• Contact
  • Feedback
Banking Day
Stay Ahead. Stay Informed.
Concise. Candid. Provocative.
Get the daily banking news that matters
Banking Day – Your trusted source for independent financial insights.
Subscribe Now
  • News
  • Topics
    • All Topics
    • Briefs
    • Major Banks
    • Authorised deposit-taking institutions
    • Insurance, funds and super
    • Payments, mobile & wallets
    • Consumer lending
    • Mortgages
    • Business lending
    • Finance regulation
    • Debt capital markets
    • Ratings agencies
    • Equity capital markets
    • Professional services
    • Work & career
    • Foreign news
    • Other topics
  • Free Trial
  • Subscribe
  • Resources
    • Industry events
  • About us
    • About Banking Day
    • Advertise
    • Feedback
    • Contact Banking Day
  • Search
  • Login
  • My account
    • Account settings
    • User Admin
    • Logout

Login or request a free trial

Gateway fees fall foul of tenancy law

09 July 2013 4:41PM
Operators of payments gateways, including banks, may have to re-negotiate terms with many real estate agencies following a ruling of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.VCAT recently ruled that the terms of a tenancy agreement between a Ray White franchise and a tenant breached the Residential Tenancies Act.This law prohibits certain charges, for example: "The establishment or use of direct debit facilities for payment of rent under a tenancy agreement."The Ray White franchise had been collecting a fee of A$1.65 each month along with the tenant's monthly rent payment, under standard contract terms.Ray White used an IP Payments' service to collect the rent.Ian Lulham, a deputy president of VCAT, noted in his ruling evidence regarding Jamie Collins, the CEO of IP Payments, "that his company's services are provided to a vast number of estate agents throughout Australia and that many tenants use the services to pay millions of dollars in rent.""The outcome of this case, and any appeal, potentially has ramifications for many people and for that reason it was appropriate to provide a written decision", even though in the end the amount at issue was $32."The issue before the tribunal is whether [Ray White] can cause that fee to be imposed upon [the] tenants."The effect of (the relevant clauses in the [tenancy] agreement) in combination, however, is to oblige the tenant to pay by direct debit in circumstances that entail the payment of a charge for use of the direct debit facility.

I'm a returning subscriber

*
Password reset *
Login

Request a free trial

  • Emailing you the news at 7am.
  • Covering core lending and funding issues, strategy, payments, regulation, risk management, IT, marketing and more.
  • Original news and summaries of major stories from other media – ditch your newspaper subscriptions.
  • Focused on banking and finance, saving you the time spent wading through newspapers and other services.
  • With reporting from former editors and senior writers from the AFR and The Australian.
  • Configured for your phone, laptop and PC.
Free trial Banking Day
Stay Ahead. Stay Informed.
Concise. Candid. Provocative.
Get the daily banking news that matters
Banking Day – Your trusted source for independent financial insights.
Subscribe Now

Consumer lending

  • Latitude, Harvey Norman liable for interest free GO card con

Copyright © WorkDay Media 2003-2025.

Banking Day is a WorkDay Media publication

WorkDay Media Unit Trust

  • Privacy policy
  • Terms of access and use