Mastercard and Worldpay Join Forces to Combat Global Payment Fraud

Chargebacks may sound like a technical term, but they’re actually a creation of the industry, not a government mandate. They stem from the rules set by card schemes rather than statutory regulations. So, what exactly are they?

Think of chargebacks as a safety net for cardholders. If, for instance, they didn’t receive the goods they paid for, if those goods turn out to be fraudulent, or if they were double charged, they can ask their card issuer for a refund. It’s like having an extra layer of protection beyond your usual consumer rights.

Now, here’s where it gets a bit tricky, especially with the rise of fintech companies. As these new players embed themselves into transaction flows, the application of chargeback rights becomes more complex. For example, some fintech propositions alter card payments in a way that customers lose their chargeback rights. This raises important questions:

Is the fintech’s proposition really aligned with what customers need?

Are customers still getting enough benefits from the product even if they lose chargeback protections?

Are customers fully aware of what protections they have?

Will the product still work as expected without chargeback protection?

But wait, there’s more. Who’s actually responsible for chargebacks? Depending on how a fintech integrates into payment flows, they might end up being held liable for chargebacks or have them deducted from their accounts. This adds another layer of complexity for these companies to navigate.

As fintechs navigate these waters, they need to keep a few things in mind. They must understand the implications of chargeback rights on consumer rights and ensure their propositions are clear and fair to customers. Additionally, they need to figure out how to balance their fees with providing fair value to their customers. After all, the last thing they want is to face regulatory liability or assume undue risk for chargebacks. It’s all about carefully structuring their offerings and staying vigilant as they evolve.

The world of commerce is undergoing a digital revolution, with consumers increasingly turning to online platforms for their purchases. However, this shift presents a growing challenge: the rise of chargebacks. These occur when a customer disputes a transaction on their account, potentially leading to financial losses for merchants and a frustrating experience for everyone involved.

Mastercard and Worldpay, two industry giants, are stepping up to address this issue through a groundbreaking partnership. By integrating Mastercard’s Ethoca Alerts into Worldpay’s services for over 1 million merchants worldwide, they aim to streamline the resolution of disputes and significantly reduce chargebacks.

Ethoca Alerts acts as an early warning system, offering real-time insights that empower merchants to identify and prevent potential problems before they escalate into costly chargebacks. This innovative solution works across all payment brands, seamlessly integrating with existing merchant infrastructure. This translates to smoother transaction processing for the massive $2.3 trillion in annual transactions facilitated by Worldpay.

Security and trust are paramount in today’s thriving e-commerce landscape. Johan Gerber, Executive Vice President of Cyber and Intelligence at Mastercard, emphasizes this by highlighting the partnership’s mission to bolster global digital economies. By curbing fraud and fostering trust among all parties involved – consumers, merchants, and financial institutions – the collaboration strengthens the foundations of secure online transactions.

Echoing this sentiment, Gabriel de Montessus, Executive Vice President of Global Enterprise at Worldpay, expresses his enthusiasm for the partnership. Their focus lies on delivering innovative solutions that enhance accessibility, flexibility, and security for their clients. This translates to robust protection for both consumers and merchants, fostering a thriving and secure commercial environment.

While advancements have been made in fraud prevention, challenges remain. First-party fraud disputes, where consumers initiate chargebacks due to difficulties with cancellations or refunds, are a persistent concern. A study by Chargebacks911 underscores this point, highlighting the booming subscription-based e-commerce market that already surpasses $100 billion annually. Consumers appreciate the convenience of subscriptions and free trials, but streamlined cancellation processes are crucial. This has led to banks playing a more active role in dispute resolution, ensuring consumer protection and minimizing chargebacks.

The payments landscape is constantly changing, with consumers embracing an ever-wider array of payment methods. While credit cards maintain their dominance, digital wallets and peer-to-peer payment apps are rapidly gaining traction, especially among younger demographics. Recognizing this shift, merchants are adapting by diversifying their payment options and embracing innovative solutions like buy now, pay later (BNPL) schemes. These developments aim to cater to evolving consumer preferences and create a seamless shopping experience.

