Payzones New Contract Payzones New Contract FACTUAL INFORMATION - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Payzone’s New Contract

Payzone’s New Contract FACTUAL INFORMATION PAYZONE RETAILERS NEED TO BE AWARE OF: The basis of our communication with Payzone has been regarding the new T&C for the new tablet installation. The new Payzone Contract represents a substantial and fundamental change from existing arrangements. We therefore respectfully asked Payzone to consider the following: a. Before being asked to sign, for retailers to be given a reasonable period of notice to consider the new contract and seek advice regarding the impact to their business. b. To terminate the contract without penalty as an alternative to signing the new contract, if they consider that the new arrangements are no longer suitable for their business. c. To reconsider the implementation date of 4 August 2017, which is insuffjcient notice for retailers to consult on the new contract.

Questions and Observations Posed to Payzone A. In order for retailers to understand the positives of moving towards advanced technology, we would like for Payzone, if possible, to provide the following: 1. In a table format, to outline the current charges retailers presently pay weekly (ie PCI DSS, line rental, terminal service, credit/debit charge charges, stationery costs, etc.) 2. On the same table, to outline the full proposed costs, taking into account and including the need for retailers to have the use of broadband facilities, PCIDSS, credit and debit card facilities, as well as any other possible costs associated with providing this service. 3. For the 99p/pw, low usage and non-usage charges to be presented in the table, in order for retailers to have a clear and transparent understanding of the true costs. 4. Considering the Credit Card Acceptance Agreement is separate, to outline the costs retailers should expect in the case they have the cr/fr linked to Payzone. 5. Are retailers expected, as part of the T&C, to be linked in with your merchant for credit and debit card facilities? Is it mandatory? 6. Retailers have informed us that they do not understand the current invoice as it does not breakdown the charges. We are calling for this to be resolved moving forward.

Questions and Observations Posed to Payzone B. When a new contract is being imposed, there is normally a legal right for retailers to terminate their current contract without any termination costs. Is this option available for retailers? Clause 2.3, Clause 18 of the T & Cs appears to be entirely one-sided and fails to include any provision for the retailer to terminate the contract, without penalty, in the event of a substantial change. As written, this appears to be an Unfair Contract term and, arguably, challengeable. We therefore urge your reconsideration.

NFRN Raised Concern over the Following Clauses and Awaits Payzone’s Response The NFRN is very concerned with the following clauses and seeks Payzone’s comment or reconsideration the following: Clause 4.2 The NFRN considers that clause 4.2 is both unnecessary and unreasonable in expecting retailers to accept installation of new equipment without notice. Clause 6.3 Whilst the NFRN accepts that, over time, there may be variations to the Products and Services provided by Payzone, we urge Payzone to accept that the withdrawal of a major service may well tip the balance in relation to the continuing profjtability of the service provided by retailers. In such circumstances, where retailers can demonstrate that the removal of a product or service has rendered the agreement unprofjtable, Payzone should agree that retailers can terminate the contract, without fjnancial penalty, at the date of removal of said service.

NFRN Raised Concern over the Following Clauses and Awaits Payzone’s Response The NFRN is very concerned with the following clauses and seeks Payzone’s comment or reconsideration the following: Clause 7.1.2 Is there a cost for consumables? Has Payzone resolved the duplication of receipts? Clause 7.1.3 As a fundamental principle, we ask Payzone to accept that retailers have a right to make a profjt from all transactions. We therefore urge Payzone to agree that, taking into account the “cost to serve” (including charges for credit transactions), retailers have a right to apply a reasonable surcharge on Products or Services where otherwise the transaction would be loss making. Clause 7.4.2 Please outline the charges? Clause 7.5 “Retailers are liable to pay the cash value of any mobile top up mistake”. We are concerned there is no facility to refund errors made by retail personnel and request that this clause is reconsidered.

