MBNA say people can still take money off my CC even though my account is closed?

AARRRGH

Does this make any sense to any one?

I have closed my MBNA CC account. The guy in MBNA told me if anyone takes any money from my CC in the future, I will owe that money. He says it doesn't matter that my account is closed, people can still charge my closed CC.

This makes no sense to me.

Is he for real?!

iMax

He absolutely is.

I had it set up to pay my car insurance through a standing order on my MBNA pigsback (only reason I was doing it) card & when I closed it, it took me three months to sort out.

Any pre-orders you have (say for example with amazon) would be charged also any standing orders or anything which isn't charged until after you close the account (some retailers only do their charges once a week or month or longer).

Just try to mop up everything.

AARRRGH

Wow, that's mad. You would think once the account is closed, any new payments would be rejected. I don't think it's right that the merchants should have more authority than the card holder!

iMax

Not right but that's the way it is... MBNA operate a DD+ policy. if the charge is authorised, it'll be paid.

parsi

AARRRGH wrote: »

Wow, that's mad. You would think once the account is closed, any new payments would be rejected. I don't think it's right that the merchants should have more authority than the card holder!

If people leigitimately charge that closed account they will be paid.

This prevents guys signing up, giving the card number, closing the account and saying "tough".

AARRRGH

parsi wrote: »

If people leigitimately charge that closed account they will be paid.

This prevents guys signing up, giving the card number, closing the account and saying "tough".

I'd say the thinking is more likely: let's try to make money off old customers.

100gSoma

AARRRGH wrote: »

I'd say the thinking is more likely: let's try to make money off old customers.

No your wrong. It's so that the retailers can have confidence in credit cards; they need to know they will be paid. Even if they only submit for the money in two weeks, and your account has since been closed they don't lose out.

AARRRGH

100gSoma wrote: »

No your wrong. It's so that the retailers can have confidence in credit cards; they need to know they will be paid. Even if they only submit for the money in two weeks, and your account has since been closed they don't lose out.

You obviously haven't heard of chargebacks.

Anyway, I find it rather sad that I am not trusted to give my new credit card details to my existing subscriptions - I have to use my old closed account! This makes no sense.

Closed should mean closed.

100gSoma

If you have authorised a continuous payment on it (equivalent of a direct debit to a bank account for car insurance) then the company who issued the card will honour it and charge you.
It's up to you to make sure these payments are cancelled or changed to a valid card/account.
There are endless problems with companies who continue to charge a card on a continuous payment authorisation even after the customer has said they want to cancel a service/subscription, or even cancelled the card and closed the account. Most finance sites suggest never to use a credit card for an authorised continuous payemnt. Go with a direct debit instead, where you have a lot more control. Unfortunately its just how it works.

parsi

AARRRGH wrote: »

Anyway, I find it rather sad that I am not trusted to give my new credit card details to my existing subscriptions - I have to use my old closed account! This makes no sense.

That comment makes no sense .

If you give the company your new details then they won't be using the old card ...

7mountpleasant

It is one of the main things that they highlight to you when you close the account so I wouldn't be so surprised, if you have given your authorisation to a retailer to debit your card then they need to have faith in it, i'd say its hardly a money maker for mbna due to the number of people who ring up about it and the number who may have moved and don't pay.

AARRRGH

parsi wrote: »

That comment makes no sense .

If you give the company your new details then they won't be using the old card ...

No, you're missing the point.

Merchants are allowed charge a credit card account which the owner has closed and forgotten about. The problem is the word closed. It seems you can't really close your credit card account, you can only block yourself from using it, you can't block anyone else from using it.

BuffyBot

I don't think he is.

The account is "closed", and nothing new can happen on it. However if you agreed to payments before it was closed, then they are quite entitled to honour that agreement.

AARRRGH

But isn't the agreement between me and the subscription, rather than between the credit card company and the subscription?

For example, if I sign a contract with someone saying I will give them X amount per month, that is me saying I will give them X amount, not the credit card company saying they will give them X amount.

So if I cancel my credit card, they shouldn't be able to take money off a cancelled/closed card, and they should come to me looking for the subscription I owe them. At that stage I can then choose how I continue to pay them.

You know, as it is my subscription, and I am the person responsible for it, I should be in control as to how I pay it, not some third party who didn't sign the contract.

I'd understand MBNA's position if they could be sued for refusing the payment (due to the account being closed), but the reality is only I am legally responsible for making the payment.

BuffyBot

The rules imposed on card issuers by Visa International and Mastercard International are complex, and don't always follow the train of thought you're on.

