continuous payment authority

agarnett

eskbanker wrote: »

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?

Simply No. Complain to the bank as I recommended. They don't like having to record dissatisfactions which can't be labelled as bank error or customer misunderstandings. There's no misunderstanding here. We customers just don't like banks letting merchants use CPA for crooked behaviour. So tell the banks.

eskbanker

You don't think it's worth going after the actual 'crooks' then?

It stands to reason, you silly moo....

Chalkius

agarnett wrote: »

Simply No. Complain to the bank as I recommended. They don't like having to record dissatisfactions which can't be labelled as bank error or customer misunderstandings. There's no misunderstanding here. We customers just don't like banks letting merchants use CPA for crooked behaviour. So tell the banks.

It isn't the banks fault if a customer signs up to a CPA. A banks responsibility when notified of a CPA a customer does not want to continue, is to cancel it. And unless it was also fraudulently set up(and by this I mean by someone other than the cardholder without their knowledge), that is the extent of it.

You can get your dissatisfaction recorded by the bank but it'll almost certainly be not in favour and the FCA/FOS would laugh at you if you took it any further.

agarnett

Chalkius wrote: »

It isn't the banks fault if a customer signs up to a CPA. A banks responsibility when notified of a CPA a customer does not want to continue, is to cancel it. And unless it was also fraudulently set up(and by this I mean by someone other than the cardholder without their knowledge), that is the extent of it.

If you hadn't noticed, the OP is complaining about the sneaky way that the merchant set the bloody thing up.

We don't like banking services with built-in sneakiness routes for n'er do wells, do we? Altogether now ... NO!!

Banks are the providers of these particular dodgy payment devices. They aren't needed, but banks want to keep using them. Say No. Complain

You can get your dissatisfaction recorded by the bank but it'll almost certainly be not in favour ...

So what? - that's not the purpose of complaining.

... and the FCA/FOS would laugh at you if you took it any further.

We don't have to take it further - FCA can take it up with the banks if enough expressions of dissatisfaction arrive in the stats which are mandatorily reported to FCA. Simple as. It might help put a wrong right eventually - i.e. it's a bit like calling 101 to report ASB in your street. Most people are too apathetic, but its generally the only way to improve society. So make an effort.

If a few more people actually acted instead of arguing uselessly that "police do nuffink", then one day you might even see patrols in your street, and even doors knocked on and collars felt if enough people report behaviour they think police should do something about.

Same with FCA - and one way to ring their bell is by expressing dissatisfaction to any bank employee who is then personally obliged to record it, and that results in a statistic on a report to FCA. It is a number one rule at the banks for any customer facing staff member. You don't have to accept their suggestion that they will put you through to complaints department either. You remind them that it is their personal duty to record it themselves and that you expect to receive the acknowledgement inside 5 days thanks and goodbye.

We then live in hope that we may have contributed to getting bad systems changed.

Richey_

Am I missing something here, the (somewhat rude) OP would have to have a tangible loss to make a county court claim against this company, rather than a complaint about their working practices which they have already complained to the FCA about.

Just seems like they are venting rather than providing full facts

eskbanker

agarnett wrote: »

it's a bit like calling 101 to report ASB in your street

But that's the point, it's not like that at all! In this analogy, what you're suggesting is more akin to saying "those miscreants on the street are drunk so I'm going to go and complain to the off-licence because they sold them the booze earlier so it's their fault"....

agarnett

It wasn't a perfect analogy, but it was close enough. We are 20,000 police short on the streets. It results in growing ASB and it arguably results in events like Borough Market too.

Humans have a tendency to abuse societal rules for their own selfish purposes. If they get away with it, they do it again, worse next time. I forget the psychological term for it, but it is well known amongst psychologists.

Those that control society need to realise where the rules are being broken. There are several levels of paid middlemen to negotiate in conveying the message. SOme of them have a vested interest in not listening, so you choose the routes where ultimate powers have to listen.

In the UK you cannot complain to FCA directly about the sort of abuse of a payment system that this is about.

The way you start to get the message across is by complaining to the middlemen that have a duty to record the complaint.

