Pay at Pump Card Decline - 2


I am frankly appalled that Starling’s @Megan_Caywood just closed the other thread about Pay at the Pump declines. Is it now Starling’s policy that you simply shut down debate when feedback is less than favourable. How thin-skinned.

My experiences of Starling to date have been fantastic… but arbitrary PatP declines are annoying (and do not afflict your competitors) and seeking to silence customers is underhand, arrogant and stinks.

If the merchants are not following MasterCard rules… then its a matter between MasterCard and the Merchant.

I want a bank account that works universally. If NatWest, Santander, Nationwide, et al cards work… Then Starling cards damn-well should.

Please escalate this matter to somebody as a complaint over a rather shoddy area of your service.


My only concern was that i got the blame for it… :see_no_evil:


You must be used to taking the blame for things! :joy:

Back to the original point - I don’t have a problem with threads getting closed if they end up confusing more than helping customers.

But I didn’t find Meghans response particularly helpful.

Further, as Sarah stated, we have applied an additional layer of pre-authorisation amounts too in order to reduce the number of card disputes and the situation where customers have gone into unauthorised overdrafts.

That part only to be honest - Seeing as some people had claimed it was declined, with more than £100 in their account - It would be useful to know what these “addition layers of pre-autorisation” are.


I’ve sent Megan a message.

More than anything. I’d (personally) like some reasoning provided for why some customers can fill up with a £1 pre-auth and some can’t. There are screenshots proving this has happened. And anecdotal information from users claiming to have a lot more than £100 available.

£1 pre-auths are either allowed or they aren’t. What I am reading from Starling suggest that they aren’t. But what I’m seeing from other customers is that sometimes, they are.

This point in the topic was completely ignored, as other points. Like the one you mention above me @nickhoward.


Not exactly hard to see what happened, Starling don’t wish to change how they manage pay at pump, so close the thread expecting everyone to shut up about it.

Hardly transparent and open.

I’ve noticed Starling are closing more and more threads if there is any criticism or complaints about things.

A good saying is all publicity is good publicity, even bad publicity. If it gets people talking its never a bad thing.


I’m not sure if it’s an accident or on purpose, but the whole point that i said on the other thread is that repeating sentences like that mean absolutely nothing to most of us as customers, we’ve no idea what that actually means. Perhaps it’s lost in translation, but the point was that i didn’t understand it when Sarah said it, repeating it doesnt make it clearer.


100% agree, I laughed when I read the post as I couldn’t believe that anyone could think that was an acceptable response to customers unable to use their cards… Unprofessional is an understatement!


@StarlingSupport - Time somebody took this serious. Shutting down people who voice concern about a process is just dumb.

If you’re not going to make your cards do what everyone else’s card can then own your (bad) decision.

If there’s talks going on in the background, then enlightne us - we might be more understanding.

Quit it with the platitudes and the heavy-handed ‘taking ball home’ approach.


I’m sure someone will correct me - But isn’t this down to the merchant? Not Starling?

It seems the issue only affects those who authorise the £100, but then Starling’s “extra authorisation” can cause it to cancel.

As @l8n_me said, I don’t understand the statement about “extra authorisation”, which is the only bit I personally would like to be cleared up.


Whether to post a £1 or £99 pre-auth is down to the retailer. Yes.

But Starling have alluded to not accepting a non-compliant transaction (the ones which are £1), which is why some people are being declined even if they have £100+ in their account. Because the retailer is not complying and Starling are saying “no” to the transaction. Hence the decline messages. (Which makes total sense.)

But some customers CAN fill up with a £1 pre-auth. Which is non-compliant. This is the point that I’d like more clarification on.

Essentially, the evidence we have suggests that even if you do have £100, or more in some cases. Some customers can fill up with a £1 pre-auth and some can’t. It’s as if the extra processes Starling have brought in are only applying to some customers and not all.

I hope it makes sense?


That makes sense - I didn’t follow the whole thread before.

Have there been instances where the £100 pre auth is in effect, but the customer (who has over £100 in the account), still gets declined?

Would the customer even know this?

Either way, whilst I appreciate Starling responding, I don’t think they have covered all of the issues at hand - Locking the thread was a little premature.


They closed it because there’s nothing to debate. They can’t allow what people here are asking for or they risk people going into overdrafts.

Plenty of other banks do the same thing at the moment. Starling doesn’t want unauthorised overdrafts.


lots of examples of Starling allowing £1 ones to go through.

Forum doesn't allow opening of post in new tab

You obviously have skimmed over the posts from people with over £100 that have had their transaction stopped by Starling. So not sure what your reasoning is for not answering the questions from those customers.


Yeah I know that.

What about ones that “look” completely fine.

£100 pre auth, over £100 in the bank, but still declined?

This would indicate that Starling’s “extra levels of authorisation” are at play - The only problem is… No one knows what level of authorisation it is.


Isn’t that the point, the decision to refuse pay at pump transactions is Starling not Mastercard, which personally I have no issue with, I just think they should be honest and admit that, rather than some excuse it’s because of Mastercard rules. A card from most other banks will work when Starling reject the transaction.


I was also taken by surprise when the thread was closed. The answers provided didn’t satisfy my questions either.

I don’t need a Nanny Bank looking after me. I’m a grown man and can decide if I want to have a transaction go through, even if that puts me in to an overdraft, either agreed or unauthorised. I’ll happily pay the price for my decisions.

So we’re supposed to carry a spare card abroad as we can’t get replacements sent out, now we’re suppose to carry a spare card because we can’t pay for fuel in unmanned stations… I’d have thought that the goal is getting Starling customers to close their other accounts and using the Starling as the primary (and only) account, no?


Respectfully, I disagree. It’s arrogant and weak to close off a particular avenue of discussion because you don’t like your customers opinions on how the service should work.

As discussed, other banks can manage these transactions - if this is a matter of Starling refusing (not being unable) these transactions then they should discover a little honesty.

As it happens, because it seems to be pot luck at present, none of us have the faintest clue what’s going on.


I don’t understand why threads are being closed - it happened last night too. Threads are usually either closed because they are duplicates and have been merged with an existing thread, or because there has been no activity for 4 months. There was no reason to close that Pay@Pump thread.

If Starling are actively declining transactions when a customer has enough funds to cover it, that is completely wrong and beyond justification. I’m not aware of any other bank that does that. MasterCard’s rules that they set retailers is arguably nothing at all to do with the banks.

Before the recent attempt by MasterCard to increase the pre-auth from £1 to £99, it had worked that way for years and years. How much of a problem is it? At the end of the day, someone going into an overdraft - authorised or unauthorised - will be charged the appropriate fees and Starling will make a bit of additional revenue.


It may be because of duplicates. There are 9 threads specific to AFD transactions and 6 other threads on themes where AFD transactions are also discussed.