted then surely they are in the wrong?

I am just so unsure how this Auddis scheme works? When then 18 months after the relevant paper work was sent back to they only decide to set the payment scheme up when legal action is being taken - surely this is underhanded?

THanks for any information

Mikeyorks

AUDDIS is primarily a way for originators (the people you're paying) to set up DDs electronically and without the need of paper. It's generally where you agree a DD arrangement over the 'phone / internet (I haven't signed a paper mandate in at least the last 5 years)

So it appears to have little to do with your questions? Except that any recent mandate (even if originated on paper) will almost certainly have been set via AUDDIS - as I think paper is no longer accepted by the Banks.

You may be better looking through the FAQ's on the DD system :-

http://www.thesmartwaytopay.co.uk/did-you-know.asp

You can always request a refund via the DD Guarantee? But if you owe an unpaid debt from 18 months ago ..... you'd be better sorting it with the originator as it's only likely to crystallise the proceedings you indicate are threatened.

chantelle87_2

MMMM Thanks for the info but I am solely looking at the Auddis in's and out's.

I just need to figure out how the Auddis scheme works and legal side of things!

EarthBoy

BACS have this explanation of AUDDIS:

http://www.bacs.co.uk/Bacs/Businesses/DirectDebit/Services/Pages/AUDDIS.aspx

All the references to keeping paper records are well out of date though, because 99% of companies using the AUDDIS system do so over the phone or internet, and no paper is involved. This explanation of the paperless direct debit system might be of some help:

http://www.bacs.co.uk/Bacs/Businesses/DirectDebit/Services/Pages/PaperlessDD.aspx

chantelle87_2

Thank you, I am so confused because they made me signe
this DD mandate. And in RBS explanation they say about the paper document staying with the organisation.

But they have managed to do the transaction via Auddis which is different to BAC's etc.... its just very under handed! Cant understand why they choose to do it now rather than 18 months ago

Mark_In_Hampshire

chantelle87 wrote: »

Hi there,

I am currently tryig to find out a few things about the AUDDIS scheme, but there isnt much on the internet :mad:

Situation:

You have signed the aggreement for the DD to confirm you allow money to go out of your account. The organisation then takes this paper work.

Assuming I have understood what I have learnt so far -

It is then the organisations responsibilty to set up payer on their computing system for the data to be sent over to the payers bank. The bank will the make a record of this to allow the payments to go ahead.

You supply your name, sort code and account number to the payee whether by post, phone or over the internet. The payee creates a mandate request and sends it to your bank. That doesn't create a payment in itself but the bank then create the mandate on your account enabling payments to be requested.

chantelle87 wrote: »

If the payer was to query the payment the bank can ask the organisation for a copy of the orginal document signed by the customer, which has to be supplied within 7 days. Or they can send an electronic copy but it must have the payers signature on.

Most direct debits are paperless (phone, internet) these days. There is no original document, just a phone conversation for example.

chantelle87 wrote: »

my questions:

• If a doument was signed 16 - 18 months ago and the organisation only decided to set the payment scheme up after this period can it become in valid, does this paper work or scheme has an expiration date?

Not as far as I know. There is something called a dormancy period which means that a direct debit mandate, once set up, will "expire" if not used.

However bear in mind that the bank does not request any proof from the payee when the direct debit mandate is received - the bank simply goes on the payee's say so, and starts handing out your money. There's no due diligence as such, no signature - it's like a debit card but without a pin number or a signature.

So if for instance I had your basic bank details, I'd have no problem setting up a direct debit on your account. It's very insecure.

chantelle87 wrote: »

• If the organisation are trying to threaten you with non payment, even though you have signed all relevant documents - surely this is wrong?

No, it's correct in so far as: when you sign up for services and agree to pay e.g. a monthly fee, pay back a loan, etc YOU are responsible for repayments. If you agree to allow the payee to dip into your account and pay themselves and they fail to do so, YOU remain responsible and in breach of contract. The responsibility that you have for paying is not altered by using DD as the payment mechanism.

Therefore you could take out a loan, set up the DD, see the mandate appear on your account - all good - however if they then make an error and take no payments, YOU are in breach of the loan terms. Legally and technically they have no legal case to answer.

chantelle87 wrote: »

• If they managed to set up the payment 18 months after you have given the documents backs yet said you havent paid sure this isnt fair?

As above, the payee only needs your bank details given verbally, if they store them and decide 18 months later to set up the mandate there is nothing in the system to prevent that. Fair probably not, also probably not intended either!

chantelle87 wrote: »

• If they managed to retrieve funds from your account 18 months after signed document was submitted then surely they are in the wrong?

A direct debit mandate doesn't in itself have an expiry - it's ongoing until cancelled unlike a standing order which you can specify has X number of payments on Y dates.

Again as above however - once you give someone your details for DD there is nothing actually in the system to prevent them setting it up after 18 months, or if you cancel it, there is nothing in the system to prevent the payee simply setting it back up again other than you changing your bank account number.

chantelle87 wrote: »

I am just so unsure how this Auddis scheme works? When then 18 months after the relevant paper work was sent back to they only decide to set the payment scheme up when legal action is being taken - surely this is underhanded?

THanks for any information

I can't quite see what has happened from your post, but if it is as follows:

1. You signed up for a subscription/service/goods and agreed to pay £x per month
2. You gave the payee your DD details
3. They didn't take any payment for 18 months
4. You were supposed to have paid something in those 18 months

YOU are the one in breach of contract.

Because you signed a DD mandate and handed over the keys to your account "please take unspecified amounts on unspecified dates from my account" you have given authority:

If you got bills each month (the ones not being paid) you actually HAVE been given the required notification of each debit due. Even if it wasn't taken, actually, you owe it, they have your details, and so can help themselves. They've already notified you of the amounts due.

There used to be a time limit - the amount of time allowed betwen you being notified of a payment due - the amount and date - and when the debit could take place, to protect people, but that protection was removed.

Finally, you can have the bank reverse the direct debit and put the amount back in your account, and you can also cancel the mandate (though the payee can always set it up again - if you're having that issue, you need to write to your bank and explain and ask them to see if they can stop them doing it) but that won't alter the fact you (presumption) owe the amount debited.

chantelle87_2

Thanks for the response, you've definately help me out with a few things but its a longer more arduous situation!

Well ihopefully my solicitor can shed some more light on it, its not the fact I dont want to pay if the fact I am paying for very poor materials and help!

I have what I need so thank you!

Mikeyorks

The only breach is if the company concerned did not advise you of the value / date the DD would be taken.

That is considered an 'error' under the DD scheme rules and you can invoke the DD guarantee to reclaim the money. But if you are involved with a Solicitor over the debt - you'd be better taking their advice than posting half details on a forum.