Charged in GBP without my agreement, card issuer and Mastercard refuse to fix it, any ideas?

zagfles

p3ncilsharpener said:

zagfles said:

Deleted_User said:

zagfles said:

Deleted_User said:

Peter_Parsons said:

zagfles said:

Peter_Parsons said:

Just to update this - the solution seems to be don't accept the BS and stick to your guns.

After escalating the complaint within my issuer, they have accepted that the Mastercard rules were not followed by the merchant and they have credited my account with the amount of the overcharge.

Well done - bank call centres often try to fob customers off, or are clueless and don't understand the rules, so always worth escalating.

In future when abroad, always say you want to be charged in <local currency> when handing your card over, and if using a handheld POS terminal keep hold of it after entering the PIN to see if asks about DCC.

Thank you, and thank you for the documents you shared.

I got nowhere with the bank's disputes team, so insisted that it was escalated within the bank (or I was going to the Ombudsman) and the person it was escalated to had made the effort to read what had happened and accepted that the rules had clearly not been followed.

In future, I will never enter my PIN without seeing the screen wherever it is. I trusted that, having discussed the bill in local currency only, that that was what I'd be paying in. I won't be anywhere near so trusting in future. It's a shame that I will need to be that way, but once bitten, twice shy.

The sum being low, the bank paid it to get rid of you as it costs them more in wasting time and FOS fees, not because you were right or wrong - hence it's always a good lesson to stick to your guns and well done for doing so.

Whether the FOS would have agreed there was a fault and tell the bank to refund or not had they refused, I don't know, I cannot see any cases where they have made a decision on this

The banks would never let it get as far as the FOS, before that stage someone at the bank who knows what they're doing would have looked at the case. Banks know that DCC non-complaince and even fraud is rife amongst retailers in some countries.

I doubt they'd have taken a 3-figure loss on the chin, they'd have charged it back to the retailer.

The bank refused a charge back if you read the OP so they did pay out of their own pockets. The FOS fee is something like £750 so refunding the difference between the bill and the bill without DCC (which is what they did) is going to be reasonably low - OP said it was 7% difference between what they would have paid vs what they did - on a £1000 bill that's only £70. You can doubt all you like, banks have thresholds for "go away" payments, with PPI and packaged bank accounts it's been closed to 4 figures as it's still cheaper than an FOS case fee, unless OP was staying at the Ritz at £1000 a night for 10 nights, I very much doubt what they "took on the chin" was anything like a significant three figure sum

Initially they did, the usual first line fob off attempt, but after the OP escalated it he reported: "....they have accepted that the Mastercard rules were not followed by the merchant and they have credited my account with the amount of the overcharge."

Why would the bank take the hit for a merchant not following the rules? They'd have almost certainly done a chargeback for the DCC difference. Retailers do get chargebacks for DCC disputes, see these sites aimed at helping retailers with chargebacks:

https://midigator.com/chargeback-reason-codes/mastercard/4834-poi-currency-conversion-dynamic-currency-conversion/

https://chargebacks911.com/chargeback-reason-codes/mastercard/4834-point-of-interaction-currency-conversion/

The idea that banks roll over on an unjustified complaint to avoid a FOS fee is laughable - if that were true everyone would complain about every transaction on spurious grounds and no-one would pay their bill There would have to be validity to the claim for the bank to refund, especially it wasn't anything they'd done.

Banks (and many other businesses) absolutely DO roll over when customers push back hard enough.

Businesses care about one thing, money.  If it costs £550 for the Ombudsman fee + the wages for dealing with it (probably several hours) vs paying maybe double digits out of their own pockets, they're going to pay double digits out of their own pockets.

There are countless examples on this forum of people who are absolutely in the wrong "winning" with companies, and it's because the company takes the view that backing down is the better option, because it'll cost them less.

Until it gets out that they're a soft touch and everyone does it. A FOS judgement in the bank's favour would deter others so it's worth the cost in the long run if they win. But DCC disputes aren't going to make it to the FOS anyway.

There does seem to be attitude by some posters on MSE that the customer is always wrong and the retailer/bank is always right. Look at the number of people in this thread blaming the OP. In this case it's blatently obvious to anyone who's travelled a bit that what happened to the OP as he described it is entirely realistic. DCC was imposed without consent.

