SumUp purchase treated as cash advance?!?

mouseysarah

I have been charged interest on my NatWest credit card because they have categorised a purchase I made in a local music shop as "cash equivalent" due to the fact that they use SumUp as their card payment processor. It was a normal purchase of goods (music equipment) from a shop and I put my card into a normal card reader - I had no idea this might be treated as cash rather than a purchase.

When I look at the NatWest T&Cs about cash advance fees they talk about ATMs, buying gambling chips, and putting credit on a mobile - there is nothing there to indicate you need to be careful about using the card in some shops.

NatWest are refusing to budge and just saying it is categorised as cash and so subject to interest.

Has anyone else come across this? 

born_again

Time they updated T/C as using a CC for gambling has not been allowed since 2020.

Sounds like retailer might be using wrong Catsic  (MCC) code

DullGreyGuy

Banks use the MCC associated with the merchant account to determine the nature of the business and therefore in turn if its a cash like transaction or not. 

With most of these intermediaries they have a single merchant account themselves and so all of their client's end up with the same MCC. SumUp's documentation looks like it may be different, there are API calls for setting MCC, but not sure if that applies to the UK or just elsewhere. 

You could ask your bank what the MCC code was but it's not NW that will have set that. 

Ultimately it's for you to talk to the merchant who most likely will need to speak to SumUp to try and work it out. 

CliveOfIndia

born_again said:

Time they updated T/C as using a CC for gambling has not been allowed since 2020.

Interesting point (and apologies to the OP for the slight hijack !).  As you rightly say, using a credit card for gambling in the UK has been illegal for a while now.  But would you be allowed to use your UK credit card to buy chips if, say, you were on holiday in Las Vegas (or whichever of the US states does allow gambling on credit)?

Lots of (most?) credit cards state that gambling is classed as a cash transaction, so I just assumed you could still use it abroad in a casino (and get charged for it).

GeoffTF

mouseysarah said:

When I look at the NatWest T&Cs about cash advance fees they talk about ATMs, buying gambling chips, and putting credit on a mobile - there is nothing there to indicate you need to be careful about using the card in some shops.

I use my Barclaycard Rewards card to top up 1p Mobile and have never been charged interest. Ditto with other credit cards and PAYG providers. Perhaps it is best to avoid NatWest.

crispy_duck

DullGreyGuy said:

Ultimately it's for you to talk to the merchant who most likely will need to speak to SumUp to try and work it out. 

Is that really the case? Without having read the full T&Cs, it seems that the OP hasn't bought anything that's defined there as a cash advance, and it shouldn't be their job to sort out the comms issues between the merchant, the payment processor and the bank.

I'd complain to the bank, laying out the facts - presumably there's a receipt from the purchase listing the items bought - and if/when the complaint is rejected then I'd take it to the ombudsman.

Nasqueron

crispy_duck said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Ultimately it's for you to talk to the merchant who most likely will need to speak to SumUp to try and work it out. 

Is that really the case? Without having read the full T&Cs, it seems that the OP hasn't bought anything that's defined there as a cash advance, and it shouldn't be their job to sort out the comms issues between the merchant, the payment processor and the bank.

I'd complain to the bank, laying out the facts - presumably there's a receipt from the purchase listing the items bought - and if/when the complaint is rejected then I'd take it to the ombudsman.

The bank charges based on the MCC provided to them, complaining to the bank and ombudsman is a fruitless endeavour that will take months and achieve nothing because the bank is acting on the code provided.

Simply put -
OP buys something
Seller has a SumUp device which tells the bank it's a cash transaction by MCC 
Bank receives a notice OP has bought cash with their credit card
Bank charges OP for cash

The bank is not going to change MCC from the seller as it's none of their business to do so and a complaint that they did what they were told will only clog up the queue

It IS the OP's responsibility to deal with the seller as it is the seller whose device has incorrectly told the bank it's a cash thing and thus it is the seller's fault

HillStreetBlues

Nasqueron said:

crispy_duck said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Ultimately it's for you to talk to the merchant who most likely will need to speak to SumUp to try and work it out. 

Is that really the case? Without having read the full T&Cs, it seems that the OP hasn't bought anything that's defined there as a cash advance, and it shouldn't be their job to sort out the comms issues between the merchant, the payment processor and the bank.

I'd complain to the bank, laying out the facts - presumably there's a receipt from the purchase listing the items bought - and if/when the complaint is rejected then I'd take it to the ombudsman.

The bank charges based on the MCC provided to them, complaining to the bank and ombudsman is a fruitless endeavour that will take months and achieve nothing because the bank is acting on the code provided.

