Faster Payment Service

1jim

what I dont get about the faster payments system is this not guaranteeing it and not knowing until the payment has been sent if its gone this route or not.
I must admit to not knowing how it all works but it seems some of my payments go fp, others 3day transfer, there seems no rhyme nor reason to it, all payments have been below the threshold for sending and receiving banks, no obvious security checks carried out (I asked smile and halifax about this when sent slower payment way), and all I am told when it doesnt go is that payments are not guaranteed.
It shouldnt be that hard, I know I can pay to send it via chaps if its important (it rarely is), but why have a system that may or may not work and you only know if its going to work until you try it?

noh

MDD wrote: »

Good Morning noh You are right. The bank issue statements and I decide whether I accept the terms and conditions. Unfortunately the bank issued a statement on the 14th of the month showing a debt owing. I never actually received the money until the 16th of the month. Then the bank say Ah! it was in process and I say what process and they say Bacs and I say what is Bacs and they say we process it on the 1st day but you don't get the money till the 3rd day so I say so you knew I hadn't had the money when you issued the statement and they don't say anything. Then it goes on and on and on. So noh you are right banks have rules. That is where my first post started about the rules on FPS because I made a payment on the 1st day and it was in the bank on the 3rd day but it seems that what is good for the goose is not good for the gander.

They charge you the money transfer fee when they initiate the transfer. The transfer is done by BACS. All perfectly normal and the same with all credit card companies.
Your statement was produced after the fee was charged so correctly showed the fee again just as expected.
The payment you made by FPS to your account was credited on the day stated in the literature supplied to you.

If the purpose of your post was to demonstrate to others that not paying attention to the T+Cs of credit agreements can cost you money then I believe you have successfully illustrated that.

MDD_2

Just to clarify. In my previous post I was saying that my payment was in process.

blueberrypie

MDD wrote: »

Unfortunately the bank issued a statement on the 14th of the month showing a debt owing. I never actually received the money until the 16th of the month. Then the bank say Ah! it was in process and I say what process and they say Bacs and I say what is Bacs and they say we process it on the 1st day but you don't get the money till the 3rd day

Let's say you place an order on-line on Monday, and pay with your credit-card.

Let's say the company you ordered from posts your order to you on Tuesday or Wednesday, and it arrives on Thursday or Friday.

And let's say your credit-card company produce your statement on Tuesday.

You don't receive the item you paid for until after your statement is produced, but the payment still shows on your statement. Do you then argue that you shouldn't have to pay that bit of your credit-card bill, or be charged interest on it, until after the *following* statement?

MDD_2

blueberrypie wrote: »

Let's say you place an order on-line on Monday, and pay with your credit-card.

Let's say the company you ordered from posts your order to you on Tuesday or Wednesday, and it arrives on Thursday or Friday.

And let's say your credit-card company produce your statement on Tuesday.

You don't receive the item you paid for until after your statement is produced, but the payment still shows on your statement. Do you then argue that you shouldn't have to pay that bit of your credit-card bill, or be charged interest on it, until after the *following* statement?

Thank you for taking the time to respond.

MBNA issue a statatement on the due date which in my case was the 14th of the month.
The statement showed an amount due which included the 0% money transfer that I had not received.
The statement showed that a minimum amount of £25 needed to be paid.
I was not aware of that statement and found that the money had been transferred on the 16th of the month when I checked my HSBC statement when online.
15 days later I checked online to find out when a payment was due to the MBNA and found it was due that day a Saturday.
I made a FP payment via HSBC bank immediately for £50 to MBNA using the sort code 086130. I have checked this sort code on various websites and they verify it is for MBNA EUROPE BANK LTD who are recognised for receiving Faster Payments.Technically as there was £18.77 already in my bank account I only needed to pay £6.23.
I then spoke with MBNA and was told that I was in breach of the agreement and I was not entitled to the 0% money transfer. I was told that I would have to pay the money transfer fee. I asked for a copy of the statement and t&c's.I read through the t&c's and could not find anywhere where I agreed to pay for money that I had not received.
The question that has been put forward is that the MBNA do not accept FP payments direct and use the co-operative bank who held the money over the weekend and the MBNA did not receive the payment until the Monday following the due date.
I did not argue with the MBNA. What I actually said was this is a bit harsh.

Milarky

@MDD,

Two words "direct debit" [set up for the minimum payment]? As an existing customer [I believe you said you were] you could have had one of these already set up - and doing so the £25 would have been taken and applied in good time and you've not be in this situation now...

A few general observations on what others have been saying

The general requirement to make a minimum payment is probably a deliberate device to capture late payment/default fees. [See the classic documentary Maxed Out]

MBNA is a US giant - and brought their practices over here with them

Minimal repayments (like £25 - and it used to be £5) are intended to preserve the debt in reality whilst giving the impression of allowing for its repayment.