The bank now agree and have refunded it, and the merchant will be getting a chargeback. Case closed.

p3ncilsharpener

Thrugelmir said:

p3ncilsharpener said:

zagfles said:

Deleted_User said:

zagfles said:

Deleted_User said:

Peter_Parsons said:

zagfles said:

Peter_Parsons said:

Just to update this - the solution seems to be don't accept the BS and stick to your guns.

After escalating the complaint within my issuer, they have accepted that the Mastercard rules were not followed by the merchant and they have credited my account with the amount of the overcharge.

Well done - bank call centres often try to fob customers off, or are clueless and don't understand the rules, so always worth escalating.

In future when abroad, always say you want to be charged in <local currency> when handing your card over, and if using a handheld POS terminal keep hold of it after entering the PIN to see if asks about DCC.

Thank you, and thank you for the documents you shared.

I got nowhere with the bank's disputes team, so insisted that it was escalated within the bank (or I was going to the Ombudsman) and the person it was escalated to had made the effort to read what had happened and accepted that the rules had clearly not been followed.

In future, I will never enter my PIN without seeing the screen wherever it is. I trusted that, having discussed the bill in local currency only, that that was what I'd be paying in. I won't be anywhere near so trusting in future. It's a shame that I will need to be that way, but once bitten, twice shy.

The sum being low, the bank paid it to get rid of you as it costs them more in wasting time and FOS fees, not because you were right or wrong - hence it's always a good lesson to stick to your guns and well done for doing so.

Whether the FOS would have agreed there was a fault and tell the bank to refund or not had they refused, I don't know, I cannot see any cases where they have made a decision on this

The banks would never let it get as far as the FOS, before that stage someone at the bank who knows what they're doing would have looked at the case. Banks know that DCC non-complaince and even fraud is rife amongst retailers in some countries.

I doubt they'd have taken a 3-figure loss on the chin, they'd have charged it back to the retailer.

The bank refused a charge back if you read the OP so they did pay out of their own pockets. The FOS fee is something like £750 so refunding the difference between the bill and the bill without DCC (which is what they did) is going to be reasonably low - OP said it was 7% difference between what they would have paid vs what they did - on a £1000 bill that's only £70. You can doubt all you like, banks have thresholds for "go away" payments, with PPI and packaged bank accounts it's been closed to 4 figures as it's still cheaper than an FOS case fee, unless OP was staying at the Ritz at £1000 a night for 10 nights, I very much doubt what they "took on the chin" was anything like a significant three figure sum

Initially they did, the usual first line fob off attempt, but after the OP escalated it he reported: "....they have accepted that the Mastercard rules were not followed by the merchant and they have credited my account with the amount of the overcharge."

Why would the bank take the hit for a merchant not following the rules? They'd have almost certainly done a chargeback for the DCC difference. Retailers do get chargebacks for DCC disputes, see these sites aimed at helping retailers with chargebacks:

https://midigator.com/chargeback-reason-codes/mastercard/4834-poi-currency-conversion-dynamic-currency-conversion/

https://chargebacks911.com/chargeback-reason-codes/mastercard/4834-point-of-interaction-currency-conversion/

The idea that banks roll over on an unjustified complaint to avoid a FOS fee is laughable - if that were true everyone would complain about every transaction on spurious grounds and no-one would pay their bill There would have to be validity to the claim for the bank to refund, especially it wasn't anything they'd done.

Banks (and many other businesses) absolutely DO roll over when customers push back hard enough.

Businesses care about one thing, money.  If it costs £550 for the Ombudsman fee + the wages for dealing with it (probably several hours) vs paying maybe double digits out of their own pockets, they're going to pay double digits out of their own pockets.

There are countless examples on this forum of people who are absolutely in the wrong "winning" with companies, and it's because the company takes the view that backing down is the better option, because it'll cost them less.

A fee is only charged if it's decided that an investigation is neccessary. The act of complaining doesn't in itself a chargeable event.  Would make a nonsense of the system if it did. 

