NowTV are super sneaky with their recurring payment meaning it doesn’t get predicted. They use a different company name each month. Can you twart that one?
1 Like
Hi Dave, welcome to the community 
Just had a look at my own and not too sure what you mean, with Now TV being a card payment rather than a direct debit you have to mark it was a repeat payment yourself.
Just checked mine and it’s working fine?
Edit: I see what you mean now, but marking one as recurring should still work?
They use the same company for me but charge in 3 different charges over 3 days, so it completely throws the prediction.
1 Like
Yeah, I have a standard bill and then a separate payment for the Boost (which I think is a con but we won’t go into that) but if you go onto the one for the main bill and look at the bottom, the actual merchant ID is different each time
2 Likes
I’m not sure how using a different merchant each time (if true) makes them sneaky. It might make it less convenient for users of a small number of banks who can mark them as recurring - that isn’t the same as sneaky.
Now vary a portion of the full/original transaction name each month. For example one month you might see “Now X7012 Sports” and the next month you might see “Now F613d Sports”. I have no idea why they do this, but this might be what the @Brindle321 is referring to.
I don’t use Monzo for my Now subscrptions so I don’t now how this is handled in Monzo, but if this what is causing issues with predictions it is within Monzo’s power to fix.
In Emma (aggregator) the variable central code gets ignored so my Now transactions appear with the following names: Now TV Sports, Now TV Cinema, Now TV Entertainment, Now TV Boost. The recurring predictions work properly for each of these.
2 Likes
Mine show as skulyunlimited and now TV. When I go into the number of payments to that merchant they show as 1.
It was skyunlimite [E0, B1, …] Prior to March.
Since march it shows as
Now [xxxxx] cine or Now [xxxxx] ents
I’m sure I’ve tried to predict this recurrent payment. But it doesn’t account for it being paid as it has a different merchant name.
Sneaky is the only reason I could think of them doing it.
My thought process was so they prevent predictions or aggregations using the same merchant id in some aggregators. Therefore being less likely to get the cull when people are trying to manage their money.
Just a Sky sceptic. 
Cancel Boost then
No