Expand | ||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What’s changed?
These are the changes that have been introduced in v1.1
from v1.0
Business rules updates
Errata version | Section | Subsection | Impacts | Description | Action | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs TPPs |
The Open Finance Standards do not offer a prototype of a Single Instant Payment flow. | A prototype illustrating an example of a Single Instant Payment flow has been created. TPPs and LFIs should use this prototype in conjunction with the prescribed customer experience screens. | |||
2 | 2 | Common Components | LFIs TPPs |
All Customer Experience sections currently provide branded screens without stipulation of whether these are illustrative or prescriptive. | A new rule is added as follows: “LFIs and TPPs MUST implement their customer experience screens in line with what is provided in each Customer Experience section of the Standard for the relevant functionality. This includes colors, branding, spacing and component design.” | |||||
3 | 2 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs | Rule CRG-2.1 states the following:
Further clarification is required to be added about how TPPs will be presenting the LFIs to Users for easier identification. | Rule CRG-2.1 is modified as follows:
| |
4 | 2 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs | The rules SIP-7 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151848434/Single+Instant+Payments#3.1.2-Rules-%26-Guidelines do not define the maximum time between the payment Consent being authorized and the Single Instant Payment request being initiated by the TPP. | SIP-7 rule 7.1 is modified to add a new rule as follows: “TPPs MUST: 7.1 Submit to OFP the payment initiation requests with the same parameters as per the Payment Consent authorized by the User.
| |
5 | 2 | Limits and Constants | TPPs | The Limits table does not include an entry for the Max SIP Payment Initiation Time Interval. | A new entry A15 is added to the table as follows: ID: A15Name: Max SIP Payment Initiation Time IntervalDescription: This is the period of time that TPPs MUST submit the Single Instant Payment Initiation Request to the OFP. The value defined for this is period is currently 5 sec. The OFP will reject the Payment Initiation Request is submitted outside this time window. | |
6 | 2 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs | The rules BBP-6 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151849558/Bulk+and+Batch+Payments#3.1-Rules-%26-Guidelines do not define the maximum time between the Bulk/Batch payment Consent being authorized and the Bulk/Batch Payment request being initiated by the TPP. | BBP-6 rule 6.1 is modified to add a new rule as follows: “TPPs MUST: 6.1 Submit to OFP the Bulk/Batch payment initiation requests with the same parameters as per the Bulk or Batch Payment (BBP) Consent authorized by the User(s).
| |
7 | 2 | Limits and Constants | TPPs | The Limits table does not include an entry for the Max Bulk/Batch Payment Initiation Time Interval. | A new entry A16 is added to the table as follows: ID: A16Name: Max Bulk/Batch Payment Initiation Time IntervalDescription: This is the period of time that TPPs MUST submit the Bulk/Batch Payment Initiation Request to the OFP. The value defined for this is period is currently 15 sec. The OFP will reject the Payment Initiation Request is submitted outside this time window. | |
8 | 2 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs | The rules FDP-5 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151848769/Future+Dated+Payments#3.2-Rules-%26-Guidelinesdo not define the requirement for TPPs to submit the FDP Payment Initiation request to the OFP and the LFI so that the FDP payment initiation can take place and the FDP can be warehoused in the LFI’s systems. Also, there is no rule to define the maximum time between the FDP payment Consent being authorized and the FDP Payment request being initiated by the TPP. | FDP-5 is modified to add a new rule as follows: “TPPs MUST: 5.15 Submit to OFP the FDP payment initiation requests with the same parameters as per the FDP Payment Consent authorized by the User(s).