Err, no.  As soon as it goes to the Ombudsman then an investigation starts  If there wasn't there'd be no point in going to the Ombudsman because they'd have settled it already.

p3ncilsharpener

zagfles said:

p3ncilsharpener said:

zagfles said:

Deleted_User said:

zagfles said:

Deleted_User said:

Peter_Parsons said:

zagfles said:

Peter_Parsons said:

Just to update this - the solution seems to be don't accept the BS and stick to your guns.

After escalating the complaint within my issuer, they have accepted that the Mastercard rules were not followed by the merchant and they have credited my account with the amount of the overcharge.

Well done - bank call centres often try to fob customers off, or are clueless and don't understand the rules, so always worth escalating.

In future when abroad, always say you want to be charged in <local currency> when handing your card over, and if using a handheld POS terminal keep hold of it after entering the PIN to see if asks about DCC.

Thank you, and thank you for the documents you shared.

I got nowhere with the bank's disputes team, so insisted that it was escalated within the bank (or I was going to the Ombudsman) and the person it was escalated to had made the effort to read what had happened and accepted that the rules had clearly not been followed.

In future, I will never enter my PIN without seeing the screen wherever it is. I trusted that, having discussed the bill in local currency only, that that was what I'd be paying in. I won't be anywhere near so trusting in future. It's a shame that I will need to be that way, but once bitten, twice shy.

The sum being low, the bank paid it to get rid of you as it costs them more in wasting time and FOS fees, not because you were right or wrong - hence it's always a good lesson to stick to your guns and well done for doing so.

Whether the FOS would have agreed there was a fault and tell the bank to refund or not had they refused, I don't know, I cannot see any cases where they have made a decision on this

The banks would never let it get as far as the FOS, before that stage someone at the bank who knows what they're doing would have looked at the case. Banks know that DCC non-complaince and even fraud is rife amongst retailers in some countries.

I doubt they'd have taken a 3-figure loss on the chin, they'd have charged it back to the retailer.

The bank refused a charge back if you read the OP so they did pay out of their own pockets. The FOS fee is something like £750 so refunding the difference between the bill and the bill without DCC (which is what they did) is going to be reasonably low - OP said it was 7% difference between what they would have paid vs what they did - on a £1000 bill that's only £70. You can doubt all you like, banks have thresholds for "go away" payments, with PPI and packaged bank accounts it's been closed to 4 figures as it's still cheaper than an FOS case fee, unless OP was staying at the Ritz at £1000 a night for 10 nights, I very much doubt what they "took on the chin" was anything like a significant three figure sum

Initially they did, the usual first line fob off attempt, but after the OP escalated it he reported: "....they have accepted that the Mastercard rules were not followed by the merchant and they have credited my account with the amount of the overcharge."

Why would the bank take the hit for a merchant not following the rules? They'd have almost certainly done a chargeback for the DCC difference. Retailers do get chargebacks for DCC disputes, see these sites aimed at helping retailers with chargebacks:

https://midigator.com/chargeback-reason-codes/mastercard/4834-poi-currency-conversion-dynamic-currency-conversion/

https://chargebacks911.com/chargeback-reason-codes/mastercard/4834-point-of-interaction-currency-conversion/

The idea that banks roll over on an unjustified complaint to avoid a FOS fee is laughable - if that were true everyone would complain about every transaction on spurious grounds and no-one would pay their bill There would have to be validity to the claim for the bank to refund, especially it wasn't anything they'd done.

Banks (and many other businesses) absolutely DO roll over when customers push back hard enough.

Businesses care about one thing, money.  If it costs £550 for the Ombudsman fee + the wages for dealing with it (probably several hours) vs paying maybe double digits out of their own pockets, they're going to pay double digits out of their own pockets.

There are countless examples on this forum of people who are absolutely in the wrong "winning" with companies, and it's because the company takes the view that backing down is the better option, because it'll cost them less.

Until it gets out that they're a soft touch and everyone does it. A FOS judgement in the bank's favour would deter others so it's worth the cost in the long run if they win. But DCC disputes aren't going to make it to the FOS anyway.

There does seem to be attitude by some posters on MSE that the customer is always wrong and the retailer/bank is always right. Look at the number of people in this thread blaming the OP. In this case it's blatently obvious to anyone who's travelled a bit that what happened to the OP as he described it is entirely realistic. DCC was imposed without consent.

