There has been considerable discussion of late regarding cancellation
fees that are charged by ISOs and credit card processors upon the
termination of a merchant agreement. Below I will discuss the various
types of cancellation provisions and their impact on our industry.
What Is A Cancellation Provision?
The vast majority of Merchant Agreements contain a provision that
provides for the merchant to pay a cancellation fee if the Merchant
Agreement is terminated before the end of its term. The “term” of a
Merchant Agreement is the time period the contract will be in effect.
The industry standard term for Merchant Agreements is three years.
A typical cancellation situation occurs as follows: A merchant signs
up with a credit card processor under a Merchant Agreement that
provides for a three-year term. The merchant is then approached by a
sales agent that wishes to move the merchant to another credit card
processor, usually using the enticement of charging the merchant less
fees for processing credit cards. The merchant attempts to cancel its
existing Merchant Agreement with its current credit card processor
before the merchant has been with the credit card processor for three
years. However, the merchant is notified when it attempts to cancel
the Merchant Agreement that it is subject to a cancellation fee since
the merchant has not fulfilled its obligation to use the credit card
processor for the entire three years that it is obligated to do so
under the Merchant Agreement.
Types of Cancellation Fees.
There are three main types of cancellation fees that are prevalent in
the bankcard industry:
The first type of cancellation fee is the flat fee. The merchant is
charged a set amount for canceling the Merchant Agreement prior to the
end of the term, regardless of when the cancellation occurs.
Consequently, if the merchant cancels the Merchant Agreement one day
into the relationship or even 2 years and 11 months into a 3 year term.
The merchant pays the same amount as a cancellation fee. The most
common cancellation fee utilized in our industry is a flat fee of $295.
The second type of cancellation fee is a hybrid fee, that is calculated
by multiplying a fixed amount by the balance of the term left in the
Merchant Agreement. Agents and credit card processors will typically
choose a cancellation fee multiplier that is the sum of the monthly
minimum and statement fee payable every month by the merchant such as
$35. The $35 is multiplied by the remaining months left in the
merchant contract. For example, if a merchant cancels his Merchant
Agreement after two years where the Merchant Agreement has a three-year
term, there are 12 months left in the term of the Agreement. To
determine the cancellation fee, you multiply the 12 months remaining in
the Merchant Agreement by $35 to arrive at the total cancellation fee
of $410.
The third type of cancellation fee, and potentially the most
problematic, is based on lost profit to the credit card processor. The
Merchant Agreement provides that the credit card processor is entitled
to the monthly profit that it would have made from the merchant for the
balance of the term of the Agreement. For example, if the merchant
cancelled its Merchant Agreement with a year left on the term of the
Agreement, the credit card processor would be entitled to 12 times the
average monthly profit it would have derived from the merchant. This
includes all dues, assessments and other charges that the merchant may
have incurred in the first two years of the relationship on an average
monthly basis.
Problems With Cancellation Fees.
The main reason credit card processors have to charge these fees is to
dissuade merchants from moving to another processor. If a merchant
decides to move to a new processor that is willing to offer the
merchants more competitive pricing for its credit card processing
services, the credit card processor uses the cancellation fee to try to
retain the merchant. The merchant loses because it cannot move to a
different credit card processor without paying what may amount to a
hefty fee in many circumstances. If the merchant does move, the price
it pays in the cancellation fee may more than offset any advantage it
will get from a lower rate to process. This practice therefore tends
to limit competition in the marketplace.
Cancellation fees have also caused problems for credit card processors
that try to assess such fees to merchants. Inadequate disclosure of
fees is a common problem. Some processors bury the cancellation fee to
be charged in the boilerplate language of the agreement and some do not
disclose it at all. There have been a number of lawsuits recently
challenging these cancellation fees and some companies in our industry
have had to pay substantial settlement payments to address these
claims.
While inadequate disclosure is a problem regardless of the type of fee,
the most serious consequences can occur when “lost profits”
cancellation fees are not fully disclosed. Obscure language in the
agreement may make it very difficult to really appreciate the amount of
the fee that may have to be paid in the event of cancellation. One
almost has to be an expert in the credit card processing industry to
understand the consequences of early termination of the relationship.
If a merchant does try to cancel its contract, the credit card
processor sends out a letter to the merchant alleging it is entitled to
a cancellation fee that few merchants could afford to pay. The credit
card processor has access to the merchant’s bank account so often it is
able to take the cancellation fee straight out of the merchant’s bank
account before the merchant can object. The merchant is left with the
decision to stay with the credit card processor or fight over a
termination fee that could bankrupt it.
The continued use of these types of cancellation fees, especially the
ones based upon lost profits, is inviting additional scrutiny and
regulation of our industry. It might be time for us to consider
adopting “best practices” to regulate the imposition of cancellation
fees in Merchant Agreements.
** The information contained herein is for informational purposes only
and should not be relied upon in reaching a conclusion in a particular
area. The legal principles discussed herein were accurate at the time
this article was authored but are subject to change. Please consult an
attorney before making a decision using only the information provided
in this article.
|