| |
9 | 2 | Limits and Constants | TPPs | The Limits table does not include an entry for the Max FDP Payment Initiation Time Interval. | A new entry A17 is added to the table as follows: ID: A17Name: Max FDP Payment Initiation Time IntervalDescription: This is the period of time that TPPs MUST submit the FDP Payment Initiation Request to the OFP. The value defined for this is period is currently 15 sec. The OFP will reject the Payment Initiation Request is submitted outside this time window. | |
10 | 2 | Bank Service Initiation | OFP | Rule 2.9 of MPPI-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151848909/Multi-Payments#5.-Payment-Initiation states the following: “2.9 Increment the cumulative Total Number and the cumulative Total Value of payments under the VRP Consent after the payment successfully executed and received payment status confirmation from the creditor LFI. The initial value of these parameters should be zero for each authorized VRP Consent.” The OFP at this stage is not able to know whether the payment has been successfully executed and the LFI has received payment status confirmation from the creditor LFI. This is because this check is happening before the OFP has forwarded the Payment Initiation request to the LFI and thus the payment has not been initiated yet. | Rule 2.9 of MPPI-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151848909/Multi-Payments#5.-Payment-Initiation is modified as follows: “2.9 Increment the cumulative Total Number and the cumulative Total Value of payments under the VRP Consent after the payment resource has been created and it is in ‘Pending’ status and has not been rejected. This will prevent multiple payments being initiated that could exceed the Maximum values of the respective Consent Control parameters. The initial value of the cumulative Total Number and the cumulative Total Value of payments should be zero for each authorized VRP Consent.” | |
11 | 2 | Bank Service Initiation | OFP | Rule 2.10 of MPPI-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151848909/Multi-Payments#5.-Payment-Initiation states the following: “2.10 Increment the cumulative Total Number and the cumulative Total Value of all payment initiations per Control Period after the payment successfully executed and received payment status confirmation from the creditor Bank. These parameters are reset to zero when a new Consent Control Period starts at 00:00:00 of the first day of the Control Period.” The OFP at this stage is not able to know whether the payment has been successfully executed and the LFI has received payment status confirmation from the creditor LFI. This is because this check is happening before the OFP has forwarded the Payment Initiation request to the LFI and thus the payment has not been initiated yet. | Rule 2.10 of MPPI-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151848909/Multi-Payments#5.-Payment-Initiation is modified as follows: “2.10 Increment the cumulative Total Number and the cumulative Total Value of all payment initiations per Control Period after the payment resource has been created and it is in ‘Pending’ status and has not been rejected. This will prevent multiple payments being initiated that could exceed the Maximum values of the respective Consent Control parameters. The cumulative Total Number and the cumulative Total Value of all payment initiations per Control Period are reset to zero when a new Consent Control Period starts at 00:00:00 of the first day of the Control Period.” | |
12 | 2 | Bank Service Initiation | OFP |
TPPs | Rule 2.14 of MPPI-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151848909/Multi-Payments#5.-Payment-Initiation states the following: “2.14 Reject the payment initiation and provide the necessary error message to the TPP if any other checks of the payment initiation request parameters fails against Consent parameters of the authorized long-lived Payment Consent.” The OFP at this stage is able to decrement the relevant VRP cumulative counters, but this rule is missing from this step. | MPPI-2 rule 2.14 is modified to add a new rule as follows: “2.14 Reject the payment initiation and provide the necessary error message to the TPP if any other checks of the payment initiation request parameters fails against Consent parameters of the authorized long-lived Payment Consent.”
| ||
13 | 2 | Bank Service Initiation | OFP |
TPPs | Rule 2.22 of MPPI-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151848909/Multi-Payments#5.-Payment-Initiation states the following: “2.22 Send an appropriate error response to the TPPs in case the payment is rejected due to violating any of the LFIs BAU payment accounts checks or limits.” The OFP at this stage is able to decrement the relevant VRP cumulative counters, but this rule is missing from this step. | MPPI-2 rule 2.22 is modified to add a new rule as follows: “2.22 Send an appropriate error response to the TPPs in case the payment is rejected due to violating any of the LFIs BAU payment accounts checks or limits.”
| ||||
14 | 2 | Common Rules and Guidelines | OFP | A new rule is required so that when OFP receives updates on the Payment status of a payment, updates the relevant VRP Consent Control Parameters as appropriate. | A new rule is added as follows: “OFP MUST: CRG-15.4.1 Check if the status of the payment has been set to ‘Rejected. In this case:
| |
15 | 2 | Common Rules and Guidelines | LFIs | Within rules CRG-15.5 and CRG-15.8 the payment status model is referenced incorrectly as GRC 15.12 Payment Status Model. | CRG-15.5 and CRG-15.8 are modified as follows: “CRG-15.5 Respond to payment status query requests from a TPP with the appropriate status codes as listed below in section https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151850813/Common+Rules+and+Guidelines#GRC-15.10-Payment-Status-Model based on the status information provided by the LFI.” “CRG-15.8 Be able to notify the OFP asynchronously about any changes in the status of the payment request. More specifically, LFIs MUST provide asynchronous notification to the OFP by sending the appropriate status codes as listed below in section https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151850813/Common+Rules+and+Guidelines#GRC-15.10-Payment-Status-Model”. | |