Simply put -
OP buys something
Seller has a SumUp device which tells the bank it's a cash transaction by MCC 
Bank receives a notice OP has bought cash with their credit card
Bank charges OP for cash

The bank is not going to change MCC from the seller as it's none of their business to do so and a complaint that they did what they were told will only clog up the queue

It IS the OP's responsibility to deal with the seller as it is the seller whose device has incorrectly told the bank it's a cash thing and thus it is the seller's fault

I don't see it that way.
The OP has two contracts, one with the seller and one with the bank.
As far as the OP is concerned the seller charged the correct price and OP got product.
The bank has now charged the OP against the terms of it's contract, no where doe it state that it depends on what code a retailer uses, just what is classed as a cash transaction.
So I see it as the bank's breech.

NorwichMan

Isn't it the case that some card providers treat some MCCs as cash-like transactions, whilst others treat the same MCCs as not cash-like transactions? I am going to struggle to give a concrete example, but thought that some cards were "stricter" here than others. In which case, maybe a complaint to the bank might result in them reviewing whether it's appropriate to classify this particular MCC as cash-like?

DullGreyGuy

crispy_duck said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Ultimately it's for you to talk to the merchant who most likely will need to speak to SumUp to try and work it out. 

Is that really the case? Without having read the full T&Cs, it seems that the OP hasn't bought anything that's defined there as a cash advance, and it shouldn't be their job to sort out the comms issues between the merchant, the payment processor and the bank.

I'd complain to the bank, laying out the facts - presumably there's a receipt from the purchase listing the items bought - and if/when the complaint is rejected then I'd take it to the ombudsman.

Its not about what has been bought its about the MCC which is set at merchant level when using SumUp, with traditional POS solutions its set at merchant account. 

Let's take Thomas Cook, they have two merchant accounts, one is for their holiday business MCC 4722 and the other is for their foreign exchange MCC 6211. If you went in store to book a holiday but their cardmachine wasn't working and to save you leaving empty handed the assistant went and grabbed the one from the FX booth then your holiday booking would go through under 6211 and you would be charged a cash advance fee. 

It's a rather crude tool but its the limited level of data shared with card companies and hence you get what appear to be odd results. Buy a gift card from a dedicated retailer and it can be counted as cash, buy the same card alongside your weekly shopping in Tesco and it will be counted as a purchase. 

SumUp do set the MCC based on what their client declares their main source of revenue is, so it depends on what the "music shop" has told SumUp that they do. Maybe at the person has a second bigger line of work in gift cards, gambling or FX and thats why they've been charged as a cash like transaction. 

Nasqueron

HillStreetBlues said:

Nasqueron said:

crispy_duck said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Ultimately it's for you to talk to the merchant who most likely will need to speak to SumUp to try and work it out. 

Is that really the case? Without having read the full T&Cs, it seems that the OP hasn't bought anything that's defined there as a cash advance, and it shouldn't be their job to sort out the comms issues between the merchant, the payment processor and the bank.

I'd complain to the bank, laying out the facts - presumably there's a receipt from the purchase listing the items bought - and if/when the complaint is rejected then I'd take it to the ombudsman.

The bank charges based on the MCC provided to them, complaining to the bank and ombudsman is a fruitless endeavour that will take months and achieve nothing because the bank is acting on the code provided.

Simply put -
OP buys something
Seller has a SumUp device which tells the bank it's a cash transaction by MCC 
Bank receives a notice OP has bought cash with their credit card
Bank charges OP for cash

The bank is not going to change MCC from the seller as it's none of their business to do so and a complaint that they did what they were told will only clog up the queue

It IS the OP's responsibility to deal with the seller as it is the seller whose device has incorrectly told the bank it's a cash thing and thus it is the seller's fault

I don't see it that way.
The OP has two contracts, one with the seller and one with the bank.
As far as the OP is concerned the seller charged the correct price and OP got product.
The bank has now charged the OP against the terms of it's contract, no where doe it state that it depends on what code a retailer uses, just what is classed as a cash transaction.
So I see it as the bank's breech.

This is not the way it works:

The Merchant's card system sent a request for payment to the bank stating it was a cash transaction
The bank processed the payment and applied a cash transaction charge per the terms of the account which clearly state they charge for a cash transaction

There is no breach by the bank, they have acted as they were told based on the terms and conditions of the account which are posted on this topic already

The bank is not at fault, the seller (more specifically, their card machine/merchant account which is their issue) is the one responsible

To put in simple terms

OP bought something and paid by card
Seller machine told bank it was a cash purchase --> this is where the charge comes from
Bank processed it as a cash purchase
Bank applied the appropriate charge for a cash purchase

At no point is there a fault by the bank