The bank now agree and have refunded it, and the merchant will be getting a chargeback. Case closed.

I'm not sure anyone has disagreed with the OP's explanation of what happened, it's plausible, in fact it may well be rife abroad (not in my experience but I have a very limited sample size.)

However to say that the bank will now do a chargeback is most likely false.  On what basis will they do that that won't be contested?  The hotel will claim the OP agreed to it and there is no evidence to the contrary,  The bank will absolutely eat this charge.

zagfles

p3ncilsharpener said:

zagfles said:

p3ncilsharpener said:

zagfles said:

Deleted_User said:

zagfles said:

Deleted_User said:

Peter_Parsons said:

zagfles said:

Peter_Parsons said:

Just to update this - the solution seems to be don't accept the BS and stick to your guns.

After escalating the complaint within my issuer, they have accepted that the Mastercard rules were not followed by the merchant and they have credited my account with the amount of the overcharge.

Well done - bank call centres often try to fob customers off, or are clueless and don't understand the rules, so always worth escalating.

In future when abroad, always say you want to be charged in <local currency> when handing your card over, and if using a handheld POS terminal keep hold of it after entering the PIN to see if asks about DCC.

Thank you, and thank you for the documents you shared.

I got nowhere with the bank's disputes team, so insisted that it was escalated within the bank (or I was going to the Ombudsman) and the person it was escalated to had made the effort to read what had happened and accepted that the rules had clearly not been followed.

In future, I will never enter my PIN without seeing the screen wherever it is. I trusted that, having discussed the bill in local currency only, that that was what I'd be paying in. I won't be anywhere near so trusting in future. It's a shame that I will need to be that way, but once bitten, twice shy.

The sum being low, the bank paid it to get rid of you as it costs them more in wasting time and FOS fees, not because you were right or wrong - hence it's always a good lesson to stick to your guns and well done for doing so.

Whether the FOS would have agreed there was a fault and tell the bank to refund or not had they refused, I don't know, I cannot see any cases where they have made a decision on this

The banks would never let it get as far as the FOS, before that stage someone at the bank who knows what they're doing would have looked at the case. Banks know that DCC non-complaince and even fraud is rife amongst retailers in some countries.

I doubt they'd have taken a 3-figure loss on the chin, they'd have charged it back to the retailer.

The bank refused a charge back if you read the OP so they did pay out of their own pockets. The FOS fee is something like £750 so refunding the difference between the bill and the bill without DCC (which is what they did) is going to be reasonably low - OP said it was 7% difference between what they would have paid vs what they did - on a £1000 bill that's only £70. You can doubt all you like, banks have thresholds for "go away" payments, with PPI and packaged bank accounts it's been closed to 4 figures as it's still cheaper than an FOS case fee, unless OP was staying at the Ritz at £1000 a night for 10 nights, I very much doubt what they "took on the chin" was anything like a significant three figure sum

Initially they did, the usual first line fob off attempt, but after the OP escalated it he reported: "....they have accepted that the Mastercard rules were not followed by the merchant and they have credited my account with the amount of the overcharge."

Why would the bank take the hit for a merchant not following the rules? They'd have almost certainly done a chargeback for the DCC difference. Retailers do get chargebacks for DCC disputes, see these sites aimed at helping retailers with chargebacks:

https://midigator.com/chargeback-reason-codes/mastercard/4834-poi-currency-conversion-dynamic-currency-conversion/

https://chargebacks911.com/chargeback-reason-codes/mastercard/4834-point-of-interaction-currency-conversion/

The idea that banks roll over on an unjustified complaint to avoid a FOS fee is laughable - if that were true everyone would complain about every transaction on spurious grounds and no-one would pay their bill There would have to be validity to the claim for the bank to refund, especially it wasn't anything they'd done.

Banks (and many other businesses) absolutely DO roll over when customers push back hard enough.

Businesses care about one thing, money.  If it costs £550 for the Ombudsman fee + the wages for dealing with it (probably several hours) vs paying maybe double digits out of their own pockets, they're going to pay double digits out of their own pockets.