16 | 2 | Bank Service Initiation | OFP | Within rules 5.12 the Check Authorization Time Window is referenced incorrectly. | Rule 5.12 in MPCS-5 is modified as follows: “5.12 Check the Authorization Time Window is valid as per https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151850813/Common+Rules+and+Guidelines#19.-Check-Authorization-Time-Window.” | |
17 | 3 | Authentication and Authorization | LFIs | The business rules for App-to-Browser and Browser-to-Browser journeys do not currently permit an LFI to provide a redirect to their mobile banking app to continue the authentication journey. This will cause friction for customers who are enrolled only in an LFIs mobile banking app and do not have internet banking credentials. | Sections 2.3 (Browser-to-Browser) and Section 2.4 (App-to-Browser) are modified as follows: The following alternative experience MUST be implemented by LFIs to allow customers to use their mobile banking app to complete Authentication and Authorization:
| |
18 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs | Rule 5.6 of SIP-5 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151848434/Single+Instant+Payments#3.1.2-Rules-%26-Guidelines includes reference to Fees to be displayed by LFIs, if applicable. This reference is no longer relevant. | Updated rule 5.6 of SIP-5 to remove the reference to LFI fees. “LFIs MUST: 5.6 Present to Users the following minimum required information for authorizing the Single Instant Payment (SIP) Consent:
| |
19 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs | The rule 7.5 SIP-7 in Single Instant Payments | 3.1.2 Rules & Guidelines includes the User (Debtor) Payment Account (i.e. account identifier) and the Creditor Identification details as parameters included in the SIP Payment Initiation Request sent from the TPP. The Debtor and Creditor Identification details have now been removed from the SIP Payment Initiation Request and LFIs will get this information from the authorized Payment Consent. | SIP-7 rule 7.5 is modified as follows: “OFP MUST: 7.5 Send the SIP payment initiation request to the LFI for initiating an instant payment using the payment parameters included in the payment initiation request including:
| |
20 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs | The rules of SIP-7 in Single Instant Payments | 3.1.2 Rules & Guidelines do not include the requirement for LFIs to retrieve the Creditor Identification details from the encrypted PII information block included in the authorized Payment Consent. | SIP-7 rule 7.6 is modified to add new rules as follows: “LFIs MUST: 7.6 Trigger the payment initiation process for the payment Consent immediately after receiving the payment initiation request from the OFP.
| |
21 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs | Rule 5.7 of FDP-5 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151848769/Future+Dated+Payments#3.2-Rules-%26-Guidelines includes reference to Fees to be displayed by LFIs, if applicable. This reference is no longer relevant. | Updated rule 5.7 of FDP-5 to remove the reference to LFI fees. “LFIs MUST: 5.7 Present to Users the following minimum required information for authorizing the Single Future Dated Payment (FDP) Consent:
| |
22 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs | The rules of FDP-6 in Future Dated Payments | 3.2 Rules & Guidelines MUST take place after the Hand-off back to TPP as described in the rules of FDP-7. | The order of steps FDP-6 and FDP 7 MUST be reversed. More specifically: FDP-7 → FDP-6 and FDP-6 → FDP-7 | |
23 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs | The rules of FDP-7 in Future Dated Payments | 3.2 Rules & Guidelines do not define the requirement for TPPs to submit the FDP Payment Initiation request to the OFP and the LFI so that the FDP payment initiation can take place and the FDP can be warehoused in the LFI’s systems. Also, there is no rule to define the maximum time between the FDP payment Consent being authorized and the FDP Payment request being initiated by the TPP. | FDP-7 is modified to add a new rule as follows: “TPPs MUST: 7.1 Submit to OFP the FDP payment initiation requests with the same parameters as per the FDP Payment Consent authorized by the User(s).
| |
24 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs | The rules of FDP-7 in Future Dated Payments | 3.2 Rules & Guidelines do not define the requirement for OFP to check the FDP Payment Initiation request and then submit it to the LFI so that the FDP payment initiation can take place and the FDP can be warehoused in the LFI’s systems. | FDP-7 is modified to add a new rule as follows: “OFP MUST: 7.2 Allow the TPPs to submit the individual FDP payment initiation request under the FDP Payment Consent authorized by the User, without any additional MFA or authorization from the User. 7.3 Check that the received FDP payment initiation request relates to a valid FDP Payment Consent authorized by the User. The Consent MUST be in the Authorized state. The OFP MUST reject a, FDP payment initiation message related to a FDP Payment Consent in a different state and respond back to the TPP with the appropriate error message/code. 7.4 Check the FDP payment initiation request parameters against the authorized FDP Payment Consent. All parameters MUST match exactly.
7.5 Send the FDP payment initiation request to the LFI for warehousing the FDP payment using the payment parameters included in the FDP payment initiation request including:
| |
25 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs | The rules of FDP-7 in Future Dated Payments | 3.2 Rules & Guidelines do not include the requirement for LFIs to retrieve the Creditor Identification details from the encrypted PII information block included in the authorized FDP Payment Consent. | FDP-7 rule 7.6 is modified to add a new rule as follows: “LFIs MUST: 7.6 Trigger the FDP Payment warehousing process in their systems for it to be scheduled for initiation, processing and execution on the Requested Execution Date as per BAU future dated payments processing, immediately after receiving the FDP payment initiation request from the OFP.
