Post by moonraker on Mar 26, 2020 10:59:46 GMT
I've just had my experience of this new security requirement for electronic payments.
I had a vague feeling that its introduction was going to be deferred for a couple of months but today I had to pay a bill to a consultant ophthalmologist My first attempt resulted in the message "That's not a match", my second "That's a close match" and I got it right at the third attempt. One problem was that initially I omitted "Mr". When making the actual payment, I had to tick a new box confirming that I was sure that this wasn't a scam payment.
Next time I opt to receive payments from a new financial provider I'm going to check the precise name on my account. I think that I mentioned that last year a challenger bank jibbed because the annotation "EPA" appeared after my name, a throwback to when I had Enduring Power of Attorney for my father, who died in 2006. (This doesn't seem to have worried all the other banks with whom I've opened accounts since then.)
CoP is obviously desirable, but I can foresee lots more multi-attempts by others to get the details right.
BTW, I was with the consultant for ten minutes, during which he reassured me all was relatively well. His bill for a "New Consultation" was £240 and I mildly pointed out that I'd seen him ten years ago for the same condition. His secretary said that because there had been a lapse of more than two years it counted as a New Consultation but offered to reduce the bill to £200.
I have NO PROBLEMS about this amount. I was seen very quickly after an optician's referral and two days later the hospital was not giving appointments to over-70s. And I got welcome reassurance that would not otherwise have been forthcoming for many months.