Mar 9, 2020 21:41
4 yrs ago
32 viewers *
French term
Jack Fleming
rejets de prélèvement
French to English
Bus/Financial
Finance (general)
Bank accounts
The document is a guide for customer service advisers in a bank.
It presents a case of a potential customer who is over-indebted and tries to do some "rejets de prélèvement".
Here is the phrase:
Un client est en surendettement. Il veut effectuer des rejets de prélèvement et ne comprends pas pourquoi, suite à un mail qui lui a été adressé, on lui demande d’aller au resto du cœur.
Here is my suggested translation:
A customer is over-indebted. He wants to cancel some direct debits and doesn’t understand why, following an e-mail he received, he has been asked to go to the charity organisation “Resto du Coeur”.
Shortly afterwards the document considers possible customer complaints, and one of them is as follows:
"10€ pour des rejets répétés, c’est beaucoup trop cher."
My translation: "€10 for repeated direct debit cancellations is far too expensive"
I imagine that in both cases, the customer wishes to cancel direct debits/standing orders and that in the second phrase the complaint refers to the bank charging a fee for doing so on numerous occasions.
Do you agree? Thanks!
It presents a case of a potential customer who is over-indebted and tries to do some "rejets de prélèvement".
Here is the phrase:
Un client est en surendettement. Il veut effectuer des rejets de prélèvement et ne comprends pas pourquoi, suite à un mail qui lui a été adressé, on lui demande d’aller au resto du cœur.
Here is my suggested translation:
A customer is over-indebted. He wants to cancel some direct debits and doesn’t understand why, following an e-mail he received, he has been asked to go to the charity organisation “Resto du Coeur”.
Shortly afterwards the document considers possible customer complaints, and one of them is as follows:
"10€ pour des rejets répétés, c’est beaucoup trop cher."
My translation: "€10 for repeated direct debit cancellations is far too expensive"
I imagine that in both cases, the customer wishes to cancel direct debits/standing orders and that in the second phrase the complaint refers to the bank charging a fee for doing so on numerous occasions.
Do you agree? Thanks!
Proposed translations
(English)
| 4 +3 | Direct Debit rejection / refusal |
Tony M
|
| 5 -2 | Cancel |
Ken Fisher
|
| 3 | block a direct debit |
SafeTex
|
Change log
Mar 8, 2020 16:08: Andrea Capuselli changed "Vetting" from "Needs Vetting" to "Vet OK"
Mar 9, 2020 21:41: Andrea Capuselli changed "Kudoz queue" from "In queue" to "Public"
Proposed translations
+3
7 hrs
French term (edited):
rejet de prélèvement
Selected
Direct Debit rejection / refusal
It's quite curious in fact that they are using the same term in both instances.
A bank will "reject" a Direct Debit payment if you don't have enough money in your account to cover it — and will charge you for the privillege! Thats is what is happening in your second instance.
However, in the first instance, it isn't the customer who can "reject" it — normally, we'd say something like "faire opposition à...", so probably in EN we'd need 'refuse' — the customer wants the bank to reject it; but of course, it doesn't really work like that! If a Direct Debit payment has been incorrectly taken, then the customer can ask for it to be repaid, but they can't ask to have them simply stopped on an occasional basis whenever they feel like it!
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 7 hrs (2020-03-10 05:03:43 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Of course, it would probably work as refuse / refusal in both instances.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 days 7 hrs (2020-03-12 05:14:57 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
I think confusion is arising here because the source term is actually being used in 2 different ways:
In the first instance, the customer themselves seeks to get a specific DD rejected, which is NOT possible — you can cancel a DD authorisation for a given creditor altogether (at a cost), or you can oppose a DD that has for some reason been made incorrectly; but you cannot simply choose to suspend certain payments 'cos you don't have enough in your account to cover them!
In the second instance, however, it is the bank that has rejected the DD (because of insufficient funds) — and this too is chargeable, usually on a 'per item' basis.
A bank will "reject" a Direct Debit payment if you don't have enough money in your account to cover it — and will charge you for the privillege! Thats is what is happening in your second instance.
However, in the first instance, it isn't the customer who can "reject" it — normally, we'd say something like "faire opposition à...", so probably in EN we'd need 'refuse' — the customer wants the bank to reject it; but of course, it doesn't really work like that! If a Direct Debit payment has been incorrectly taken, then the customer can ask for it to be repaid, but they can't ask to have them simply stopped on an occasional basis whenever they feel like it!
