Banks slip on their own cards
From January 1, the Federal Law “On the National Payment System” will enter into force. The document has claims from the banking community. The project involves obliging banks to return to the client funds withdrawn from a bank card without notice. Bankers predict an increase in fraud, experts expect a rise in the use of non-cash.
The bill “On the national payment system” was developed by the Ministry of Finance and the Bank of Russia in September 2009. The national payment system should become a competitor to the international payment systems Visa and MasterCard in Russia. It has been suggested that the national system could be created on the basis of the URPS, the United Russian Payment System, launched in 2005 by the Central Bank. However, it, like other Russian systems, still occupies too small market shares. In addition, during the readings from the bill, a fundamental point disappeared, obliging the largest operators of the Banking system of the payment system to create processing centers in Russia.
From January next year, the norms of the law “On the National Payment System” should also come into force, according to which banks will be required to return all funds on all disputed transactions to their customers’ cards within 24 hours.
Now, in case of unauthorized write-offs of funds, the client must inform the bank about this no later than a day after receiving a notification of the transaction. After that, the bank begins to deal with the situation, which should refund the amount withdrawn without the consent of the client. At the same time, bankers can initiate an “investigation” of the circumstances of the withdrawal of funds and the period of reimbursement will be delayed indefinitely.
If the bill works in the current version with a mandatory refund within 24 hours, bankers predict an increase in the number of frauds. They suggest that a person can “independently withdraw money from the card and immediately write a complaint that he did not.” Or “give your plastic card to a third party: that person will withdraw funds from it in another city or country, and the card holder itself may make a complaint to the bank and demand a refund.”
Banks should not return the funds debited from the cards if the holders transferred the PIN code and the card to third parties and then applied to the bank for reimbursement, said Anatoly Aksakov, head of the Association of Regional Banks, in May.
Aksakov also proposed to prescribe in the law “On the National Payment System” the right of banks not to return funds that were debited from the cards due to the fault of their holders, and to bring such unscrupulous customers to administrative responsibility: “The bank should have the right to initiate proceedings.”
Meanwhile, Russian lawmakers in this area of regulating relations between banks and customers fully repeat European practice. Back in 2007, the European Commission adopted the Payment Services Directive, according to which the bank must return the money stolen from the client as a result of an online transaction, without waiting for the results of the investigation. At the same time, the level of bank card fraud in the EU is an order of magnitude higher than the Russian one. Nevertheless, banks are somehow managing the situation.
According to the president of the National Payment Council non-profit partnership Andrei Emelin, who is a member of the CBR working group, the new amendments suggest that a person who appeals against the legality of a transaction will have to prove that the bank did not notify him of the transaction. If the bank works efficiently and in good faith, it will be impossible to carry out the above frauds, the expert believes.
“We need to find a compromise and register it in the law: for example, if the transaction was completed by entering a PIN code or other personal data, then this is the customer’s fault – he was inattentive himself, for example, but if remotely using technical means, then the responsibility lies with to a bank means a security system is not working efficiently, ”Anatoly Aksakov softened his position.
Moreover, the preservation of the law on the terms of reimbursement of funds on the client’s card can lead to more expensive services, as banks will more actively use the services of insurers. Although card fraud is objectively exclusively a risk of the bank, credit organizations often choose not to insure the issuer, that is, their portfolio of cards at their own expense, but sell the insurance service to their cardholders.
Such insurance costs an average of one to three thousand rubles per year to the cardholder. If the issue of bank cards is insured, then depending on the history of losses and the volume of the portfolio, the amount can reach hundreds of thousands of dollars.