Payment Accounts Directive — the fee information document, the statement of fees and the switching clock

The Payment Accounts Directive is the conduct rulebook most e-money institutions discover late — usually when a supervisor asks to see the fee information document. Firms plan for PSD2 and anti-money-laundering, and treat Directive 2014/92/EU as a retail-bank problem. Two of its four chapters are not: they bind every payment service provider offering a consumer payment account, whatever the licence. Below: which chapters catch which firms, what the two mandated fee documents must contain, and the business-day clock that runs when a customer switches away.

1. Four chapters, three different populations

Article 1 does the scoping, unusually bluntly. Article 1(3): Chapters II and III apply to payment service providers. Chapter II is fee comparability — the national list of representative services, the fee information document, the statement of fees, comparison websites. Chapter III is switching. Neither is limited to credit institutions, so a payment institution or e-money institution offering consumer payment accounts is squarely inside both.

Article 1(4): Chapter IV applies to credit institutions — the right of access to an account with basic features. The second subparagraph is the trap: member states may decide to apply Chapter IV to payment service providers other than credit institutions. Whether a non-bank is caught is a national-law question, answered differently across the Union, to be checked in every market on the passporting list.

Article 1(6) defines the product perimeter: the directive applies to payment accounts through which consumers can at least place funds, withdraw cash, and execute and receive payment transactions including credit transfers to and from a third party — with member states free to extend it to other accounts. Everything in Chapters II and III is consumer-facing only: a business account is outside.

2. The national list and the Union standardised terminology

Everything in Chapter II hangs off a vocabulary a firm does not control. Under Article 3(1) each member state establishes a list of at least 10 and no more than 20 of the most representative services linked to a payment account and subject to a fee, with terms and definitions for each; in any official language, only one term may be used per service. The Article 3(2) selection criteria are the services most commonly used by consumers and those generating the highest cost, overall and per unit.

On top of that sits a European layer: Article 3(4) required EBA to develop regulatory technical standards setting out Union standardised terminology for the services common to at least a majority of member states, adopted as Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/32 of 28 September 2017. The presentation formats came in the same package — Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/34 for the fee information document and its common symbol, and Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/33 for the statement of fees.

The operational consequence is that a firm’s own product names are not a compliant vocabulary. Where a service maps to a term on the national final list, that term must be used, in the language of the member state where the account is offered.

Facts: an e-money institution passports a consumer account into three member states with one product and one set of marketing names, of which “instant transfer”, “card top-up” and “monthly plan” are fee-bearing. Rule: Article 4(1) requires the fee information document to use the standardised terms in the final national list under Article 3(5), and Article 3(1) allows only one term per service per language. What the team does: builds a mapping table from internal product names to each national list, notes that services the firm does not offer simply do not appear (Article 4(1) requires fees only “where such services are offered”), and localises through the table rather than translating marketing copy. Outcome: three country-specific documents generated from one catalogue, and a mapping artefact that survives the next product change.

3. The fee information document

Article 4(1) requires the FID in good time before entering into a contract, on paper or another durable medium, containing the standardised terms from the final national list and the corresponding fee for each service the provider offers. Article 4(2) then imposes unusually prescriptive form requirements:

• a short and stand-alone document, laid out clearly and legibly, in characters of a readable size;
• no less comprehensible if a colour original is printed or photocopied in black and white;
• written in the official language of the member state where the account is offered, or another language agreed with the consumer;
• accurate, not misleading, and expressed in the currency of the account — or another Union currency if agreed;
• carrying the title ‘fee information document’ at the top of the first page next to a common symbol, so it is distinguishable from other documentation;
• containing a statement that it covers fees for the most representative services and that complete pre-contractual and contractual information sits in other documents.

Packages get their own rule. Under Article 4(3) the document must disclose the fee for the entire package, the services included and their quantity, and the additional fee for any service used beyond the quantity the package fee covers. Article 4(4) adds a glossary of at least the standardised terms and their definitions, in clear, unambiguous, non-technical language.

Article 4(5) is the one that catches web teams: the FID and glossary must be available at any time, easily accessible, including to non-customers — electronically on the provider’s website where it has one, and in premises accessible to consumers — and free of charge on paper or another durable medium on request. A document that exists only inside the authenticated onboarding flow does not satisfy that.

4. The statement of fees

Article 5(1) requires the provider to give the consumer, at least annually and free of charge, a statement of all fees incurred for services linked to the payment account, together with the interest-rate information described below. The communication channel is agreed with the consumer, but the statement must be provided on paper at least on request. Article 5(2) fixes the minimum content:

• the unit fee for each service and the number of times it was used in the period; for packages, the package fee, the number of times it was charged, and any additional fee for usage beyond the package;
• the total fees for each service, each package, and services exceeding the package quantity;
• the overdraft interest rate applied and the total interest charged in the period, where applicable;
• the credit interest rate applied and the total interest earned, where applicable;
• the total amount of fees charged for all services in the period.

