AMEX requests information on supplementary cardholders

[SOPOOR]

This just arrived in the mail, so I guess theyre cracking down on it or ive been targetted, so a warning, if you are getting cards made under pets and imaginary people

it doesnt actually say what happens if I dont provide it

however, all mine a real people but , not all of them of have utilitiy bills or payslips, so I wont be providing any info

 

[exceladdict]

Good warning, but getting all of those documents certified will cost you money. Will amex reimburse you for that?

 

[Dr Ralph]

Good warning, but getting all of those documents certified will cost you money. Will amex reimburse you for that?

A Justice of the Peace can not charge you for certifying documents.

It would cost you your own time though.

Amex cannot require pay slips from supplementary card holders.

 

[SOPOOR]

Good warning, but getting all of those documents certified will cost you money. Will amex reimburse you for that?

I'm confidently going to say, i think amex will say take it or leave in terms of costs and time take to get the docs

They may also hide behind the money laundering act by requesting all these documents. Be interesting How they react if i don't provide anything, or if i provide only some of the documents, as in my case not everyone has all those documents.

As for legalities, i have no idea

 

[NoName]

Of what relevance are payslips of supplementary card holders to the ability of the primary card holder to pay the bill they are responsible for?

 

[burmans]

Of what relevance are payslips of supplementary card holders to the ability of the primary card holder to pay the bill they are responsible for?

Good question and would suggest someone actually ask Amex this, but I haven't had the letter.

 

[maccaisking]

Amex cannot require pay slips from supplementary card holders.

I would suggest they can require whatever they want as the card issuer.

I don’t think it adds any benefit, and I for one won’t be asking for friends/families payslips, or asking them to have payslips certified and submit them. if these means losing my supp cards then so be it. It is more likely added in for nuisance value to those who have multiple cards purely for the offers (as I do).

This doesn’t mean however, that they can’t require them.

 

[amaroo]

Looks like Amex are reviewing all sorts of things. I got reviewed (not about supps) on my Plat, Ult and Edge - all good there.

If you don’t cough up the info - I’d suggest they’ll just cancel whatever card they want.

 

[SOPOOR]

the weird thing is that I ahve the same number and people as supps on both cards
and ive maybe probably used none of them for 12 months since amex small shop, might have used one for a statement credit

 

[straitman]

Their list of who can certify seems rather short also.

I have several things to get certified and/or witnessed this week and the list of who can do it is much more comprehensive than the one shown here.

 

[burmans]

I would suggest they can require whatever they want as the card issuer.

I don’t think it adds any benefit, and I for one won’t be asking for friends/families payslips, or asking them to have payslips certified and submit them. if these means losing my supp cards then so be it. It is more likely added in for nuisance value to those who have multiple cards purely for the offers (as I do).

This doesn’t mean however, that they can’t require them.

Well Amex aren't above the law in this case the Privacy Act. This has some interesting requirements on what they can collect, when and what they must do when they collect.

Some interesting info at Collection of personal information

Some ways I'd suggest this request might fall foul of the law

"Personal information must be collected from the individual concerned, unless this is unreasonable or impracticable (additional exceptions apply to agencies)."

"What you must be told when your personal information is collected
When an organisation or agency collects your personal information they must take reasonable steps to tell you the following information, as close as possible to the time they collected your personal information:

• the organisation or agency’s identity and contact details
• the fact and way in which the organisation or agency collected your personal information
• if collecting your personal information is required or authorised by law
• the reasons the organisation or agency collected your personal information
• the consequences if the organisation or agency doesn’t collect your personal information
• the organisation or agency’s usual disclosures of the kind of personal information being collected
• information about the organisation or agency’s privacy policy
• if the organisation or agency is likely to disclose personal information to overseas recipients, and if practical, the countries where they are located"

 

[lovetravellingoz]

Amex has always done spot checks. It is why I have never used imaginary sup card holders. Amex is too valuable to me (even after the recent 50% devaluation of transfer rates) to risk having it cancelled.

This looks like they are ramping up the spot checking somewhat though.

 

[SOPOOR]

Well Amex aren't above the law in this case the Privacy Act. This has some interesting requirements on what they can collect, when and what they must do when they collect.

Some interesting info at Collection of personal information

Some ways I'd suggest this request might fall foul of the law

"Personal information must be collected from the individual concerned, unless this is unreasonable or impracticable (additional exceptions apply to agencies)."

"What you must be told when your personal information is collected
When an organisation or agency collects your personal information they must take reasonable steps to tell you the following information, as close as possible to the time they collected your personal information:

• the organisation or agency’s identity and contact details
• the fact and way in which the organisation or agency collected your personal information
• if collecting your personal information is required or authorised by law
• the reasons the organisation or agency collected your personal information
• the consequences if the organisation or agency doesn’t collect your personal information
• the organisation or agency’s usual disclosures of the kind of personal information being collected
• information about the organisation or agency’s privacy policy
• if the organisation or agency is likely to disclose personal information to overseas recipients, and if practical, the countries where they are located"

Im going to assume that regardless of what the privacy act says, the money laundering act trumps them all

Just like how paypal sometimes ask business account holders for verification via requesting supplier invoices and bank account transactions

 

[Hvr]

Well Amex aren't above the law in this case the Privacy Act. This has some interesting requirements on what they can collect, when and what they must do when they collect.

As noted elsewhere money laundering legislation is superior to privacy.

Look here:

Customer identification: Know your customer (KYC) | AUSTRAC

An AML/CTF program must include KYC procedures to collect and verify a customer’s identity.

www.austrac.gov.au

 

[deka2]

Not just Amex
Last week I had to renew a Citibank Prestige Supplementary and have to supply certified drivers license of the cardholder before they will renew.

 

[DC3]

May be targeted?

Edit: Regardless, I see no point in requiring payslips/occupation details

 

[burmans]

Amex has always done spot checks. It is why I have never used imaginary sup card holders. Amex is too valuable to me (even after the recent 50% devaluation of transfer rates) to risk having it cancelled.

This looks like they are ramping up the spot checking somewhat though.

Proof they are a real person is reasonable but they haven’t given a good reason (or any justification) for payslips as required and as far as I can tell they have no valid reason. The Privacy Act does allow for collection of information where required by law. AML does require that you identify the person but there is nothing in there requiring they validate what you earn.

 

[DC3]

I have only 1 x sup card for a non-animal/bird/etc. If I get this letter I will provide the ID and utility/Council rates but not payslips. If they cancel the cards then it saves me having to do it.

 

[liuyz]

It is reasonable for them to indentify the supp card holders.

As for the payslips, when issuing a supp card, did they requested that? If not, this seems they failed the AML check at very beginning, and they should not request the payslip after issuing the supp cards if the base card member is responable for the repayments.

If the person in question does have problem in regarding to AML, it should be other agency to step in, not AMEX.

If the problem is that dummy supp cards making use of the offers, they should not start the conversion by referencing AML.

 

[DC3]

As a general comment, there’s no reason for the supp card holder to even have an income let alone a payslip. The supp card holder is not responsible for the charges anyway.