Bank charges cash fee for online credit card transaction

muhandis

I bet it is too. But if financial institutions dealing with lay consumers could always hide behind their very-expensive-lawyer drafted T&Cs, Martin wouldn't have a job and the FCA would struggle to ever get them to treat customers fairly

In any case, my complaint is to XYZ who (imho) should have (like their competitors do) made it clear (or at least hinted) on their payment page that the cc payment might incur extra charges.

All I'm looking for is to be refunded my out-of-pocket expenses, whether it be from XYZ or ABC. No harm in asking is there?

BoGoF wrote: »

Surely it's your responsibility to check your card issuers t and c's. Bet it's covered there somewhere.

noh wrote: »

The money transfer service was probably Transferwise?
Looking at their Website I can see nothing that they have done wrong they clearly state their fees.
If you tell us your credit card provider we can find where their T+Cs cover this.

chattychappy

Indeed there is no harm in asking.

Personally I don't think there is (currently) any onus on XYZ to tell you that your CC might charge. This really is a matter between you and ABC.

BUT I do think there is a transparency issue. In the "old" days of manual imprinter machines, it was simple. The normal vouchers were blue. It went through as a purchase. If you drew cash somewhere, the vouchers were red and had cash advance written on them. You were in no doubt as to how the transaction would be processed. Gambling on credit wasn't allowed, cash meant cash. Online purchasing didn't exist, and mail order was minimal.

These days, "cash advance" has been widened to include gambling and even purchases of snacks and stuff in casinos. People buy online all the time and rarely sign anything.

I think it SHOULD be clear at the point of sale how a transaction will be presented to a card company - CASH or PURCHASE. It should be PURCHASE unless otherwise stated.

muhandis

Thanks, you put that across very clearly. Commercially, it probably suits XYZ to keep it fuzzy given how deeply ingrained the use of personal credit is in Britain, for pretty much everything.

chattychappy wrote: »

Indeed there is no harm in asking.

Personally I don't think there is (currently) any onus on XYZ to tell you that your CC might charge. This really is a matter between you and ABC.

BUT I do think there is a transparency issue. In the "old" days of manual imprinter machines, it was simple. The normal vouchers were blue. It went through as a purchase. If you drew cash somewhere, the vouchers were red and had cash advance written on them. You were in no doubt as to how the transaction would be processed. Gambling on credit wasn't allowed, cash meant cash. Online purchasing didn't exist, and mail order was minimal.

These days, "cash advance" has been widened to include gambling and even purchases of snacks and stuff in casinos. People buy online all the time and rarely sign anything.

I think it SHOULD be clear at the point of sale how a transaction will be presented to a card company - CASH or PURCHASE. It should be PURCHASE unless otherwise stated.

muhandis

XYZ has offered to comp the fees that I've had to pay (asked me to send a screenshot) and thrown in a free transfer credit as well! :beer:

They still insist that not all card providers treat the Merchant Category Code (MCC) they use as a cash advance but that CC providers have the discretion to do so. Apparently they had it reviewed with their provider and changed a while ago to specifically address this issue. They advised that I definitely pick it up with ABC as well and check with other CCs that I own as to how they treat this MCC so I can consider using a different card in the future.

I'm a happy bunny :money:

Thanks for all your comments on the thread.