Article 5(3) repeats the formal requirements — clear and legible, accurate, in the account currency, titled ‘statement of fees’ at the top of the first page next to a common symbol, in the official language of the member state. The unit-fee-and-count requirement is what most often exposes a ledger gap: many billing systems store a total charge per period without preserving the per-event count Article 5(2)(a) demands.

5. Switching — the clock, in business days

Chapter III is where a payment or e-money institution is most likely to be on the losing end, as the transferring provider. Article 10(1) puts the receiving provider in charge; member states may keep alternative measures only where these are clearly in the consumer’s interest, add no burden, and complete within at most the same overall time-frame.

Two obligations sit outside the timetable and are easy to miss. Article 10(4)(e) allows closure only if the consumer has no outstanding obligations and the information, redirection and balance-transfer steps are done — and requires the provider to immediately tell the consumer where outstanding obligations block closure. Article 10(6) prohibits the transferring provider from blocking payment instruments before the date specified in the authorisation, so service is not interrupted mid-switch.

On cost and liability: Article 12(1) gives consumers free access to their own standing-order and direct-debit information; Article 12(2) requires the transferring provider to supply the Article 10(4)(a) information without charging either the consumer or the receiving provider; Article 12(4) confines any other switching fee to what is reasonable and in line with actual costs. Article 13(1) then requires a provider to refund without delay any financial loss, including charges and interest, resulting directly from its own non-compliance with Article 10 — subject only to the abnormal-and-unforeseeable-circumstances defence in Article 13(2).

6. Cross-border account-opening assistance

Article 11 covers the case Chapter III does not: the consumer is moving to a provider in another member state, so there is no domestic switching service to run. On request the existing provider must give the consumer, free of charge, a list of active standing orders and debtor-driven direct-debit mandates plus available information on recurring incoming credit transfers and creditor-driven direct debits over the previous 13 months; transfer any remaining positive balance where the request identifies the new account fully; and close the account. Under Article 11(2) those steps happen on the date the consumer specifies, at least six business days after the request is received, unless otherwise agreed.

Facts: a consumer with an e-money account says they are opening an account in another member state and want the balance moved and the account closed. The firm’s offboarding flow closes accounts on a 30-day notice cycle. Rule: Article 11(1) requires the 13-month information, the balance transfer and closure; Article 11(2) sets a floor of six business days after the request, not a ceiling the firm may extend unilaterally. What the team does: routes Article 11 requests out of the standard offboarding queue, generates the 13-month statement from the transaction store, and applies the standard notice only where the parties genuinely agree otherwise. Outcome: a compliant path running in days rather than weeks.

7. Chapter IV, and the PSD2 cross-reference

Chapter IV binds credit institutions and, where a member state has exercised the Article 1(4) option, other providers too. Its shape is worth knowing even where it does not bind you, because it sets the local competitive baseline. Article 16(3) requires a decision to open or refuse within 10 business days of a complete application; Article 16(4) requires refusal where opening would infringe anti-money-laundering law; Article 16(5) permits refusal where the consumer already holds a qualifying account in that territory, unless they have notice it will be closed. Article 17(1) fixes the service set — opening, operating and closing; placing funds; cash withdrawals within the Union; direct debits, card payments including online, and credit transfers including standing orders — with Article 17(4) requiring an unlimited number of operations. Termination under Article 19(2) is a closed list, including no transaction for more than 24 consecutive months, and Article 19(4) requires at least two months’ written, free notice for most grounds, immediate only for deliberate illegal use or false information.

One drafting artefact affects the whole text: Directive 2014/92/EU cross-refers throughout to Directive 2007/64/EC, the first Payment Services Directive. PSD1 has been repealed by Directive (EU) 2015/2366, whose Article 114 provides that references to the repealed directive are construed as references to PSD2 and read in accordance with its correlation table. Anyone tracing an Article 10 or Article 19 cross-reference to a live obligation has to make that substitution first.

8. What to do, today

• Answer the Article 1(4) question per market. Chapters II and III bind you wherever you offer consumer payment accounts; Chapter IV depends on each member state’s choice.
• Build the terminology mapping table from internal product names to each national final list, and generate documents from it. Do not translate marketing copy.
• Publish the FID and glossary outside the login wall — Article 4(5) requires availability to non-customers.
• Check the billing store keeps per-event counts, not just period totals: Article 5(2)(a) needs the unit fee and the number of uses.
• Instrument the switching clock — two business days out, five in, five to execute, six-business-day floor on the start date — with alerting, because Article 13(1) attaches refund liability to missing them.
• Give Article 11 requests their own path. A 30-day offboarding cycle is not compatible with a six-business-day statutory floor.

9. FAQ

Related: Branch vs freedom of services · Where to base your EMI · Verification of Payee · Safeguarding compared