Around this time last year we published a blog on REP018, discussing the reporting obligation and who had to submit. Just to recap, REP018 is the name the FCA has given to the reporting return for the operational and security risk assessment that all payment service providers (PSPs) must submit to their regulator at least once a year, or more often as the regulator directs. Most other regulators, including the Central Bank of Ireland, simply refer to the return as the ‘operational and security risk assessment.’
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is taking every opportunity to warn payment and e-money institutions over “unacceptable” practices in safeguarding client funds, as well as around risk governance and financial management.
As of today, credit institutions, MiFID investment firms, e-money institutions and payment institutions must maintain a register of outsourcing agreements that can be made available to the FCA on request and new arrangements must meet the European Banking Authority (‘EBA’) Guidelines. Existing arrangements must be made compliant by the end of 2020.
Firing off an email to the wrong recipient can be embarrassing however sending funds to the wrong beneficiary is not only negligent but can also be costly. With £350 million worth of payments misdirected in 2018 alone and £145 million each year going unrecovered; the benefit of implementing a system to check the name on the account as a way of decreasing the volume is clear.
What are you doing to protect your customers from authorised push payment (APP) scams? That is a question payment service providers (PSPs), including payment and e-money institutions, will have to answer following regulatory intervention in the UK to force the industry to tackle the problem following Which?’s supercomplaint in 2017.
fscom’s Director, Alison Donnelly, who was recently appointed as the European Women in Payments Network (EWPN) Ambassador for Ireland, will be hosting the event at the offices of FPAI.
With only four months to go to the final PSD2 implementation date of 14 September 2019, all payment service providers must make sure they are urgently progressing plans to meet the additional regulatory obligations or to confirm that their obligations are met.
Safeguarding is both a simple and important concept. Every payment and e-money institution that I have ever worked with wants to protect their customers’ funds and make sure that, if the worst came to the worst and they became insolvent, either their customers’ payment instruction would be fulfilled or they would have their funds returned to them.
In my previous blogs I have given you the basics of strong customer authentication (SCA) and explained how the exemptions could be used to minimise the disruption experienced by payment service users when making payments or accessing transaction information. In this blog, I will take a closer look at the details of the SCA obligations and explain why it’s not as simple as the much-mentioned two-factor authentication (2FA).