Direct debits would be nice to have set up to take these notional payment amounts - but often a 'new card' customer has to make the first payment themselves manually, only after receiving the initial statement [bill] because of time scales imposed for DD set up.

The trend with credit cards of late is towards

- online statementing (so no obvious reminder for the unsuspecting) by default
- earlier 'due dates' for customers to satisfy (used to be 28 or 25 days - now more like 21 or 15)

If MBNA will not accept a payment received by the given 'due date' (falling on a weekend) - why call that a 'due date' at all? This is a 'cheat' also practised by several other providers to meet the condition that they give the customer 'up to x' days to pay. Being widespread does not make acceptable however

You've got to ask yourself what both the cumulative intention and effect of all these things is.

MDD_2

Milarky wrote: »

@MDD,

Two words "direct debit" [set up for the minimum payment]? As an existing customer [I believe you said you were] you could have had one of these already set up - and doing so the £25 would have been taken and applied in good time and you've not be in this situation now...

A few general observations on what others have been saying

The general requirement to make a minimum payment is probably a deliberate device to capture late payment/default fees. [See the classic documentary Maxed Out]

MBNA is a US giant - and brought their practices over here with them

Minimal repayments (like £25 - and it used to be £5) are intended to preserve the debt in reality whilst giving the impression of allowing for its repayment.

Direct debits would be nice to have set up to take these notional payment amounts - but often a 'new card' customer has to make the first payment themselves manually, only after receiving the initial statement [bill] because of time scales imposed for DD set up.

The trend with credit cards of late is towards

- online statementing (so no obvious reminder for the unsuspecting) by default
- earlier 'due dates' for customers to satisfy (used to be 28 or 25 days - now more like 21 or 15)

If MBNA will not accept a payment received by the given 'due date' (falling on a weekend) - why call that a 'due date' at all? This is a 'cheat' also practised by several other providers to meet the condition that they give the customer 'up to x' days to pay. Being widespread does not make acceptable however

You've got to ask yourself what both the cumulative intention and effect of all these things is.

Yes, I have noted what you say and have no problem with it. I think there is a lot of stating the obvious with some posts which really doesn't help with wisdom to deal with the matter of fact banking attitude. I am fully aware of what happened in this situation. People suffer everday with bank attitude what I would like to see is more of a stand together against their practices. The FPS as you know was set up as a 24/7/365. The sort code 08-61-30 is allocated to the Bank of America. The co-operative bank as you know were one of the founder members of the FPS. As I understand 08-61 is allocated to the co-operative bank as a clearing bank. The co-operative bank uphold the 24/7/365. An FPS payment to 08-61-30 (MBNA) cleared through co-operative bank who uphold (supposedly) 24/7/365 banking. So if the money transferred on a weekend is sent to MBNA who are recognised as able to receive FPS, cleared through Co-operative bank. WHO IS HOLDING IT UP. If the Co-operative bank uphold FPS and MBNA are able to receive FP.
How much money is transferred and held for 2 days - 3 on bank holidays. What are the Co-operative bank saying Oh! MBNA are shutting down at weekends oh! alright we understand they cannot keep running those batch files it must be so hard for them you know when we say the money should be there in your account in 2 hours how could they possibly do that 7 days a week we'll sit on this money till you open again for business its going to be hard but we'll put up with it, its going to be so hard where are we going to put all these coins and all that paper money.
The FPS was set up as a Faster Payment Service. The word Service is an indication as to what was proposed. Another service is the NHS. Have people abused the NHS I would say so. So do those who set up the FPS ensure that it is adhered to? Are banks abusing the FPS ?

noh

The FPS is working as it should.
No faster payments are being held up by MBNA or any one else.

This has been explained but you seem unable to grasp the facts.

pmduk

You're getting obsessed. Their terms and conditions have been pointed out to you, your choice is to live with them or change cards. End of.

MDD_2

1jim wrote: »

what I dont get about the faster payments system is this not guaranteeing it and not knowing until the payment has been sent if its gone this route or not.
I must admit to not knowing how it all works but it seems some of my payments go fp, others 3day transfer, there seems no rhyme nor reason to it, all payments have been below the threshold for sending and receiving banks, no obvious security checks carried out (I asked smile and halifax about this when sent slower payment way), and all I am told when it doesnt go is that payments are not guaranteed.
It shouldnt be that hard, I know I can pay to send it via chaps if its important (it rarely is), but why have a system that may or may not work and you only know if its going to work until you try it?

Needs sorting. noh reckons its all working okay