There are countless examples on this forum of people who are absolutely in the wrong "winning" with companies, and it's because the company takes the view that backing down is the better option, because it'll cost them less.

Until it gets out that they're a soft touch and everyone does it. A FOS judgement in the bank's favour would deter others so it's worth the cost in the long run if they win. But DCC disputes aren't going to make it to the FOS anyway.

There does seem to be attitude by some posters on MSE that the customer is always wrong and the retailer/bank is always right. Look at the number of people in this thread blaming the OP. In this case it's blatently obvious to anyone who's travelled a bit that what happened to the OP as he described it is entirely realistic. DCC was imposed without consent.

The bank now agree and have refunded it, and the merchant will be getting a chargeback. Case closed.

I'm not sure anyone has disagreed with the OP's explanation of what happened, it's plausible, in fact it may well be rife abroad (not in my experience but I have a very limited sample size.)

However to say that the bank will now do a chargeback is most likely false.  On what basis will they do that that won't be contested?  The hotel will claim the OP agreed to it and there is no evidence to the contrary,  The bank will absolutely eat this charge.

Read the links I posted earlier. If the retailer gets a chargeback it's up to them to prove DCC was agreed to. Chargebacks are so common that companies like the ones I linked earlier exist to help merchants challenge chargebacks. Just google "DCC chargeback" and you'll find loads of others - they all say to accept the chargeback unless they have proof the customer was offered and accepted DCC. The proof will obvioulsy be lacking in this case. Banks with 0% fee cards will be well used to this (once you get past the first line call centre and to the staff who know what they're doing). Open and shut case.

phillw

wolvoman said:

Why on earth does DCC even exist? What possible benefit does it bring to consumers?

They charge you a premium so that you know how much something is worth in your own currency, in case you buy a sandwich for £100.

It's likely however that anyone running that scam isn't going to give you the option of paying in your own currency, so in reality there is no benefit.

As for business expenses, if I were an employer then I'd refuse a claim for expenses on a foreign trip that used DCC on the basis that my employee had acted with negligence.

zagfles

IanManc said:

zagfles said:

p3ncilsharpener said:

zagfles said:

Deleted_User said:

zagfles said:

Deleted_User said:

Peter_Parsons said:

zagfles said:

Peter_Parsons said:

Just to update this - the solution seems to be don't accept the BS and stick to your guns.

After escalating the complaint within my issuer, they have accepted that the Mastercard rules were not followed by the merchant and they have credited my account with the amount of the overcharge.

Well done - bank call centres often try to fob customers off, or are clueless and don't understand the rules, so always worth escalating.

In future when abroad, always say you want to be charged in <local currency> when handing your card over, and if using a handheld POS terminal keep hold of it after entering the PIN to see if asks about DCC.

Thank you, and thank you for the documents you shared.

I got nowhere with the bank's disputes team, so insisted that it was escalated within the bank (or I was going to the Ombudsman) and the person it was escalated to had made the effort to read what had happened and accepted that the rules had clearly not been followed.

In future, I will never enter my PIN without seeing the screen wherever it is. I trusted that, having discussed the bill in local currency only, that that was what I'd be paying in. I won't be anywhere near so trusting in future. It's a shame that I will need to be that way, but once bitten, twice shy.

The sum being low, the bank paid it to get rid of you as it costs them more in wasting time and FOS fees, not because you were right or wrong - hence it's always a good lesson to stick to your guns and well done for doing so.

Whether the FOS would have agreed there was a fault and tell the bank to refund or not had they refused, I don't know, I cannot see any cases where they have made a decision on this

The banks would never let it get as far as the FOS, before that stage someone at the bank who knows what they're doing would have looked at the case. Banks know that DCC non-complaince and even fraud is rife amongst retailers in some countries.

I doubt they'd have taken a 3-figure loss on the chin, they'd have charged it back to the retailer.

