continuous payment authority

MarkDavidClarkeLondon

mt99 wrote: »

There is a definite difference between a retailer storing your credit card details so that next time you go there it is simpler to check out (for example Amazon does this) and authorising a CPA - you have to do this specifically and expressly with the retailer and it is definitely not the same but just storing your card details

Exactly - Saying store my details for use later and just taking money when you want - are 2 different things.

I'm in touch with the FCA to clarify this

MarkDavidClarkeLondon

Thanks for everyones replies - illuminating

I suspect a major bone of contention will be - Did we sign up for a CPA without knowing it

and if that is the case - surely its a case of misrepresentation on the vendors part

MarkDavidClarkeLondon

Zanderman wrote: »

The quote that you're quoting seems to be from a generic Privacy Policy - and isn't appropriate to your case if you've given CPA authority.

If you give CPA the firm can keep your card data and debit the card.. That's the whole point of CPA.

Don't get your hopes up by quoting the wrong terms.

And no they don't have to give notice if what they're doing is within the CPA contract you have signed up to.

The T&C's mentioned are from the vendors site - there is no mention of CPA anywhere in the documentation.

Surely storing card details is different from signing free access to an account whenever a vendor feels like it?

eskbanker

MarkDavidClarkeLondon wrote: »

Exactly - Saying store my details for use later and just taking money when you want - are 2 different things.

I'm in touch with the FCA to clarify this

Up to you how you choose to proceed but personally I'd start with the assumption that, as your bank has told you, there is a valid CPA as far as they're concerned (which you should cancel immediately if not already done) so there doesn't seem to be much point in pursuing the bank and the FCA, at least in the first instance.

It sounds more fruitful to me to establish the Ts & Cs governing your dealings with the merchant and in particular the basis on which they believe you authorised them to set up the CPA. I'm not going to speculate on your motives for not disclosing the identity of the merchant on here but if you do then others may be able to offer more specific assistance - have you searched online for others experiencing the same issue for example?

eskbanker

MarkDavidClarkeLondon wrote: »

The T&C's mentioned are from the vendors site - there is no mention of CPA anywhere in the documentation.

It's unlikely to be labelled as 'CPA' or 'continuous payment authority' as such, but dressed up in a different way, in the same way that annual insurance policies offer 'auto-renewal' as a benefit.

MarkDavidClarkeLondon wrote: »

Surely storing card details is different from signing free access to an account whenever a vendor feels like it?

Yes, which is why you need to establish the basis on which the vendor acted. What have they said so far?

Zanderman

MarkDavidClarkeLondon wrote: »

The T&C's mentioned are from the vendors site - there is no mention of CPA anywhere in the documentation.

Surely storing card details is different from signing free access to an account whenever a vendor feels like it?

You're missing the point. The T&C you are quoting clearly don't apply to a CPA - if they did no CPA would ever work would it? And it seems you have authorised a CPA (even if you don't have any recollection of it). And that's the position you should be working from - that they have authorisation..

Quoting T&C from their website and trying to apply it to yourself isn't valid. If you have given authority for a CPA you have given authority for a, er, CPA. Some generic wording about generic stuff from their website is irrelevant.

Find out what this CPA is for and then cancel it. Forget general stuff from the website. They seem to have a specific authority from you. Ignore the website, find out what that authority, specific to you and your card, is.

p00hsticks

OP - as an aside, I'd suggest you ned to consider if it is a good idea to use what presumably is your real name as your username for this forum - most people don't.

mt99

hey how do you know my realname's not mt99...

agarnett

eskbanker wrote: »

Not according to the FCA: https://www.fca.org.uk/news/press-releases/fca-reminds-banks-their-obligations-when-cancelling-continuous-payment

That's interesting, and I hadn't noticed FCA had insisted on an easier ro

eskbanker wrote: »

ute to cancellation since I was at the retail banking coalface.

me wrote:

Once you have presented the evidence to the bank, and because it is not going to happen instantly anyway (unlike cancelling a Direct Debit Authority) it is probably best to confirm that yes the matter should be recorded as a complaint against the bank for providing the means of abuse

That's just nonsense! By all means complain to a bank if you request cancellation and they don't cancel, but the bank isn't doing anything wrong by merely processing a valid CPA, regardless of your opinions about them....

Of course it isn't nonsense. The banks are responsible for continuing these crazy systems even though they know they cause huge problems daily. FCA clearly acted in 2013 in order to stop the banks from saying it was none of their business. It would be great in 2017 to see another FCA press release confirming CPAs are outlawed completely. You yourself have subsequently also said:

It's unlikely to be labelled as 'CPA' or 'continuous payment authority' as such, but dressed up in a different way, ...

The crooks wouldn't be able to do that if CPAs simply didn't exist, now would they?

Just because the banks appear to be doing nothing illegal and nothing which all the banks aren't doing, doesn't mean we customers have to consider ourselves satisfied. Express your dissatisfaction to your bank. They have to record ALL dissatisfaction and report the statistics of such complaints to FCA. How else do things get changed for the better?

eskbanker

agarnett wrote: »

Just because the banks appear to be doing nothing illegal and nothing which all the banks aren't doing, doesn't mean we customers have to consider ourselves satisfied. Express your dissatisfaction to your bank. They have to record ALL dissatisfaction and report the statistics of such complaints to FCA. How else do things get changed for the better?

You used the term 'abuse' earlier - complaining to a bank for correctly providing standard banking services would be abuse of the complaints process, which is clearly intended to allow customers to seek rectification of shortcomings or failures of the bank's own people, processes and systems, not to express dissatisfaction with the generic regulations they're obliged to work to.

If you want to change the rules, write to the FCA directly or start a petition or lobby your MP or whatever....

Given the tone of your intolerant rantings, I think I know what the 'a' stands for in your user name, Hammers fan are we?