| |
26 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs | Rule 5.7 of MPCS-5 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151848909/Multi-Payments#3.2-Rules-%26-Guidelines includes reference to Fees to be displayed by LFIs, if applicable. This reference is no longer relevant. | Updated rule 5.7 of MPCS-5 to remove the reference to LFI fees. “LFIs MUST: 5.7 Present to Users the following minimum required information for authorizing the long-lived payments Consent:
| |
27 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs | The rules of MPPI-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151848909/Multi-Payments#5.-Payment-Initiation incorrectly include the requirement for OFP to check the Debtor and Creditor Identification details of the Payment Initiation Request against the authorized consent. | MPPI-2 rule 2.3 is modified as follows to remove the OFP requirement and move it to the LFI requirements: “OFP MUST: 2.3 Check the payment initiation request parameters against the authorized long-lived Payment Consent. More specifically, the OFP MUST check the following:
| |
28 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | N/A | Rule 2.12 of MPPI-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151848909/Multi-Payments#5.-Payment-Initiation incorrectly includes the requirement for OFP to check that the payment initiation request contains valid creditor identification details and that there is a unique identifier related to the User’s authorization of the payment details. This is not possible as this information is encrypted and not available to the OFP. | Rule 2.12 of MPPI-2 is removed from the OFP requirements and is moved to the LFI requirements. Rules numbers are modified as follows: 2.13 → 2.12 2.14 → 2.13 2.15 → 2.14 2.16 → 2.15 | |
29 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs | The rule 2.15 of MPPI-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151848909/Multi-Payments#5.-Payment-Initiation includes the User (Debtor) Payment Account (i.e. account identifier) and the Creditor Identification details as parameters included in the Payment Initiation Request sent from the TPP. The Debtor and Creditor Identification details have now been removed from the Payment Initiation Request and LFIs will get this information from the authorized Payment Consent, except in the case of Variable Beneficiaries. | MPPI-2 rule 2.15 is modified as follows: “OFP MUST: 2.15 Send a payment initiation request to the LFI for initiating an instant payment using the payment parameters included in the Payment Initiation Request including:
Variable Beneficiaries Only
| |
30 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs | The rules of MPPI-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151848909/Multi-Payments#5.-Payment-Initiation do not include the following requirements for LFIs: a) requirement to retrieve the Creditor Identification details from the encrypted PII information block included in the authorized Multi-Payment Consent. b) requirement to check the Creditor Identification details of the Payment Initiation Request against the authorized Multi-Payment Consent, in the case of Variable-defined Beneficiaries. c) requirement to check that the payment initiation request contains valid creditor identification details and that there is a unique identifier related to the User’s authorization of the payment details, for the case of Variable Beneficiaries. | New rules are added to MPPI-2 as follows: “LFIs MUST: 2.16 Trigger the payment initiation process for the payment Consent immediately after receiving the payment initiation request from the OFP. Fixed Beneficiaries Only
Variable Beneficiaries Only
Variable-defined Beneficiaries Only
| |
31 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs OFP TPPs | The rules of IP-8 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151849156/International+Payments#3.1.1-Rules-%26-Guidelinescontain duplicate numbering of rules 8.5. | The rule numbers of IP-8 are modified as follows: 8.5 (duplicate) → 8.6, 8.6 → 8.7, 8.7 → 8.8, 8.8 → 8.9, 8.9 → 8.10, 8.10 → 8.11, 8.11 → 8.12, 8.12 → 8.13, 8.13 → 8.14, 8.14 → 8.15 | |
32 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs | The rule 8.6 IP-8 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151849156/International+Payments#3.1.1-Rules-%26-Guidelines includes the User (Debtor) Payment Account (i.e. account identifier) and the Creditor Identification details as parameters included in the IP Payment Initiation Request sent from the TPP. The Debtor and Creditor Identification details have now been removed from the IP Payment Initiation Request and LFIs will get this information from the authorized Payment Consent. | IP-8 rule 8.6 is modified as follows: “OFP MUST: 8.6 Send the IP payment initiation request to the LFI for initiating a single International Payment using the payment parameters included in the payment initiation request including:
| |
33 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs | The rules of IP-8 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151849156/International+Payments#3.1.1-Rules-%26-Guidelinesdo not include the requirement for LFIs to retrieve the Creditor Identification details from the encrypted PII information block included in the authorized IP Payment Consent. | IP-8 rule 8.8 is modified to add a new rule as follows: “LFIs MUST: 8.8 Trigger the payment initiation process for the payment Consent immediately after receiving the payment initiation request from the OFP.
