Best way to stop CPA on my card

SnowTiger

ferry wrote: »

Hi. I have a payment due on my card which I would like to stop.

It's a continuous payment authority for a loan but I need to negotiate other ways to pay it. I have contacted them and they said I need to put it writing but the timing of this means a payment will be taken.
Could ask for advice to ensure the CPA is cancelled and no attempt made to take a payment even at a later date?

You can cancel a continuous payment authority with the card issuer.

This is what the FCA said in 2013 about stopping a CPA:

How to cancel a continuous payment authority

In most cases, you should be able to cancel by contacting the company taking the payment and asking it to stop. However, you do have the right to cancel directly with your card issuer. Once you have done this, it must stop payments immediately – it cannot insist that you agree this with the company taking the payment first.

REMEMBER: IT IS YOUR RIGHT TO CANCEL CONTINUOUS PAYMENT AUTHORITIES DIRECTLY WITH YOUR CARD ISSUER

You obviously have to give your bank advanced noticed. Barclays suggests one working day.

fwor

boo_star wrote: »

"Obtaining pecuniary advantage by deception?"

Isn't that the textbook definition of fraud?

Perhaps, in theory, but in the real world it's completely impractical to define "losing" (as opposed to actually losing) a credit card as fraud.

In the real world, nobody is going to "lose" a card with loads of witnesses present, so whether they "lost" it deliberately or accidentally is entirely academic.

In my opinion there's no point in moralising about a point like this. Save your moralising for situations where it's important. It's better to advise the OP that the plan may not work and there's a better way to cancel a CPA than to label it as fraud.

sourcrates

Davy_Jones_II wrote: »

Please don’t commit fraud, despite being advised to do so above.

I’m not very impressed that posts encouraging lawbreaking are allowed here, but it’s terrible advice.

How on earth do you come to the conclusion this would be fraud ?


I have never heard anything so ridiculas in all my life, its standard procedure to cancel your payment instruction, if you lose your card, or it is stolen, or if you just want to stop the payment for any other reason.

It is a payment service offered by your bank, which you have the statutory right to cancel at any time for goodness sake.

Please, if you don`t know the answer to a question, do not just make it up from your own moral viewpoint, giving out incorrect information helps no one.

sourcrates

boo_star wrote: »

How long ago was this?

VISA Account Updater has been a thing for a few years so it's surprising they didn't know about your new card number.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/money/2017/jan/12/how-amazon-know-new-visa-card-information-before-me-natwest

Early to mid noughties, that was boo, things, as you suggest, may be different now.

sourcrates

boo_star wrote: »

"Obtaining pecuniary advantage by deception?"

Isn't that the textbook definition of fraud?

Yes, but at what point does the actual deception occur, and what advantage have you gained, canceling of a CPA is a statutory right with your bank, it is a service they offer, so cannot be described as deception, it only potentially becomes deception if you do not intend to pay at all, and thats a whole new ballgame to prove.

You are free to cancel a CPA as and when you wish, there is no penalty for doing so, describing the act as deception is extreamly mis-leading, and just plain incorrect, the OP has stated they want to pay via a different method, which they are perectly entitled to do, so there is no deception involved whatsoever.


This whole debate is pointless.

glennstar

Davy_Jones_II wrote: »

Please don’t commit fraud, despite being advised to do so above.

I’m not very impressed that posts encouraging lawbreaking are allowed here, but it’s terrible advice.

Blimey! I thought I was a bit preachy and judgy. I agree with Sourcrates. Where exactly has the deception taken place? Moreover, where is the pecuniary advantage? If OP owes the money then they owe the money and will have to pay it back, regardless of what mechanism is used to do so.

Consequently no advice to commit a crime has been given and no crime has been committed.