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 7 hrs (2020-03-10 05:03:43 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Of course, it would probably work as refuse / refusal in both instances.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 days 7 hrs (2020-03-12 05:14:57 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
I think confusion is arising here because the source term is actually being used in 2 different ways:
In the first instance, the customer themselves seeks to get a specific DD rejected, which is NOT possible — you can cancel a DD authorisation for a given creditor altogether (at a cost), or you can oppose a DD that has for some reason been made incorrectly; but you cannot simply choose to suspend certain payments 'cos you don't have enough in your account to cover them!
In the second instance, however, it is the bank that has rejected the DD (because of insufficient funds) — and this too is chargeable, usually on a 'per item' basis.
Peer comment(s):
| agree |
Daryo
: exactly, that's how it works in UK, and that would lead to being repeatedly charged €10 for each "unpaid direct debit".
12 hrs
|
|
Thanks, Daryo!
|
|
| neutral |
SafeTex
: I don't get this fixation on what you can and cant' do in the UK. We are translating a French text and if it's possible to block a direct debit in France in some cases, that's all that counts
1 day 17 hrs
|
|
I didn't say anything about the UK! But it's NOT, that's exactly the problem — and why we mustn't attempt to translate on the basis of how it works in the UK. You seem to be getting confused, and getting it all the wrong way round...
|
|
| agree |
AllegroTrans
2 days 9 hrs
|
|
Thanks, C!
|
|
| agree |
Jack Fleming
7 days
|
|
Thanks, Jack!
|
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "Selected automatically based on peer agreement."
-2
31 mins
Cancel
I think you are correct, "cancel" is what UK banks use for similar circumstances. The second phrase could be simplified to "repeated cancellations" as "direct debit" is superfluous.
Peer comment(s):
| neutral |
Daryo
: CL5 might be too optimistic - it COULD also mean "unpaid direct debits", whatever ONE explanation says
3 hrs
|
| disagree |
Tony M
: It actually isn't a cancellation as such: the direct debit authorisation remains in force for the future, this is just a one-off temporary "rejection"
6 hrs
|
| disagree |
AllegroTrans
: No it's a failure of a direct debit (lack of sufficient funds is the usual reason) resulting in the bank refusing/rejecting/blocking payment. "Cancel" is wrong here
3 days 20 hrs
|
14 hrs
block a direct debit
Seems to me the customer just wanted to block (effectuer des rejets) a few direct debits without actually cancelling the direct debits.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 days 32 mins (2020-03-11 22:14:12 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
it's a bit hard to speak just about the UK as many apps are global now but it is clear that many banks and apps now let you block direct debits in some circumstances.
I'm not going to list examples as you just have to Google "block direct debit"
As for the UK and what you can and can't do compared to France, we are translating a French text and all that matters is that you can do this in France, not what you can or can't do in the UK
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 days 32 mins (2020-03-11 22:14:12 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
it's a bit hard to speak just about the UK as many apps are global now but it is clear that many banks and apps now let you block direct debits in some circumstances.
I'm not going to list examples as you just have to Google "block direct debit"
As for the UK and what you can and can't do compared to France, we are translating a French text and all that matters is that you can do this in France, not what you can or can't do in the UK
Peer comment(s):
| neutral |
Daryo
: maybe you can do that in France - in UK you can only cancel completely a direct debit, not play ON/OFF with each payment.
1 day 8 hrs
|
|
Please see note added
|
|
| neutral |
Tony M
: Exactly as Daryo says! The point is, you CAN'T generally do this in France!
1 day 9 hrs
|
|
Please see note added
|
Discussion
I think the source text is probably deliberately seeking to represent the "stupidity" of the average customer!
Generally, when you 'faire opposition', it is like stopping a cheque, except that in the case of prélèvements, the 'opposition' is to the WHOLE authorisation; it is not always possible to re-start it afterwards, although the situation is slightly different with payments to the Goverment compared to businesses
"Si vous avez déjà réglé vos échéances de mars, vous avez peut-être encore la possibilité de vous opposer au prélèvement SEPA auprès de votre banque en ligne. Sinon, vous avez également la possibilité d'en demander le remboursement auprès de votre service des impôts des entreprises, une fois le prélèvement effectif."
So if that is not an example of blocking a direct debit, I don't know what is.
The difference is explained in the link below. Yes, some people may say that it is not clear or "bloquer" is a stage of "arrêter" and I don't deny this but if you translated this text, you would have to use the words "block" and "stop" (or "cancel" perhaps).
https://www.sepastop.eu/fr-fr/base-de-connaissance/bloquer-p...