The Netherlands is of course an odd case, in that they assume all debit cards are Maestro cards, and depending where you are, you can be a bit stuck if Visa or MasterCard is all you have.
There is this weird assumption in the Netherlands that Visa/MC can only ever be a credit card, the concept of both of those being debit cards is alien in a lot of places there.
I just paid my AMEX bill with a Visa Debit card instead of Mastercard for the first time in a while - Amex balance didn’t reduce straight away like normal (avaliable credit did) - difference in processing?
I have been paying my Amex bill with Visa debit for the last year or so and it always happens pretty instantly. The payment certainly appears by the time I reload my feed
Perhaps it’s just as I’ve used a new card. Who knows.
What’s equally bizarre is that the balance shows correctly in a linked app, and not on the Amex app! Go figure!
Assuming this is Adrian Flux who are an insurance company, they absolutely do accept Mastercard (I’ve paid with Monzo) so that’s another one debunked that we can cross of the list.
It matters to me in that both Visa and Mastercard have their own version of Visa’s VAU meaning if you receive a new card (with Barclays even Lost cards according to a Chat), the merchants are informed of your new details.
Now… you can turn this off within Monzo, which is MC. With Barclays there should be the facility to turn it off, although I’ve tried approaching the subject with a few agents who haven’t been able to.
This is bad, let’s say someone steals your card and registers for tons of CPAs, they are transferred to your new card. Or you get a free trial, can’t cancel it, and expect a new card would fix the issue.
Of course you may be able to resolve both via your bank BUT I’d much rather be able to take a preventative approach as opposed to reactive. Lastly I should as the Cardholder surely be able to opt out of a service I do not want, when other Visa based banks allow you to
Monzo its a quick 5 second thing (the process of disabling Mastercard’s version of this “feature” or hindrance if you’re with the kings of the blue gradient.
Any ideas?
If the card has been replaced due to a fraud-based reason, this service shouldn’t be used.
I think the people on Barclays chat may have misinformed you.
What if you’ve lost it? I’ve only asked over Twitter but they are UK based in Sunderland (mainly) and they do work shifts at Video from time to time so I’m sure they’d know.
They said it is a Visa thing and it’s on Visa, not them.
BUT other banks look to disabling it for their customer’s so surely there’s a method to do so.
Visa will automatically update card numbers as part of the process of ordering a replacement, but if replaced through fraud a flag is sent which tells the system “don’t auto-update these details”, effectively.
I believe that’s how it works.
There is some quite detailed technical information on the community about how Monzo’s Mastercard implementation works and I’m sure I remember reading from someone knowledgable at the time that Visa was very similar and never automatically updated the numbers of replaced defrauded cards.
Ugh… I could say I was defrauded but that would not be truthful.
There must be a way around it.
Any idea?
The process I described is meant to be used for any card which is lost, or stolen or defrauded.
Essentially, whenever the card number is compromised.
I would probably just call the lost/stolen number and report it as lost, tell them you haven’t seen any fraudulent charges on your account but you’re concerned the card number is compromised since you don’t know where the card is, and can they order a new card?
They should then trigger the correct process and I wouldn’t worry beyond that.
See I did have fraud on my account that prompted this paranoia. They just did a reissue.
A reissue of the same number?
That sounds like a complete mistake.
I would file a complaint, and go that route to a card replacement if necessary, explaining that you want a totally new card with new PAN (the long number on the front), validity dates and CVV (the three digit number on the back).
Reissue meaning the option to get a new card but not specified lost or stolen. It’s essentially showing up as if I just fancied one.
This means logically VAU is still on there.
Chat alluded that even if I say it is lost, it’ll have VAU, and they’d be reactive. Which isn’t proactive 
I think they would likely only forgo VAU if it was stolen… Which it hasn’t been.
What would the complaint be specifically? I don’t really want to get anyone in a hole as they are cordial enough and humans, not robotic like at Santander when I had issues with them, that FOS ruled in my favour over.
If the details are all different they probably didn’t auto-update.
Otherwise, they would have done a “reissue” (used when you report a card damaged but not compromised) which gives you a new physical card with all the same details printed on it, although usually a new 3 digit security code on the back.
With VAU the whole premise is the new PAN is given to any merchants.
That’s why I am saying - a new PAN is expensive for banks, as Visa or Mastercard charge them for every one.
They therefore don’t order a new one unless it is needed.
If you have a new PAN then it is most likely the case that they deliberately requested a style of card replacement which doesn’t update the system. The main use of this feature is for naturally expiring cards. I wouldn’t worry.
I am still uncertain as they confirmed the opposite and I have reissued myself and its been different PAN. With 5 banks I’ve never had the same PAN.
Over the years I have had the same PAN at many banks, for years at a time.