Debit card purchase timescales

andybloke

jonesMUFCforever wrote: »

How much are we talking about here?
Are you really expecting us to believe that you kept say £10 in your account all this time and now you have been debited £11.50?

$125 (£76.56), plus £13.80 in various charges. At the time of the original transaction the total would have been around £77, so I saved a few pence thanks to fluctuations in the dollar rate, but incurred charges instead. Not sure why it's all in dollars anyway, as it's a German business.

No - I didn't notice that the payment hadn't gone out. At the time I was under the impression that once the 'available balance' had gone down and I'd received a receipt that the transaction was under way and unlikely to stop.
No - I didn't bother reading about the new non-sterling charges when LTSB split (not expecting to be making international payments any more).

Having spoken to a colleague who I've just discovered used to work in small business finance, a Visa merchant agreement states that payments should be taken within a maximum of 10 to 180 days, depending on the type of business, of the receipt point.
As such I probably have a good case for asking them to credit my account with them, not my bank, for the value of the charges incurred by their mistake (and violation of their merchant agreement) to have them deducted from my next payment to them.

andybloke

Having had a chance to do some googling, now I know the keywords, I found the "chargeback management guidelines for visa merchants" on visa_com (sorry, newbies can't post links, or I would) which explains code 74:

The transaction was not processed within the required time limits and the account was not in good standing on the processing date, or the transaction was processed more than 180 calendar days from the transaction date
...
Sales Receipt Older than 181 Days
(NR) If the sales receipt was deposited more than 181 days after the transaction date, accept the chargeback. (In this situation, the cardholder’s account status is not a factor.)
...
Time limits for depositing transactions are set to ensure timely processing and billing to cardholders.
When you hold transactions beyond the period defined in your merchant agreement (usually one to five days), you lose money, affect customer service (cardholders expect to see transactions on their Visa statements within the same or next monthly cycle), and possibly invite a chargeback.
No remedies exist for chargebacks on sales receipts deposited 181 days or longer after the transaction date.

Some UK bank websites also have various 74 codes for late presentment which would indicate that it's a standard thing here.

It would seem that I could get out of the whole payment on these grounds. I don't want to. I just don't want to have to pay all the extra bank charges that they've generated for me!

grumbler

andybloke wrote: »

No - I didn't bother reading about the new non-sterling charges when LTSB split

Were there any new charges?

As such I probably have a good case for asking them to credit my account with them, not my bank, for the value of the charges incurred by their mistake (and violation of their merchant agreement) to have them deducted from my next payment to them.

It's up to you, but I think it's easier to ask the bank for the chargeback and a refund, then to arrange making payment again (fingers crossed, they won't procrastinate 15 months again).

jonesMUFCforever

Sorry but I stand by my original comment - OP got whatever service he paid for - for free for 2 years - until they noticed.
IMO it will cost OP more to settle again if he tries a chargeback.

Non sterling charges are nothing new - they were always in the exchange rate before.
It may have also been overlooked by the OP that the £ to $ is better these days than 2 years ago so it has worked out cheaper for him.

If he wants to carry on with this let him.

iAMaLONDONER

Surely the chargeback system can't be used to allow people to get products/services for free just because the payment process was delayed!

andybloke

jonesMUFCforever wrote: »

It may have also been overlooked by the OP that the £ to $ is better these days than 2 years ago so it has worked out cheaper for him.

I had noticed.

andybloke wrote:

I saved a few pence thanks to fluctuations in the dollar rate, but incurred charges instead

That was something I checked last week. 1.600 on 10/10/12, 1.632 last week.

jonesMUFCforever

andybloke wrote: »

I had noticed.



That was something I checked last week. 1.600 on 10/10/12, 1.632 last week.

So you will volunteer to pay the extra?

andybloke

iAMaLONDONER wrote: »

Surely the chargeback system can't be used to allow people to get products/services for free just because the payment process was delayed!

It looks to me that that's what Visa expect. Want to take Visa? Follow the rules.
How many bits of paperwork do we all have to submit to certain places by a certain time to receive some kind of payment?

I imagine it also stops a lot of businesses delaying transactions for months leading up to the next tax year.

andybloke

jonesMUFCforever wrote: »

So you will volunteer to pay the extra?

They only asked for 125 dollars, that's what I tried to give them, that's what they'll get! The difference only applies here, not their price list.

jonesMUFCforever

andybloke wrote: »

They only asked for 125 dollars, that's what I tried to give them, that's what they'll get! The difference only applies here, not their price list.

But you paid using a sterling denominated card - so IMO you owe them a few extra pennies.