Getting screwed over, some advice please

blastman

Folks, I'm after some advice regarding a issue I have that I realise now I am being screwed over, and I can't decide whether it is by the bank or the government i.e. the usual suspects.

The situation is this. I had a credit card with one of the big banks through an organisation that I was a member of. Some time ago, the card was due for renewal and I duly got a new card in the post which I stuck in a drawer at home somewhere. I didn't use the card much as I had just cleared a large-ish sum off it, so I left it in the drawer until I couldn't find it any more. By the time I realised I didn't know where it was, I decided not to bother reporting it lost as it was probably due for renewal soon enough and I'd get a new one.

A long passed, however and no new card was ever sent out. The only thing I got was the annual €30 tax shafting, which I always paid. Every year, upon receiving this statement I thought I better ring up and find out what the story is with that card, but it always got forgotten about.

Fast forward to today and I finally decide to ring up after another €30 tax demand arrived. I'm told that because the card hadn't been used since 2007 (!), there was a refusal to renew in 2008, so I've effectively not had a credit card with them since then. So why have been paying the €30 government stamp duty every year, I asked. Oh, that's on the account, apparently. Even though there was no card issued since 2008, the account was still there.

I always thought the government levy was a tax on the card, am I wrong about that? This account is purely for that particular credit card, I don't do any other banking with this bank. I do however have an old savings account also with them which has a small amount sitting in it (less that €100) but I don't get charged €30 for that.

From what I can see, the stamp duty is on the card itself, so my question is, should I be looking for that money back from the bank from the time they refused to re-issue the card (which would amount to nearly a couple of hundred Euro), since I was being taxed on a card they knew didn't exist?

Sorry for the long post, thanks for reading.

GerardKeating

blastman wrote: »

Folks, I'm after some advice regarding a issue I have that I realise now I am being screwed over, and I can't decide whether it is by the bank or the government i.e. the usual suspects.

The situation is this. I had a credit card with one of the big banks through an organisation that I was a member of. Some time ago, the card was due for renewal and I duly got a new card in the post which I stuck in a drawer at home somewhere. I didn't use the card much as I had just cleared a large-ish sum off it, so I left it in the drawer until I couldn't find it any more. By the time I realised I didn't know where it was, I decided not to bother reporting it lost as it was probably due for renewal soon enough and I'd get a new one.

A long passed, however and no new card was ever sent out. The only thing I got was the annual €30 tax shafting, which I always paid. Every year, upon receiving this statement I thought I better ring up and find out what the story is with that card, but it always got forgotten about.

Fast forward to today and I finally decide to ring up after another €30 tax demand arrived. I'm told that because the card hadn't been used since 2007 (!), there was a refusal to renew in 2008, so I've effectively not had a credit card with them since then. So why have been paying the €30 government stamp duty every year, I asked. Oh, that's on the account, apparently. Even though there was no card issued since 2008, the account was still there.

I always thought the government levy was a tax on the card, am I wrong about that? This account is purely for that particular credit card, I don't do any other banking with this bank. I do however have an old savings account also with them which has a small amount sitting in it (less that €100) but I don't get charged €30 for that.

From what I can see, the stamp duty is on the card itself, so my question is, should I be looking for that money back from the bank from the time they refused to re-issue the card (which would amount to nearly a couple of hundred Euro), since I was being taxed on a card they knew didn't exist?

Sorry for the long post, thanks for reading.

If the card was not used during the relevant year, no tax is due for that year.

Rob Thomas

The Bank paid the Stamp Duty on your behalf having collected it from you. If you did not use the card, you should not have been charged and accordingly the Bank should refund you.

Post a complaint under their normal procedures and if it's as straightforward as you say, you will be refunded. It should be easy to show if you used the card or not.

It may be that the process/transaction of you lodging to the card once each year to pay the annual €30 charge (be that by dd or however) constituted a use of the card and caused you to be charged the following year and so on, but this would merely explain why the situation persisted, and should not affect you being refunded.

Jim2007

GerardKeating wrote: »

If the card was not used during the relevant year, no tax is due for that year.

Rob Thomas wrote: »

The Bank paid the Stamp Duty on your behalf having collected it from you. If you did not use the card, you should not have been charged and accordingly the Bank should refund you.

The duty is charged on both the card and the account, €30 on each. Here is the Revenue link.

Spocker

Jim2007 wrote: »

The duty is charged on both the card and the account, €30 on each. Here is the Revenue link.

The OP is referring to a credit card , not a charge card, so is only being charged €30, not €60

dobsdave

Wrong, its 30 per account that you have used a card on during the year.
The op only has one account, but has not used the card.
No 30euro tax should have been paid.

Jim2007 wrote: »

The duty is charged on both the card and the account, €30 on each. Here is the Revenue link.

Goat the dote

But the Account is open and available for use.
Ring the revenue as it is their charge. The bank are middle men in it

blastman

Guys, thanks for the replies so far. With regard to the card not being used and therefore not liable for government duty, note where I said the bank refused to renew the card (in 2008 according to the guy I spoke to on the phone). So it wasn't just that I didn't use the card, I couldn't because no card existed. This should also mean Goat's point that tthe account was open and available for use is moot. I can't use a credit card account when no card exists.

blastman

Any more thoughts on this, folks? I'd like to start a complaint process against the bank here if I can be sure the levy is solely for the card(s) associated with a given account rather than the account itself. I'd also appreciate any advice on how to start the complaint procedure if anyone has any thoughts.

wmpdd3

OP, I had a number of CC accounts that I didn't have cards for because I send them back to the issuers and tried to pay back the balance, I wasn't charged stamp duty on those accounts. Though the account holding banks were aware that I sent the card back.

Looking at the revenue site, its not looking good.

Is the duty charged on the credit card or the account?
In the case of credit cards the charge is against the account. This means that you could have a number of credit cards operating against the one account and only be liable for €30 stamp duty.

Is the duty charged on the charge card or the account?
In the case of individuals the charge is against the first or principal card issued. No charge arises in relation to additional charge cards issued on the account. In the case of charge cards issued to companies which usually have more than one card on a single company account, every card is subject to duty.

Galadriel

Same here, I had an account with MBNA but didn't use a card for years, they told me as I had not activated/used the card I was not liable for stamp duty.

blastman

wmpdd3, I read that section of revenue's site, I took it that they made the assumption that there was at least one card issued against the account, though i.e. one charge per account regardless of whether there is one or more cards issued for it, but if there is no card, there is no charge due.

Anyway, I'm going to query revenue directly and see what they say.