Credit card company direct debit. Sexist ?

[lurkinghusband]

MrsLH has just tried to complete an online direct debit form for a leading credit card company.

We have a joint account, and alphabetically, my name is first, hers second. With a long surname and initials, this means the full length is 29 characters.

The online form won't accept more than 18 characters. Which means it only reads "MR ...." and can't take the extra characters for the full name.

Am I alone in finding this irritatingly sexist in 2016 ? It seems to preclude joint accounts being properly entered with both names ?

Or, should I get out more ?

Which one of you is paying the direct debit?
Presumably the credit card is in one of your names, and that person is setting up the mandate to pay the bill?

You're not joined at the hip. You can pay a bill on your own

Re-read it twice and still can't see what's sexist about it.

Triple-barrelled-nameist maybe, but why on earth isn't she just putting her own name down? Sexist is you assuming she has to include your name when using the joint account

That wouldn't bother me - is just the amount of characters really.

What did bother me was when XH and I took out a John Lewis card. Had to be in my name as at the time I was the only one working. A few months later they randomly changed it to his name. Never did understand that.

We have a joint account and if I'm doing a direct debit I just put my name down not both

I don't get why it's sexist - if her name came first alphabetically, it would be the other way round. Or do you mean "mr" comes before "Mrs" or "ms"?

She doesn't need to put your name down? Just put her own name.

You should get out more.

Do your cards have both your names on? Our joint account cards have our single names on and either can set up and pay a direct debit to a joint account without having to put both names on. Tbh I think there are far more important sexist issues to be bothered by. Actual sexist issues.

why sexist?

Ah, the perils of having a bra-burning mum.

I find it (still do) sexist as I think it precludes the possibility that a joint account may be used to pay a card, and that the majority of second-names tends to be the woman (not exclusively, and more by custom I know).

Anyway, MrsLH called them, as she was concerned (like me) that not having the full name would invalidate the direct debit. Turns out they don't use the name anyway. So it's all irrelevant.

We have a joint account but both our cards have our own name on them, just type in one name

It's sexist that you're blaming your mum's feminism for your inability to understand how joint bank accounts work

If you pay for something out of a joint account, you don't both need to put your names down.
Just like in the old days when you paid for something with the debit card for a joint account, you didn't both have to sign the card slip.

Slight comprehension fail, I think. Or did I not explain clearly ?

My gripe is not about the nature - or otherwise - of joint accounts.

It's that when a credit card company ask for (the unused anyway) name of the account holder, they arbitrarily limit the number of characters to 18. Which - in my opinion - means that if a joint account is used, the womans name will be left off more often than not.

Anyway, it's all moot - they only need the sort code and account number anyway.

I really doubt it's sexist, it's probably a preset character limit within the system.

Account name:

B & D Cucumberbatch

Job done.