The bank refused a charge back if you read the OP so they did pay out of their own pockets. The FOS fee is something like £750 so refunding the difference between the bill and the bill without DCC (which is what they did) is going to be reasonably low - OP said it was 7% difference between what they would have paid vs what they did - on a £1000 bill that's only £70. You can doubt all you like, banks have thresholds for "go away" payments, with PPI and packaged bank accounts it's been closed to 4 figures as it's still cheaper than an FOS case fee, unless OP was staying at the Ritz at £1000 a night for 10 nights, I very much doubt what they "took on the chin" was anything like a significant three figure sum

Initially they did, the usual first line fob off attempt, but after the OP escalated it he reported: "....they have accepted that the Mastercard rules were not followed by the merchant and they have credited my account with the amount of the overcharge."

Why would the bank take the hit for a merchant not following the rules? They'd have almost certainly done a chargeback for the DCC difference. Retailers do get chargebacks for DCC disputes, see these sites aimed at helping retailers with chargebacks:

https://midigator.com/chargeback-reason-codes/mastercard/4834-poi-currency-conversion-dynamic-currency-conversion/

https://chargebacks911.com/chargeback-reason-codes/mastercard/4834-point-of-interaction-currency-conversion/

The idea that banks roll over on an unjustified complaint to avoid a FOS fee is laughable - if that were true everyone would complain about every transaction on spurious grounds and no-one would pay their bill There would have to be validity to the claim for the bank to refund, especially it wasn't anything they'd done.

Banks (and many other businesses) absolutely DO roll over when customers push back hard enough.

Businesses care about one thing, money.  If it costs £550 for the Ombudsman fee + the wages for dealing with it (probably several hours) vs paying maybe double digits out of their own pockets, they're going to pay double digits out of their own pockets.

There are countless examples on this forum of people who are absolutely in the wrong "winning" with companies, and it's because the company takes the view that backing down is the better option, because it'll cost them less.

Until it gets out that they're a soft touch and everyone does it. A FOS judgement in the bank's favour would deter others so it's worth the cost in the long run if they win. But DCC disputes aren't going to make it to the FOS anyway.

There does seem to be attitude by some posters on MSE that the customer is always wrong and the retailer/bank is always right. Look at the number of people in this thread blaming the OP. In this case it's blatently obvious to anyone who's travelled a bit that what happened to the OP as he described it is entirely realistic. DCC was imposed without consent.

The bank now agree and have refunded it, and the merchant will be getting a chargeback. Case closed.

I don't think anyone "blamed the OP". The blame clearly lies with the hotel. It is obvious that, despite the OP having said he wished to be charged in the local currency the hotel staff have scammed him by charging in sterling. Acknowledging that doesn't involve any blame attaching to the OP.

And you ending your posting with "case closed" doesn't add any weight to your argument. If the bank makes enquiries then the hotel will deny that they have scammed a customer - of course they would - and so the suggestion that the bank will simply absorb the cost is perfectly plausible. However, no one on here will ever know for sure, and that includes you.

I'm glad the OP has got his money back.  😎

Me too - and good job he ignored those saying the bank won't be able to help and there's nothing he can do. The bank did help and he did get his money back

If people want to believe the bank won't pursue a chargeback, believe it. They're probably the same people who believed the OP wouldn't get his money back.

redux

I had something close to this happen paying for fuel at a Polish motorway services, the last one or two before coming into Germany.

The screen definitely showed the transaction in Polish złote. But as I walked out of the forecourt shop I looked at the receipt and it said pounds.

I went back to the counter, waited for the next customer, then interrupted the queue, and said loudly enough so the people in both queues, probably mostly German but some would understand English, would hear, this is out of order, I wanted to pay in złote, we're going to cancel this transaction with its extra profit margin added on, and do it again, this time properly in złote.

Although that person hardly spoke English, he understood.The supervisor was called out and opened a third till, and did as I asked, fairly efficiently as if she was used to it.

When I got home, I checked the account: 6% difference. I called the card firm and said I wanted the vendor reported to MasterCard for misconduct. They wouldn't do it. I tried calling MasterCard direct, but the IVR system took my card number and connected me back to my account's customer services.

Going by the number of pumps and cars there, and if they were mostly foreign, I'd guess if that place worked that scam on most customers, it would be worth £2000 to £5000 extra profit per week. Besides that, their price was higher than the previous Polish stations, and with the margin added actually more expensive than German ones after the border. No point in going there ever again.