| |
34 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | OFP | Rule 2.3 of FRIPPI-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151849156/International+Payments#3.2.5-Payment-Initiation incorrectly includes the requirement for OFP to check that the Creditor Identification details in the submitted payment initiation request matches exactly the Creditor Identification in the authorized Fixed Recurring IP Payment Consent. This is not possible as this information is encrypted and not available to the OFP. | Rule 2.3 of FRIPPI-2 is modified to remove the requirement to check the Creditor Identification details from the OFP. The updated rule is as follows: “OFP MUST: 2.3 Check the payment initiation request parameters against the authorized long-lived Fixed Recurring IP Payment Consent. More specifically, the OFP MUST check the following:
| |
35 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs | The rule 2.9 of FRIPPI-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151849156/International+Payments#3.2.5-Payment-Initiation includes the User (Debtor) Payment Account (i.e. account identifier) and the Creditor Identification details as parameters included in the IP Payment Initiation Request sent from the TPP. The Debtor and Creditor Identification details have now been removed from the IP Payment Initiation Request and LFIs will get this information from the authorized Payment Consent. | FRIPPI-2 rule 2.9 is modified as follows: “OFP MUST: 2.9 Send the IP payment initiation request to the LFI for initiating a single International Payment using the payment parameters included in the payment initiation request including:
| |
36 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs | The rules of FRIPPI-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151849156/International+Payments#3.2.5-Payment-Initiation do not include the requirement for LFIs to retrieve the Creditor Identification details from the encrypted PII information block included in the authorized IP Payment Consent. | New rules are added to FRIPPI-2 as follows: “LFIs MUST: 2.11 Trigger the payment initiation process for the payment Consent immediately after receiving the payment initiation request from the OFP.
The rule numbers of FRIPPI-2 are modified as follows: 2.11 → 2.12, 2.12 → 2.13, 2.13 → 2.14, 2.14 → 2.15, 2.14 → 2.15, 2.15 → 2.16, 2.16 → 2.17, 2.17 → 2.18 | |
37 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs | Rule 5.8 of MPCS-5 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151850011/Payments+with+Delegated+Authentication#3.1.-Consent-Setup includes reference to Fees to be displayed by LFIs, if applicable. This reference is no longer relevant. | Updated rule 5.8 of MPCS-5 to remove the reference to LFI fees. “LFIs MUST: 5.8 Present to Users the following minimum required information for authorizing the long-lived payments Consent:
| |
38 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | OFP | Rule 2.4 of DELPI-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151850011/Payments+with+Delegated+Authentication#Processing-of-Payment-Initiation-Requests https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151849156/International+Payments#3.2.5-Payment-Initiation should not be a separate rule but instead a bullet point of rule 2.3. | Rule 2.4 of DELPI-2 is modified to become a bullet point of rule 2.3. The updated rules is as follows: “OFP MUST: 2.3 Check the payment initiation request parameters against the authorized long-lived Payment Consent. More specifically, the OFP MUST check the following:
| |
39 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs | Rule 2.7 of DELPI-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151850011/Payments+with+Delegated+Authentication#Processing-of-Payment-Initiation-Requestsincludes the User (Debtor) Payment Account (i.e. account identifier) and the Creditor Identification details as parameters included in the Payment Initiation Request sent from the TPP. The Debtor Identification details have now been removed from the Payment Initiation Request and LFIs will get this information from the authorized Payment Consent. | Rule 2.7 of DELPI-2 is modified as follows: “OFP MUST: 2.7 Send a payment initiation request to the LFI for initiating an instant payment using the payment parameters included in the payment initiation request including:
| |
40 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs | The rules of DELPI-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151850011/Payments+with+Delegated+Authentication#Processing-of-Payment-Initiation-Requests do not include the requirement for LFIs to trigger the payment initiation process immediately after receiving the payment initiation request from the OFP. | New rule added to DELPI-2 as follows: “LFIs MUST: 2.9 Trigger the payment initiation process immediately after receiving the payment initiation request from the OFP.”
The rule numbers of DELPI-2 are modified as follows: 2.9 → 2.10, 2.10 → 2.11, 2.11 → 2.12, 2.12 → 2.13, 2.13 → 2.14, 2.14 → 2.15, 2.15 → 2.16. | |
41 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs | Rule 3.7 of COP-3 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151849745/Confirmation+of+Payee#2.4-Rules-%26-Guidelines incorrectly states that LFIs must provide Users (Creditors) with the option to select to opt-out from the COP service, so that their account information is not shared with the OFP. This is not to be allowed for all users, instead this functionality is to be available only for VPIs, PEPs and other special account holders. | Rule 3.7 of COP-3 is modified as follows: “CREDITOR LFIs MUST: 3.7 NOT provide Users (Creditors) the option to select to opt-out from the COP service. However, in exceptional circumstances only, such as where the account holder is a national or Emirati leader or their immediate family, LFIs have the ability to establish processes to agree with the account holder that their account information will not be shared with the OFP when receiving a Customer Data request message from the OFP for COP purposes.
| |
42 | 3 | Bank Data Sharing | N/A | Rule 2.8 of CDCS-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151850555/Customer+Data#Data-Sharing-Consentis incomplete and must be defined correctly. | Rule 2.8 of CDCS-2 is modified as follows: “2.8 Set/clear the “Is Single Authorization” flag as appropriate (as per https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151850813/Common+Rules+and+Guidelines#7.-Is-Single-Authorization-flag).” | |
43 | 3 | Bank Data Sharing | N/A | The rules of CDCS-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151850555/Customer+Data#Data-Sharing-Consent contain duplicate numbering of rules 2.8. | The rule numbers of CDCS-2 are modified as follows: 2.8 (duplicate) → 2.9 | |
44 | 3 | Bank Data Sharing | LFIs | Rules 7.5 and 7.6 of CDCS-7 inhttps://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151850555/Customer+Data#Select-Accounts need to provide more clarity for the scenario that the Data Request Consent is related to non-account specific data permissions. | Rules 7.5 and 7.6 of CDCS-7 have been modified as follows: “LFIs MUST: 7.5 NOT request Users to select any account from their eligible account list when the Data Request Consent does not include any account-specific data permissions and instead includes only User data permissions (e.g. in the case of the Parties endpoint).
