
Shoppers warned about quick online payment option that could end up costing you £1,000s
A WARNING has been issued to shoppers over a quick payment option that can cost £1,000s.
Which? is urging caution over use of the "pay by bank" feature which lacks key consumer protection.
1
The payment feature lets shoppers pay for products without the need to enter bank details or use a card.
It is used by popular online retailers such as WHSmith, Just Eat, Funky Pigeon and Ryanair.
You can also use it to settle credit card balances or pay bills.
However, Which? has raised concerns people may be unaware it can leave them unprotected if something goes wrong with a purchase.
The option lacks Section 75 and chargeback protections that shoppers get when paying through other methods.
Under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act, a credit card company can be held jointly liable for a purchase that turns out to be shoddy or does not materialise.
This means a shopper can potentially get a refund from the credit card company if they cannot recover their costs from a retailer.
Those using a debit card or credit card for purchases can also potentially get their money back via the chargeback scheme.
Which? said pay by bank is a "potential game changer" for businesses as they can sidestep card transaction fees and also benefit from receiving customer funds immediately.
There is also appeal for shoppers as refunds can be processed instantly.
Shopping discounts - How to make savings and find the best bargains
While card details are not shared when making a transaction – eliminating the risk of them being stolen or compromised.
People do have general purchase rights under the Consumer Rights Act, meaning that goods must be fit for purpose, as described and of satisfactory quality.
But Which? said these protections are not always easy to enforce and in some cases may end up with people needing to go to a small claims court.
People may also face difficulties in the event of a business going bust.
This could particularly be the case if there is an issue with a future-dated purchase such as a flight, a festival, or a household big ticket purchase such as a kitchen or a sofa.
Jenny Ross, Which? money editor, said: 'Innovations like pay by bank present opportunities for businesses and consumers alike, but they're not without risk, particularly as they lack the rigorous purchase protections you get when paying by card.
'We're calling on the regulator to act to ensure consumers can use pay by bank with confidence, but in the meantime, we'd urge consumers to think carefully before using it to book events or make substantial purchases – for now, your good old-fashioned credit or debit card may be the best option.'
A spokesperson for banking and finance industry body UK Finance said: 'There are a range of options for making payments online which provides customers with choice as to how they wish to pay.
"Different payment methods do come with different levels of protection and it's worth being aware of these when shopping online, particularly when making higher value purchases."
What is Section 75 protection?
Section 75 protection offers you consumer protection on credit card purchases worth between £100 and £30,000.
It applies to any products or services you've bought that end up being faulty, broken, or were not delivered at all.
It also covers you in the case a retailer you've bought from goes bust.
Section 75 applies to goods bought online, over the phone or via mail order.
You aren't covered by Section 75 if you bought anything with a debit card, but may be under chargeback.
To make a claim under Section 75, you need to contact your credit card provider.
It should then send you a claim form which you can fill in and your provider will use to process your application.
Your card firm might ask you to provide evidence such as a receipt or a report verifying that the item is faulty.
In the scenario where a retailer has not gone bust, you should complain to them first.
If you find that your card company has been unhelpful and refused your claim, you can take your case to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS).
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Will HMRC's digital initiatives make customers' lives any easier?
SIR – You report (June 12) that HMRC is to stop sending letters to customers. A year ago I was encouraged by HMRC to start using its app. I duly downloaded it and tried to log in but was refused access, as I needed to provide proof of identity – specifically a passport number or driving licence. I am in my eighties, my driving licence has been revoked owing to my poor eyesight, and my passport has expired as I no longer travel abroad. My only valid means of identification is my bus pass, which is not accepted. The alternative was to contact HMRC by phone. After holding on for an hour, I gave up. Meanwhile, HMRC continues to tax my pension with impunity. George Kelly Buckingham SIR – My mother has dementia. She has none of the documents required to establish her identity and access HMRC's online systems. I have power of attorney, but am not allowed to use these systems on her behalf, so am forced to spend hours on the phone and send letters that never get a reply. HMRC has taken more tax than is due for two years. I am told by the telephone operatives that my mother does not need to file a tax return, but that is the only way to get a rebate. Is HMRC setting out to confuse customers? Gillian Courage Cheltenham, Gloucestershire SIR – HMRC is to stop writing to taxpayers, except when demanding payments. It already refuses to speak to many of us on the phone. It took my wife 10 months to get a reply to a letter she wrote last year; this meant being incorrectly charged interest, which she had to appeal against. A year earlier, only two figures on the assessment form sent to me were recognisable. A five-minute phone call could have resolved the problem, but this was not possible. In both cases, we resorted to sending letters higher up the organisation. This did the trick. E R Dring Tadworth, Surrey SIR – Yesterday morning I received an email from HMRC (having opted out of receiving post) telling me that there was a new message in my account. I duly logged in. The message informed me that I would receive a statement – in four days' time. What was the point of this? Clare Morgan Alderley Edge, Cheshire SIR – Following the news that a phishing scam led to the loss of £49 million, a spokesman for HMRC blithely declared: 'Our customers suffered no financial loss.' This reflects the myopic thinking of the Civil Service. Of course customers suffered a loss: the money cannot now be spent on what it was collected for. Des Morgan Swindon, Wiltshire


Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Any pride women felt about Rachel Reeves being the first female Chancellor has been flushed down the U-bend of spend, spend, spend
Labour has always had a woman problem and now it has the woman problem to end them all. Quite how Rachel Reeves has risen through their muppet-rich ranks without trace – to be fair, she did lie on her CV – and became Chancellor of the Exchequer is one of the mysteries of the age. Yet here she is, this mistress of mediocrity, wrecking the economy without a care in the world. Armed with only her boxy separates, freshly ironed fringe and a faint grasp of economics, Rachel from Accounts marches ever onwards in her mission to improve life for the 'ordinary working people' in this country. Whomsoever they might be. It is certainly not me. Is it you?


Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Brooklyn Beckham plugs his hot sauce brand amid trademark dispute with Beck's beer as he attempts to expand business
Brooklyn Beckham has promoted his hot sauce brand amid reports he is embroiled in a trademark dispute. The son of Victoria and David Beckham, 26, announced the launch of his new hot sauce brand Cloud23, available exclusively at Whole Foods shops in the UK, back in October. It was then revealed in January that Brooklyn had planned to expand his hot sauce company and applied to trademark 'Becks Buns '. However, Brooklyn has been dealt a blow after The Sun reported that Beck's beer, owned by Brauerei Beck & Co, has challenged it. While he contemplates his next steps, Brooklyn has publicly backed his wider brand despite the setback. From A-list scandals and red carpet mishaps to exclusive pictures and viral moments, subscribe to the DailyMail's new Showbiz newsletter to stay in the loop. Brooklyn took to his official Instagram account to share a snap of the hot sauce to his 16million followers. The entrepreneur held a bottle Cloud23 over a stainless steel table full of food. Brooklyn tagged Hunter Moreno in the story, who is a well-known creative director, having worked with big brands such as Prime drinks. Since launching the brand, Brooklyn has regularly used his gigantic social following to plug his sauce. A source told The Sun the parent firm of Beck's beer has opposed his Becks Buns trademark and has been granted a one-month extension to file documents relating to their challenge. It comes as Brooklyn and his wife Nicola Peltz, 30, have been engulfed in an escalating family rift, with parents David and Victoria believed to be concerned about the influence the billionaire heiress has over their eldest son. A source told The Sun: 'It's one thing after another for Brooklyn. 'First his row with his dad blows up — and now he's got another Beck's looking like it's going to become a bit of a headache.' Cloud 23, named after the No.23 jersey his father wore at Real Madrid and LA Galaxy, comes in two variants – Sweet Jalapeno and Hot Habanero. Elsewhere on Wednesday, Brooklyn appeared to debut a new tattoo as he shared a shirtless snap - which also seemed to show him with cupping marks. Cupping is loved by celebrities and is a therapeutic technique that uses a vacuum force applied onto the skin's surface. It is thought to stimulate healing as it encourages extra blood flow. Cruz seemed to show he is open to reconciling with his brother Brooklyn amid their ongoing devastating family feud. The youngest of the Beckham brothers, 20, took to Instagram on Wednesday as he shared a black and white photo of Victoria holding a baby Harper on the sofa as Brooklyn, Romeo and Cruz all nestled in. The musician left the adorable childhood snap uncaptioned, as he seemed to suggest he hasn't turned his back on his eldest brother. However on Wednesday it was revealed that Brooklyn has reportedly ' told his famous family that he wants no contact' with them in the latest devastating turn of their ongoing feud. While a source close to Brooklyn denied the claims, a source told Page Six: 'Brooklyn told his family he wants no contact and he's not responding to those that try to connect.' According to the publication, the eldest Beckham boy has had no communication with his family following father David's knighthood being announced last week and only learned of the news in the media alongside the rest of the world. Denying he'd asked for no contact, a source close to Brooklyn told the publication: 'Everyone's focus should be David Beckham 's great honour'. Meanwhile a source close to Brooklyn also denied the claims as they told MailOnline, 'this seems to be another deliberate attempt to misrepresent the truth, and it only serves to distract from this honour being bestowed on Brooklyn's father.'