Fraud mitigation and consumer trust are inherently linked. Proactive fraud alerts and efficient dispute resolution mechanisms, provided by banks, play a critical role in safeguarding consumers’ financial interests. When consumers trust the institutions handling their money, they are more likely to embrace digital transactions with confidence. This reinforces the vital role banks play in the fight against fraud and in ensuring secure financial interactions.

As we look towards the future, collaboration between industry leaders like Mastercard and Worldpay will be crucial to navigating the ever-evolving payments landscape. By leveraging cutting-edge technologies and fostering trust among all stakeholders, this partnership sets a new standard for security, efficiency, and growth in the digital era. With innovation at the forefront, the future of payments promises to be smoother, safer, and more accessible for everyone involved.

Disclaimer

Please note that the information provided in this article does not constitute legal or financial advice, and merchants are advised to consult with a professional financial adviser or lawyer for guidance; additionally, some of the points raised may pertain to England and Wales only.

london, willis building, reflection-3529954.jpg

This Article is brought to you by

Loopline Media

Catch up with the Author

Post-Brexit: data protection
Card processor sends sensitive data to wrong address
24 August 2022

Worldline SA subsidiary Payone GmbH has been accused of breaching data protection rules after it sent sensitive employee payroll information to the wrong address by accident. The Worldline Group holdS a 60% stake in the Frankfurt based company who have a small UK market presence.

In June 2021, one of Payone GmbH’s ex UK employees (the data subject) received a “potential data breach notification” from the firm advising him that his salary, National Insurance data, nationality (Special Category Data) was amongst various bits of information sent to an incorrect home address.

This included personal information such as the former employees name, age and address.  It also included details such as the date of birth and the amount of annual work bonus he received in his bank account amongst other identifiable data.

Payone GmbH confirmed that this document was sent out in error following an employee making a mistake when re-entering data processed by their third-party payroll provider.  The error arose when the employee was fulfilling an Article 15 GDPR request. The error was spotted by the data subject when he noticed in an email version of the document that the postal address was incorrect. An attempt to notify Payone GmbH of the error went in vain as the document was already irretrievably despatched.

The data subject was alarmed with the incident which exposed him to the possibility of fraudulent activity, amidst reasonable fears his data could end up on the dark web and used by criminals.  Habitually resident in the UK he complained to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) in June 2021. He similarly raised the concern in Germany via The Hessian Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information (HBDI).

The ICO reprimanded Payone GmbH for the error in their final decision letter.
Similarly, the HBDI cited a violation of Article 5(f) of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) relating to integrity and confidentiality.

The ICO stated in their July 2021 findings that Payone GmbH, “should take steps to ensure that all personal data records are accurate and up to date. Holding inaccurate information, such as addresses, does increase the risk of personal data breaches and poses risks to the security of information”.

The HBDI confirmed in their October 2021 findings that Payone GmbH had taken remedial action. They concluded that a monetary fine would not be imposed on Payone GmbH as they had taken technical and organisational steps in response to the data breach. Data subjects could now request their data in an autonomous portal.

The GDPR, which came into effect in 2018, gave the Information Commissioner’s Office greater powers to tackle data breaches. The new ‘UK GDPR’ charts its own course after Brexit whilst seeking to maintain EU GDPR adequacy.  In extreme scenarios, organisations face penalties of up to £20m or 4 per cent of their global worldwide turnover, whichever is more.

In the years prior to GDPR, the ICO fines were capped at £500,000.

The data subject said: “I am just glad I spotted it; they were going to resend the document again to another wrong address. Prior to Brexit the process would have been commenced via the ICO who in turn would liaise with the HBDI on the data subjects’ behalf; but I found myself communicating with both authorities separately which was an additional step but in the end was surprisingly
effective. Unfortunately, Payone GmbH again sent my incorrect address to the
Workers Pension Trust in January 2022, and documents yet again went to the wrong address. In my opinion they have not learned from the first time and my complaint is sitting with the ICO yet again”.

The former employee is pursuing a remedy under Article 82 UK GDPR via
the Court’s of England & Wales.

Extraordinary Experiences

Click edit button to change this text. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.

Click edit button to change this text. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Our Core Values

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

We use cookies to improve user experience and analyse website traffic. By clicking ‘Accept’, you agree to our website’s cookie use as described in our Privacy Policy.