7.6 Allow Users to proceed to the Data Sharing Consent authorization without selecting any accounts in the case of Consents solely including non account-specific data permissions.” | |
45 | 3 | Bank Data Sharing | LFIs |
TPPs | Customer Experience in Section 3 does not include the case that the TPP only requires the User to share User Information which is not account specific and thus the User is not required to select an account at their LFI during Data Sharing Consent. | Added new sub section in Section 3 to include the case that the TPP only requires the User to share User Information which is not account specific. New section is as follows: 3.2 Journey Variations3.2.1 User selects account at the TPP & LFI provides Supplementary Information | ||||
46 | 3 | Banking | LFIs | Limit A13https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151850897/Limits+and+Constants#Max-historical-data-for-Data-Sharing-Requestfor Banking is defined to be 24 months. However, this should be defined to be the minimum supported period by each LFI. The maximum period to be provided by each LFI should be aligned to what is their current capabilities in their existing online and mobile channels. | Limit A13 is modified as follows: “ID: A13Name: End Date of historical data for Data Sharing RequestDescription: The end date of the period of historical data that can be requested by TPPs and which MUST be sent by LFIs for Data Sharing Requests. This will differ based on the industry sector of LFIs, as follows:
| |
47 | 3 | Bank Data Sharing | TPPs | Rule 2.4 of CDCS-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151850555/Customer+Data#3.1-Rules-%26-Guidelines includes wording which can be confusing for TPPs and LFIs. | Rule 2.4 of CDCS-2 has been updated as follows: “TPPs MUST: 2.4 Define the start and end dates for the period needed for historical data, if required for a specific use case. The end date of the period of historical data that can be requested by TPPs and which MUST be returned by LFIs for a Data sharing Request is as per the End Date of historical data for Data Sharing Request defined in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151850897/Limits+and+Constants#A.-Limits.” | |
48 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs | Rule CRG-17.1.1 has been included: “TPPs MUST: CRG-17.1.1 Notify the debtor about any upcoming scheduled payments, including fixed future payments, future variable payments, and recurring payments one day before the payment date. The notification must include details of the payment amount, date, and beneficiary and should be delivered through the same channels used for payment-related notifications (e.g., SMS, email, app notifications).” | ||
49 | 3 | Common Components | TPPs | New rule 5.5 has been included: “TPPs MUST: 5.5 Inform customers if their data will be replicated outside the UAE. This notification must include clear details about where the data will be processed and stored. The TPP must obtain explicit agreement from the customer before proceeding with any data sharing or service initiation request.” The rule numbers of https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151847205/Consent+Setup#5.-General-Consent-Rules are modified as follows: 5.5 → 5.6, 5.6 → 5.7, 5.7 → 5.8, 5.8 → 5.9, 5.9 → 5.10, 5.10 → 5.11, 5.11 → 5.12, 5.12 → 5.13, 5.13 → 5.14, 5.14 → 5.15, 5.15 → 5.16, 5.16 → 5.17. | ||
50 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs | Rule 5.6 of BBP-5 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151849558/Bulk+and+Batch+Payments#3.1-Rules-%26-Guidelines includes reference to Fees to be displayed by LFIs, if applicable. This reference is no longer relevant. | Updated rule 5.6 of BBP-5 to remove the reference to LFI fees “LFIs MUST: Supplementary/ Missing Payment Information 5.6 Although the creditor details and total amount are known to the LFI before the User is authenticated, LFIs must introduce a step after authentication to allow Users to provide additional information associated with the bulk/batch payment in order to complete the payment instructions if the payment order is incomplete. This information may include:
| |
51 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs | Create BBP-7.3 (https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151849558/Bulk+and+Batch+Payments#Payment-Status-Update) “LFIs MUST: | ||
52 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs | Create DELPC-1.4 “TPPs MUST: 1.4 Implement any of the Action-Based Controls to govern the execution of VRPs. These controls must ensure that only specific, predefined actions can trigger a transaction without additional customer authorization.