You know, as it is my subscription, and I am the person responsible for it, I should be in control as to how I pay it, not some third party who didn't sign the contract.

Yes, you are responsible for it - and as such it's your responsibility to change the details with the merchant, not for the merchant to chase you. You've given them prior authorisation to debit the now closed card while it was open. Until instructed differently, they can continue to do that. Because you've given them this authorisation, the card issuer is obliged to continue to cover it until you sort it out with the merchant. The third party (in this case MBNA) don't really have a say in it either way.

AARRRGH

Yeah, I can see what you're saying, but I do still think MBNA should refuse the payment and say to the merchant: that account is closed, contact the person who took out the subscription.

I guess I just don't like the idea of MBNA letting people take money out of an account I have previously closed. It seems wrong.

CSC

But you gave permission initially for them to charge the card. If you want a subscription to stop you need to contact the merchants directly and not expect MBNA to block valid transactions from merchants.

AARRRGH

CSC wrote: »

But you gave permission initially for them to charge the card. If you want a subscription to stop you need to contact the merchants directly and not expect MBNA to block valid transactions from merchants.

Sure, but the account is supposed to be closed...

It sort of reminds me of the song Hotel California: "You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave."

CSC

I can't understand the problem though when all you have to do is cancel the subscription.

AARRRGH

I understand all I need to do is cancel the subscription. I just find it baffling that MBNA ignore the fact that the credit card account is closed.

What should happen is this:

Credit card account is cancelled
Merchant attempts to take funds from cancelled credit card account
Merchant receives an error stating the account is closed and the transaction is declined
Merchant contacts the customer asking for updated credit card details

To me, the above makes logical sense, and is the way most credit card companies run their business.

BuffyBot

To me, the above makes logical sense, and is the way most credit card companies run their business.

Which ones? Continuous authorisation to debit pretty much works the same with all card issuers - it's part of the rules.

parsi

AARRRGH wrote: »

To me, the above makes logical sense, and is the way most credit card companies run their business.

AIB are the same.

AARRRGH

parsi wrote: »

AIB are the same.

Are you sure? They used to have a different system...

100gSoma

I think this is thread baiting. the facts have been answered several times. The OP just cannot understand why it should be that way. but IT IS. so just get over it and get rid of the card and the subscriptions. It's that way to protect retailers and ensure confidence in payment. Otherwise I can get a card and create 10 subscriptions based on continuous authorisation, then close the card account and have 10 retailers not able to get their money and thus damaging the integrity and reliability of payment under the credit card system. They more than likley won't want to accept credit cards anymore if this was the way it was set up. do you get that?

parsi

AARRRGH wrote: »

Are you sure? They used to have a different system...

Yep. They renews my Granta sub once.

AARRRGH

100gSoma wrote: »

do you get that?

No, because you can still do a chargeback on all of them.

The impression of security is not the same as actual security.

100gSoma

hi, what's your definition of a chargeback? A charge back is when the card holder successfully disputes a transaction on their card. You can still do that. If a subscription is incorrectly charged to your "closed credit card" you can initiate a chargeback with the issuing bank if you feel the retailer etc should not have charged you. It will still be paid out initially to the retailer. Even if you have closed your credit card account.

AARRRGH

100gSoma wrote: »

hi, what's your definition of a chargeback? A charge back is when the card holder successfully disputes a transaction on their card. You can still do that. If a subscription is incorrectly charged to your "closed credit card" you can initiate a chargeback with the issuing bank if you feel the retailer etc should not have charged you. It will still be paid out initially to the retailer. Even if you have closed your credit card account.

And it's easy to do a chargeback. You just have to ask for it.

My point is the merchant has little to no security.

Anyway, this is the way MBNA do things, and I don't think it makes sense.

AARRRGH

Actually it turns out MBNA do actually block subscription payments when an account is closed, so what the MBNA customer service person told me was incorrect.

m4rkiz

AARRRGH wrote: »

Yeah, I can see what you're saying, but I do still think MBNA should refuse the payment and say to the merchant: that account is closed, contact the person who took out the subscription.

I guess I just don't like the idea of MBNA letting people take money out of an account I have previously closed. It seems wrong.

i dont know how exactly all credit cards work (in details), but i presume that you can for example report cc missing and ask them to close an account instead issuing a new card?

i presume that old card details will be blacklisted then and that sholud be end of story for that cc account?

BuffyBot

No, not nessecarily. Re-read the thread. Continuous authority to debit isn't limited to the card, but the account. The card issuer can easily debit either a replacement card, or an account with no active card on it.