As per your previous post and suggestion, curve is the one that can make the decision on whether or not to dispute based on the wrong MCC.
As per my explanation, yes I do believe curve is to blame for this. One thing is for the merchant to have the wrong MCC and another thing is what curve does about it on a transaction given the fact that my curve fronted is disabled & common sense. This is the type of transaction that should have been declined based on the reasoning provided above.
Curve is just a middle man here. If you really want to dispute the cash advance fee I think you have a better chance contacting the issuer of the underlying card. Given that the charge was only for €1, I’d say you have a good chance they’ll refund you the cash advance fee as a gesture of good will if you explain the situation to them.
An MCC code exists. Postal services in Poland probably think they can opt to process transactions as a cash advance to avoid merchant fees and not worry about the payment card processing risk. This is wrong though…
MCC 9402—Postal Services—Government Only
The description of each MCC includes the TCC(s) that are valid for that MCC. Only a valid
combination of MCC and TCC may be used in a transaction.
TCC R for face-to-face transactions.
T for non–face-to-face transactions.
MCC Description Government postal offices, including local post office branches. Services
provided include accepting and processing packages and mail for delivery,
selling postage stamps, and express mailing services.
I’d like to have the ability to configure merchant category based rules. That way I could make a rule to charge 4895 automatically to an underlying debit card to avoid cash advance fees, in addition to routing certain MCCs to the credit card that earns the highest rewards for that category. There’s already a thread about that idea:
Some Polish banks treat credit card transactions at the post office as a cash withdrawal and have its clearly on their T&C.
Post office in Poland use MCC 4829.
A long time ago at the post office in PL it was not possible to pay by card at all.
The only service that was available is cash withdrawal from POS at some post offices and probably therefore, despite the introduction of card payments, everything is attributed to the above MCC.
Anyways, this topic just proves that snail mail is a thing of the past and even if you try to still use it just for fun, your postcard might get lost & never arrive to the destination or the postal services will charge you as a cash advance
Moving forward, I would like curve to set a reasonable minimum of €50 / €100 for cash advance type of transactions & that the card pin is always required for them. Ideally, I would like the curve fronted feature to include all kinds of cash advance MCCs and that users can prevent them from happening as it exists now.
What happened in my case should be used for improving the service and hopefully instigate critical thinking that a €1 cash advance is a mistake on the user’s part and should not be allowed.
Ok, but my experience is different. …but thanks to curve I don’t care if it’s cash advance, they can put whatever mcc they won’t. All my bank transactions on my statement that where via curve are online transactions even atm ones.
From a practical point of view. Did you try to use GBiT and put the purchase on an underlying Debit card or Prepaid Card (eg Revolut), thus not paying a cash advance fee and maybe getting the cash advance fee refunded from the underlying Credit Card that was originally used.
Don’t forget that it’s not simply that Curve passes on all MCCs - Curve can and will choose to change MCCs that fit their business purpose, without your prior knowledge or consent. This is a known issue raised in other threads mostly from an underlying card points-maximizing perspective, but is germane to this conversation, too.
This is a very plausible explanation. However, I believe that MasterCard and Visa should prohibit this practice.
Buying stamps is no different from buying an advance credit of any other monetary value for a service, e.g. a mobile phone top-up or topping up a road toll account. Postage is a service. Should a transaction to buy stamps be treated any differently from a transaction to send a parcel immediately from the post office? The latter is clearly payment for a specific service (just like paying DHL or UPS etc), not purchase of pseudo-currency, and I would argue that the former is not materially different from the latter.
Merchants that inappropriately use a cash MCC in order to avoid or reduce transaction fees are disingenuous, whether they are a national post office or an independent business.