Any unusual or unexpected actions, such as transactions with significantly higher amounts or non-typical service charges, must require explicit customer approval before payment is processed. Clearly explain to customers the implications of these Action-Based Controls at the time of onboarding or during any update to the payment consent. This explanation should include:
The TPP must ensure that customers fully understand how these controls affect the payment process and their role in managing their consent for different types of transactions.” | ||
53 |
3 | Common Rules and Guidelines | LFIs |
TPPs | Section did not include any rules, guidelines or controls about access to accounts of minors. | New section 1.1 was added to provide guidelines and controls about access to accounts of minors. “1.1 Accounts for minorsThis section includes key guidelines and parental controls for access to accounts of minors in the context of Open Finance in the UAE. 1.1.1 Consent and Authorization
1.1.2 Data and Security
1.1.3 Age-Appropriate Services
1.1.4 Access Restrictions
1.1.5 Payment Initiation
|
54 |
3 | Common Components | LFIs |
TPPs | Section 11 of https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/x/-AANCQ does not explicitly state that an LFI must not make use of multi-press buttons, nor that they must not request Users to provide additional confirmations. | https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151847164/User+Experience+Principles#11.-Other-Rules-for-User-Journeys has been updated as follows:
|
55 |
3 | Common Components | LFIs |
TPPs | Currently, the Registration Framework includes the following references in Section 5 and also screenshot/sample code in sections 6.1 and 8.2 “authorization_detail_types” | |
56 |
3 | Common Components | TPPs | Further clarification is required to be added about how TPPs will be presenting the LFIs to Users for easier identification. | Rule 2.2.15 is added as follows: “TPPs MUST use logos and the brand names of the LFIs as they are defined in the Trust Framework Directory.” | |
57 |
3 | Common Components | LFIs | Further clarification is required to be added about how LFIs will be presenting the TPPs to Users for easier identification. | Rule 2.2.3 has been modified as follows:
| |
58 |
3 | Common Components | N/A | Further clarification is required to be added about how the CAAP will be presenting the TPPs and LFIs to Users for easier identification. | An addition has been made to the Overview as follows: “The CAAP MUST use logos and brand names of the LFIs and TPPs as they are defined in the Trust Framework Directory.” | |
59 |
3 | Common Components | TPPs | Controls have been added that set expectations on the integrity of the mobile device. | The following are added to the Controls section:
| |
60 | 4 |
Banking | https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/ |
Updates to address typos in the text.
Updated section 1 as follows:
“LFIs MUST:
CRG-1.1 Provide Open Finance APIs for as many of the following account types as they allow their Users to access in their existing Digital channels:
Retail Accounts: Accounts used for the execution of payment transactions provided by LFIs to individuals
Current accounts, Savings accounts
SME Accounts: Accounts used for the execution of payment transactions provided by LFIs to SMEs
Current accounts, Savings accounts
Corporate Accounts: Accounts used for the execution of payment transactions provided by LFIs to Corporates
Current accounts, Savings accounts
CRG-1.2 Provide Open Finance APIs for the aforementioned account types in all currencies. The scope of currencies is as follows:
CRG-1.2.1 For Bank Data Sharing, the aforementioned accounts as per CRG-1.1 MUST be supported in ALL available currencies.
CRG-1.2.2 For Bank Service Initiation, the following scope rules apply:
For domestic payments (i.e. payment accounts within the UAE jurisdiction) both debtor (initiating) payment account and creditor (beneficiary) payment account MUST be in AED.
Domestic payments (i.e. payment accounts within the UAE jurisdiction) involving FX payment conversion at the debtor (initiating) payment account (for example from USD to AED or GBP to AED) before domestic payment initiation are NOT in the scope of the current version of the Open Finance Standard.
For international payments (i.e. payments to accounts outside the UAE jurisdiction), ALL available currencies supported by LFIs MUST be supported for Open Finance payment initiation. For more information, please refer to https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151849156/International+Payments#1.-Description.
CRG-1.3 Allow Users to authorize consents only for eligible accounts.
CRG-1.4 Provide Open Finance APIs for domestic Payment Initiation capabilities from the aforementioned account types using ONLY the Instant Payment Platform (IPP).
CRG-1.4.1 In the scenario that the Creditor account is with an LFI that has not been onboarded with the IPP platform, the LFIs MUST perform their BAU check and reject any payments to Creditor accounts not supported by the IPP platform.
CRG-1.4.2 In the scenario that IPP is unavailable, for example, it is going through maintenance and planned downtime, the LFIs MUST NOT route the Open Finance payments via other payment systems. Instead, LFIs MUST keep the status of the payment to pending and process the payment as normal when IPP is available again.
Note: This does not exclude edge cases where the payment value may be applied on a different date than the payment authorization. CBUAE will be monitoring the ecosystem for these cases to assess whether remediations may be required in the future.
CRG-1.4.3 In the scenario that IPP does not have the user's date/city of birth registered, the LFIs MUST NOT route the Open Finance payments via other payment systems. Instead, LFIs MUST reject the Open Finance payment informing the User what is required to be done in order to resolve this issue. It is expected that the LFIs MUST obtain this information through the KYC or another process, to ensure that this mandated information is registered with the IPP platform.
keep the status of the payment to pending and process the payment as normal when IPP is available again.
