From: "Tim" 
Newsgroups: uk.finance uk.legal
Subject: Re: Barclaycard....Advice needed
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 11:13:00 +0100

> >"John Boyle" wrote
> >> The authority under which
> >> they are used is the original.
> >
> "Tim" wrote
> >... which (we are supposing) has
> >been *cancelled* by the cardholder!
>
"John Boyle" wrote
> Cancelled??? by telling whom?
>  the bank or the merchant?

I thought it was obvious : the merchant --
as the bank won't entertain such a request!

> >> "Tim" wrote
> >> >The cardholder wants the card company
> >> > *not* to give up-to-date card details to
> >> >retailers without the cardholder's agreement.
> >> >
> >"John Boyle" wrote
> >> Why should they? It stops the cardholder
> >> receiving the service they are paying for.
> >
> "Tim" wrote
> >Exactly! - That's what the cardholder *wants* !
>
"John Boyle" wrote
> ... rethink my point here, it will stop the
> service ever being provided in the first place.

It shouldn't stop that at all, should it?  It might
stop the service after the card's expiry date
is passed, but that only requires the cardholder
to update the details they've provided to
the merchant every couple of years or so.

> >> "Tim" wrote
> >> >So when the card company *does* give
> >> > out the details, and *this* results in an
> >> > invalid charge on the card, isn't that unfair?
> >>
> >"John Boyle" wrote
> >> No, because the cardholders
> >> original authority is still valid.
> >
> "Tim" wrote
> >Err, no it's not.  You didn't read my comment
> >properly.  I said "an invalid charge",
>

"John Boyle" wrote
> no you are selective in your quotes. in full you said
> "when the card company *does* give out the details,
> and *this* results in an invalid charge on the card"

Exactly.  This is in the situation after the cardholder
has cancelled the authority with the merchant
(otherwise the charge would not be invalid).

"John Boyle" wrote
> Giving out the right details does NOT result in an invalid charge.

But if the retailer did not use the up-to-date
details, isn't the transaction request declined?

"John Boyle" wrote
> The customer authority is not card
> detail specific, it is account specific.

When did that change?
If it *hasn't* changed, then why did the banks
previously give cardholder's the impression that
the authority ends at the expiry date of the card,
by (previously) requiring the cardholder to give
the updated details to the merchant?

> "Tim" wrote
> > ... which implies that the cardholder
> >has cancelled his authority
>

"John Boyle" wrote
> eh? How?

I was talking about the situation after the
cardholder had cancelled the CCA with
the merchant.  So the charge *was* invalid.
If the cardholder *hadn't* cancelled the
CCA, how could the transaction be invalid?

> "Tim" wrote
> > ...and therefore it is **no longer** valid.
>
"John Boyle" wrote
> Logic lost there, I'm, afraid. I can see how you have
> come to this conclusion, but your route is flawed. You
> seem to think for some reason that the cardholders
> authority is based on a specific card and the details
> thereon, when in fact it refers to a specific account.

It really doesn't matter either way, because the
situation I was describing was after the cardholder
had cancelled the CCA with the merchant.

> >"John Boyle" wrote
> >> ... if the drawer issued a number of cheques in
> >> conjunction with the cheque guarantee card ...
> >> ... he closes his account and opens a new joint
> >> account with his new darling wife for which their
> >> is a joint & several mandate for 'either to sign'.
> >>
> >> The payee stills presents the cheques for payment.
> >> Assuming the cheques have been drawn accordance
> >> with the cheque guarantee scheme rules the drawee
> >> would still have to pay the cheques however the account
> >> number upon which they are drawn is no longer valid
> >> and so the bank alters the account number to that of the
> >> joint account. As cheque guarantee cards are granted to
> >> individuals and are not account specific ... this is allowable.
> >
> "Tim" wrote
> >"Individuals not accounts"?
> >Why do the banks not point this out to customers?
>
"John Boyle" wrote
> err,,, they do. In addition a cheque guarantee
> card does NOT show the account name.

All three of mine do.
[Of course, they are also debit &
cash machine cards combined.