Corporate cardholders and their employers could cash in on several class action lawsuits alleging deceptive disclosure of currency conversion fees by American Express—which this month disclosed a $66 million settlement proposal—MasterCard International and Visa International.
The latest suit, filed Feb. 10 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, charges that American Express does not disclose adequately its foreign exchange fees and seeks to have the company refund the fees to cardholders.
Amex this month in a report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission said it has proposed a settlement, which will establish a $66 million fund to "reimburse class members with valid claims." Amex would refund the foreign exchange amount charged to cardholders since March 28, 1997. In 1999, American Express raised its currency conversion fee from 1 percent to 2 percent. According to its proposal, refunds will reflect the change.
"For a corporate card account to which multiple cards have been issued and individual cardholders receive individual periodic statements, each cardholder who receives a periodic statement is considered to have a separate account," the proposal stated. "Distributions from the settlement amount for such accounts may be paid either to the corporate holder of the account or to the individual cardholder, at American Express' option."
If requests for refunds exceed Amex's proposed $66 million, "payments will be decreased on a pro rata basis," the settlement proposal stated.
Meanwhile, if a California judge gets his way, companies using Visa and MasterCard will be getting a refund for every foreign-based transaction made since February of 1996.
Pending appeals by Visa and MasterCard, a ruling last year concluded the card associations were deceptive in disclosing currency conversion fees and ordered the networks to refund fees charged to customers, which could total up to $800 million. The judgment applies to all Visa cardholders—since Visa is based in California—while MasterCard only would have to pay restitution to cardholders in California.
While the gavel has come down against Visa and MasterCard, a lengthy appeals process could overturn the ruling or postpone any payment for some time.
"Visa and MasterCard have appealed and the wheels of justice are grinding slowly and we hope they're grinding fine, which means the judge's decision will be upheld," said Jim Baum, one of the attorneys who filed the lawsuit against Visa and MasterCard. He noted that the appeals process probably would take 18 months.
American Express, Visa and MasterCard currently mandate the disclosure of these conversion fees solely in cardholder agreements. MasterCard and Visa said that before changing this disclosure process or reimbursing cardholders, it would await an appellate ruling. Amex proposed to change the disclosure of its currency conversion practices to "cardmember agreements and billing statements."
"We believe we have strong legal arguments to have it overturned on appeal," said Noah Hanft, MasterCard general counsel, adding that "it's illogical" for the judge "to say we somehow deceived American consumers by providing them what he agrees are the best possible rates for currency conversion."
When travelers make purchases overseas with Visa or MasterCard, the card networks charge a foreign currency conversion rate plus a 1 percent fee to issuing banks, which often tack on their own charge before passing it to cardholders. The initial ruling in the case said the "optional issuer fee" could be up to 3 percent of the transaction cost. However, the suit only targets fees imposed by the networks, not their issuers. While some issuers, such as JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America, "disclose their own 2 percent currency conversion fees in billing statements," they do not break out the networks' 1 percent fee, which is embedded in the total, the ruling said.
"The court finds embedding the fee in the transaction amount has the effect of concealing the fee from cardholders," the judge ruled, adding that no other fees are embedded in the transaction amount on statements.
The judge said open disclosure of the fees would spark competition between the networks, potentially lowering fees.
"The bottom line is you're going to see a great deal more competition on these fees," Baum said. "There will be very substantial savings for consumers when the dust settles."
One form of competition already is beginning to emerge: Some third-party payment processors are offering dynamic currency conversion, which exchanges foreign-based expenses to the cardholder's native currency at the point of sale
(BTN, Dec. 8, 2003).American Express in its 2003 annual report acknowledged such vendors and their potential impact on the company's foreign exchange revenue stream. "The merchant and processor would retain some or all of the revenue resulting from the point-of-sale conversion, thus reducing or eliminating revenue for card issuers and card networks relating to the conversion of foreign charges to the billing currency," the report stated.
According to court documents, Visa collected $166 million in currency conversion fees in 2001. While international transactions are less than 2 percent of Visa's total transaction volume, in 2000 the 1 percent fee comprised 20 percent of Visa International's revenue and 9 percent of Visa U.S.A.'s revenue.
MasterCard in 2000 collected nearly $44 million in currency conversion fees, averaging $1.04 per foreign-based transaction. "From February 1996 through Dec. 31, 2000, MasterCard received $195,563,642 in revenue from U.S. cardholders as a result of its 1 percent MCCR fee."
Amex does not disclose foreign exchange revenues.
While Visa and MasterCard charge 1 percent for currency conversion and Amex charges 2 percent, court documents said that Diners Club—which is not involved in the suits—charges 2.25 percent of the transaction cost.
Despite the fees and the considerable line of revenue, charge card vendors are known to offer competitive currency conversion rates throughout the world. In the ruling against Visa and MasterCard, the judge stated that the "overall currency conversion costs using a Visa or MasterCard was the best deal available to cardholders."
According to David Hillman, president of Hillman and Associates, a New York-based consulting firm, even with conversion fees, charge cards and credit cards always will beat exchange rates when converting cash while traveling
(BTNOnline, April 9, 2003).