Debit Card Refund -Co-Op Bank

stclair

dalesrider wrote: »

Which should have resulted in questioning as to why. And then the PSD approach being put in place.
You do not need to raise a dispute. The idea is that the front line find out the issue and then get you through to the team to resolve it.

From the reply that a faster payment was being used??? Seems the OP really did get a monkey on the phone :rotfl:

I do not think they should have done to be honest.

The refund as already discussed is already on it way back to the customer so I would not think it would be necessary for the bank to do anything else at this stage unless the customer made a complaint.

Do you have a source of information? for this process that customers should be refunded whilst a transaction is already on its way back to them.

ChiefGrasscutter

T'is an interesting point. Who to tackle in this respect - the retailer or the bank/credit card company when an authorized payment is not done as expected.

I was once double charged by amazon for an item.
Now I could either have pursued it though my credit card Co as a second unauthorized charge, or I could pursue it though amazon as being double charged for one item.
I figured that it was most likely that amazon had put through a few thousand transactions twice rather than just mine so I contact amazon. Indeed they confessed in an email quickly followed up by a day later a circular to clearly a large number of customers confessing all.
The second charge was refunded by amazon (by way of a positive payment into my credit card account) a few working days later as I recall with the date on it back dated to the day of the double charge event.

In my case it was an annoyance rather than a major event - which is different from the OP here.

dalesrider

stclair wrote: »

I do not think they should have done to be honest.

The refund as already discussed is already on it way back to the customer so I would not think it would be necessary for the bank to do anything else at this stage unless the customer made a complaint.

Do you have a source of information? for this process that customers should be refunded whilst a transaction is already on its way back to them.

Search out payment services directive and unauthorised payments.
Sorry do not have a link to it. Just know how we have to work to it.

The gist is that a account has to be put back to the position where it was before the unauthorised payment was taken. Charges/interest etc included.

The fact the retailer has said they will refund makes no diffrence. It is good that the OP went to the retailer to resolve and make them aware of the issue.
Even if a customer says that they are OK with no refund, then we still refund. On the basis we could end up getting fined, for a PSD failure. We just advise them that we will redebit when the refund is seen on their account.
The OP saw fit to contact the co-op as clearly the duplicated payment was causing a issue. As such they should have acted on it.
FOS would take a very dim view of this if it was raised as a complaint.

TBH. This is one area of PSD I agree with as a duplicated payment puts a customer in a out of pocket position.

stclair

dalesrider wrote: »

Search out payment services directive and unauthorised payments.
Sorry do not have a link to it. Just know how we have to work to it.

The fact the retailer has said they will refund makes no diffrence. It is good that the OP went to the retailer to resolve and make them aware of the issue.
Even if a customer says that they are OK with no refund, then we still refund. On the basis we could end up getting fined, for a PSD failure. We just advise them that we will redebit when the refund is seen on their account.
The OP saw fit to contact the co-op as clearly the duplicated payment was causing a issue. As such they should have acted on it.
FOS would take a very dim view of this if it was raised as a complaint.

TBH. This is one area of PSD I agree with as a duplicated payment puts a customer in a out of pocket position.

I think your wrong to be honest. (we will have to Agree to disagree here)

I do not see a reason why a bank should refund a customer when the payment is not being disputed and already on their way back to them without any quibble.

innovate

I agree with stclair.

I think in the case in question, the OP could have asked their bank to resolve an "Overcharging" situation. However, they didn't ask the bank, they asked the retailer.
But even if they had asked the bank, the bank would have 10 days to come to their conclusion.

Overcharging: If you have authorised payment without stating the amount, e.g. through a direct debit or a card payment for hotel or car bookings, and the amount debited is not what you could reasonably have expected, you will be entitled to challenge it by contacting your payment service provider within eight weeks.
The payment service provider will then have to reimburse you within ten days or justify its refusal.

Or the OP could have notified their bank about an unauthorised debit, in which case they could have got their money back immediately. However, again, the OP didn't notify their bank first. Instead they sorted the matter with the retailer. What's more, they told the bank already that they had sorted it with the retailer - so why should the bank now get involved?

Unauthorised debits: If you realise that an unauthorised debit has been made from your account, you have the right to an immediate refund as long as you notify your payment service provider as soon as possible, and no later than 13 months after the debit date.

Source of quotes: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/payments/docs/framework/psd_consumers/psd_en.pdf

dalesrider

stclair wrote: »

I think your wrong to be honest. (we will have to Agree to disagree here)

I do not see a reason why a bank should refund a customer when the payment is not being disputed and already on their way back to them without any quibble.

Fair do's. Great points raised too

People moan at banks for avoiding their responsibilaties under PSD. Espically the front line staff, who do not always have a full understand of it. Poor lot have more than enough to keep up without PSD which is a nightmare at the best of times, when it is your bread and butter to understand it.

Here is a case where, we would have done it via the rule book. Co-op on the other hand seem to have skirted the issue.