They have the problem right now - all these different franchise, devices, etc. Every time a new one comes along, it seems like someone submits an update request and Monzo, in some cases, sets the name and adds a logo. As the OP pointed out, this leads to the same merchant having different names and logos. Linking any new reports to an existing merchant (if available) instead of setting up a new one seems like common sense to me.
It just sounds like a lot more work than the current system (to establish a waterfall or hierarchy) - especially if the terminals arenāt set up by the company correctly (I remember a thread on here where the terminal was named something completely different to the vendor).
The issue arises surely, with separate maps/locations and franchises/ sub-divisions - unless you forgo location (and just tie it via geo-tagging) and use the same name and logo as an incumbent merchant, like you say.
Quite frankly I imagine Monzo have decided that them paying to manually clear up the data isnāt really worth it at this point in time, especially considering that its the merchantās fault and it seems likely that the data will likely clear itself up in a few years.
Crowdsourcing the data can work but itās often pretty intermittent and needs just as much manual intervention as doing it yourself. On top of that it adds a pretty substantial vector for fraud.
I think one might be Uber Pool - there definitely used to be a different merchant profile for Uber Pool.
Either way Uber is Uber
There are 2 for Amex as well
Both should definitely be the same merchant profile āUberā. Just pointing out why there might be different profiles.
well this thread opened a can of worms 
Nope, only ever used Uber X in Leeds, exact same starting/ending spot, same payment strategy, etc.
1 Like
What I meant was Uber is Uber and Monzo should fix it instead of ignoring it for years like they have done.
This topic was automatically closed 180 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.