NFRN Raised Concern over the Following Clauses and Awaits Payzone’s Response The NFRN is very concerned with the following clauses and seeks Payzone’s comment or reconsideration the following: Clause 8.3 Payzone may wish to reconsider the need for this clause. The defjnition of “appropriate” and “prominent” is very subjective. Retailers owning their own businesses will, of course, use appropriate display space to advertise products and services giving prominence proportionate to their importance to their business. Clause 8.4.1 What are the full costs? Clause 9.1.4 Are there security codes for this due to scam alerts that happen? Clause 10.1 The equipment is not the retailer’s, but the risk of loss, theft, and damage is the retailer’s, and it should be covered for not less than £650. Does this equipment need to be named in the shop insurance policy?

NFRN Raised Concern over the Following Clauses and Awaits Payzone’s Response The NFRN is very concerned with the following clauses and seeks Payzone’s comment or reconsideration the following: Clause 11.4 With respect to a Payzone representative accessing the retail site without prior notice – do you believe that it is reasonable to expect the retailer to be on site for a “without prior notice” visit? Please can rewording be considered? Clause 11.6 Is there an SLA for repairs and what are the charges involved? Clause 13.1.1 What are the new charges? Is it just 99p, plus “low usage below 40 transactions per week” or “non usage charge” and what are the old charges in comparison? Clause 13.3 Is this for failed DD – We note the charge in sundry as £95.00 plus DD resubmission charge of £10 – is this correct and is there any other charges for same?

NFRN Raised Concern over the Following Clauses and Awaits Payzone’s Response The NFRN is very concerned with the following clauses and seeks Payzone’s comment or reconsideration the following: Clause 13.12 What is the non payment charge? Clause 13.14.1 Are these costs published annually? Clause 17 £250,000 aggregate insurance cover should Payzone have an issue. Please can you confjrm what reason you believe Payzone require this cover from a retailer in terms of the Payzone facility? Clause 17.1.2 Please explain the £1,000 breakdown.

NFRN Raised Concern over the Following Clauses and Awaits Payzone’s Response The NFRN is very concerned with the following clauses and seeks Payzone’s comment or reconsideration the following: Clause 18.4.7 A failed test purchase is a criminal ofgence. If a retailer is taken to a civil court due to defending themselves with respect to a shop lifter – could end up with a criminal ofgence. Does this example mean the retailer could lose his Payzone terminal? Moreover, if any of their stafg have a criminal ofgence for personal issues, they could also lose the Payzone terminal. Please can you advise or reconsider this clause? Clause 19.3 As per clause 18.4.2, 18.4.3, 18.4.5, 18.4.6, 18.4.7 – what are the fees? Clause 20.1 The NFRN are concerned with this clause on the basis that personal data pertaining to stafg should not be held by Payzone – please explain what personal data means concerning employees. Whilst the NFRN understands the legitimate need for Payzone to hold relevant personal information necessary for the conduct of the contract, we believe that Clause 20 goes too far in its disclosure of personal data to third parties, potentially violating the basic principles of Data Protection legislation. We urge you to fundamentally reconsider this clause with a view to limiting the exchange of personal information to the minimum necessary for the conduct of the contract.

NFRN Raised Concern over the Following Clauses and Awaits Payzone’s Response The NFRN is very concerned with the following clauses and seeks Payzone’s comment or reconsideration the following: Clause 20.2 Retailers would be in breach of data protection to disclose personal data of their stafg. Please can you disclose what this means as well as provide assurance that in complying with this clause retailers are not exposed to a possible complaint from stafg under the Data Protection Act. Clause 20.3 Personal Data should not be disclosed on employees by the retailer to Payzone. Payzone should not disclose the personal data they hold on the retailer to other suppliers/creditors/third parties etc. Clause 20.4 We appreciate Payzone is linked to Barclay for cr/dr card acceptance payment but who else is Payzone disclosing such information too? Clause 20.5 Similar to 20.3 – we are concerned about personal data regarding stafg.