You can call it an abuse of a complaint system as much as you like. You have banker in your username and you are perhaps just one of hundreds of thousands of bank employed ants who've got used to treating punters as aphids to milk in your parlours, and you do not expect them to turn and pull your plonker sometimes in novel ways! I get it ... it's challenging, but you call that "abuse"? Really?

I can almost imagine it now - a poster in your banking hall:

Our staff will not tolerate abuse of our complaints system. Invalid not found in favour complaints will be rigorously prosecuted against all misguided customers.

eskbanker

agarnett wrote: »

You can call it an abuse of a complaint system as much as you like. You have banker in your username and you are perhaps just one of hundreds of thousands of bank employed ants who've got used to treating punters as aphids to milk in your parlours, and you do not expect them to turn and pull your plonker sometimes in novel ways! I get it ... it's challenging, but you call that "abuse"? Really?

I was merely echoing your use of the term 'abuse' but, aside from all of the more serious connotations of the term, it is ultimately defined in the dictionary as "wrong or improper use; misuse" which would indeed cover a vexatious complaint to a bank for carrying out perfectly legal transactions in accordance with industry regulations.

And no, I don't work for a bank and never have!

agarnett wrote: »

In the UK you cannot complain to FCA directly about the sort of abuse of a payment system that this is about.

Any 'abuse of a payment system' in OP's scenario is by the merchant not the bank so yes, not an FCA matter (more like Trading Standards), but if you feel strongly about the regulations themselves and how FCA haven't reformed them in accordance with your wishes, you can complain to FCA directly, see https://www.fca.org.uk/about/complain-about-regulators:

A complaint is ‘any expression of dissatisfaction about the manner in which the regulators have carried out, or failed to carry out, their relevant 'functions’.

PeacefulWaters

agarnett wrote: »

We are 20,000 police short on the streets.

Corbyn seems to think it's only 2,000 more each year that are needed over the next five years.

Nobody seems to have mentioned crime rates are also down, which can justify fewer coppers.

It results in growing ASB and it arguably results in events like Borough Market too.

Yet when the streets of ?Northern Ireland were packed with police bombings seemed more common.

Apologies. Not the place for a political discussion.

Chalkius

agarnett wrote: »

If you hadn't noticed, the OP is complaining about the sneaky way that the merchant set the bloody thing up.

We don't like banking services with built-in sneakiness routes for n'er do wells, do we? Altogether now ... NO!!

Banks are the providers of these particular dodgy payment devices. They aren't needed, but banks want to keep using them. Say No. Complain

So what? - that's not the purpose of complaining.We don't have to take it further - FCA can take it up with the banks if enough expressions of dissatisfaction arrive in the stats which are mandatorily reported to FCA. Simple as. It might help put a wrong right eventually - i.e. it's a bit like calling 101 to report ASB in your street. Most people are too apathetic, but its generally the only way to improve society. So make an effort.

If a few more people actually acted instead of arguing uselessly that "police do nuffink", then one day you might even see patrols in your street, and even doors knocked on and collars felt if enough people report behaviour they think police should do something about.

Same with FCA - and one way to ring their bell is by expressing dissatisfaction to any bank employee who is then personally obliged to record it, and that results in a statistic on a report to FCA. It is a number one rule at the banks for any customer facing staff member. You don't have to accept their suggestion that they will put you through to complaints department either. You remind them that it is their personal duty to record it themselves and that you expect to receive the acknowledgement inside 5 days thanks and goodbye.

We then live in hope that we may have contributed to getting bad systems changed.

Plenty of legitimate companies use CPA's also though, it's not an inherently sneaky system, rather one that certain groups and companies find easier to exploit. And a customer can have his/her bank set up a cancellation for any CPA.

I don't particularly see them as a problem, the only thing I'd generally say banks need to do more of is making customers aware of these type of payments, people confuse them with Direct debits too often.

I'm fully aware of the complaints process for banks, but CPA's aren't the banks fault. If the FCA decide to do something to stop CPA's, or the government banks them, fair enough. But the fault lies with the merchants and the fact that they are legally allowed to do what they do. It's not a bank mistake. I mean, if companies were setting up dodgy Direct Debits I wouldn't blame the bank who processed them, I'd blame the merchant. It's no different for CPA's.