CRG-1.5 Provide Open Finance APIs for International (i.e. cross-border) Payment Initiation capabilities from the aforementioned account types using ALL available payment rails in use by LFIs to support International payment initiation for their existing online channels.”
4
Banking
TPPs | PR-31 of https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151850211/Pay+Request+enabled+by+Open+Finance#3.-Example-Rules-%26-Guidelines states incorrectly that TPPs must proceed with the Single Instant Payment Initiation journey as per the https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151848909/Multi-Payments#5.-Payment-Initiation of the Open Finance Standard. | Rule of step PR-31 has been updated as follows: “TPPs MUST:
| ||||
61 | 4 | Banking | TPPs | Further clarifications and examples in relation to the definitions are required. | Section has been updated as follows: “TPPs & OFP MUST: 8.2.2.1 Enable their systems to support the following definitions:
| |
62 | 4 | Banking | https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/ |
TPPs |
Rule 2.3 of MPPI-2 in https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151848909/Multi-Payments#5.-Payment-Initiation requires more clarity in relation to the checking of |
payment initiation date from the OFP. | Rule 2.3 of |
MPPI- |
2 has been updated as follows: |
4
Banking
TPPs
Further clarifications and examples in relation to the definitions are required.
Section has been updated as follows:
“TPPs & OFP MUST:
8.2.2.1 Enable their systems to support the following definitions:
Start Date: The date that the first repeating Period starts. It is defined at the start of the date at midnight (00:00:00).
Period Type: This MUST be one of the following:
Day: A continuous period of time, consisting of 24 consecutive hours, staring from midnight (00:00:00) and finishing at 23:59:59 of the same day. The Period will be repeating every day from the Start Date. For example, if the Start Date is the 10th of the month, then the Period will be repeating on the 11th, 12th, 13th etc.
Week: A continuous period of time, consisting of seven consecutive days, staring from midnight (00:00:00) of the Start Date and finishing at 23:59:59 of the 7th day elapsed from the Start Date. The Period will be repeating at the same day every week from the Start Date. For example, if the Start Date is the Thursday 10th October 2024, then the Period will be repeating on Thursday the 17th October 2024, Thursday the 24th October 2024, Thursday the 31st October 2024, Thursday the 7th November 2024 etc.
Month: A continuous period of time starting from midnight (00:00:00) of the Start Date and finishing at 23:59:59 of the day before the same date of the next month. The Period will be be repeating at the same date every month from the Start Date. For example, if the Start Date is the 10th October 2024, then the Period will be repeating on the 10th November 2024, the 10th December 2024, the 10th January 2025 etc. The exceptions to this rule are the following:
if Start Date is a date not available every month, then the Period will be adjusted to the end date of the month which does not have the Start Date available. For example:
If Start Date is 31st, then the Period will be initiated on the 31st for January, March, May, July, August, October and December, on the 30th for April, June, September and November and on the 28th or 29th (depending on leap year) for February.
If Start Date is 30th, then the Period will be initiated on the 30th for all months apart from February, for which it will be the 28th or 29th (depending on leap year) for February
If Start Date is 29th, then the Period will be initiated on the 29th for all months on leap year or for all months expect February on leap year, for which it will be the 29th
Year: A continuous period of time, consisting of 12 months, starting from midnight (00:00:00) of the Start Date and finishing at 23:59:59 of the day before the same date of the next year. The Period will be be repeating at the same date every year from the Start Date. For example, if the Start Date is the 10th October 2024, then the Period will be repeating on the 10th October 2025, the 10th October 2026 etc. The exceptions to this rule are the following:
if Start Date is a date not available every year, then the Period will be adjusted to the end date of the month which does not have the Start Date available: For example:
If Start Date is 29th of February on a leap year, then the Period will be initiated on the 28th of February on non-leap years and the 29th on leap years.”
“OFP MUST: |
Proceed with the Payment Initiation journey as per the https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151848909/Multi-Payments#5.-Payment-Initiation of the Open Finance Standard.”
2.3 Check the payment initiation request parameters against the authorized long-lived Payment Consent. More specifically, the OFP MUST check the following:
| ||||||||||
63 | 4 | Limits and Constants | TPPs | The entry A15 Max SIP Payment Initiation Time Interval must be defined to be 10min instead of 5sec to align to the token validity period. | Entry A15 has been updated as follows: ID: A15Name: Max SIP Payment Initiation Time IntervalDescription: This is the period of time that TPPs MUST submit the Single Instant Payment Initiation Request to the OFP. The value defined for this is period is currently 10min. The OFP will reject the Payment Initiation Request is submitted outside this time window. | |||||
64 | 4 | Limits and Constants | TPPs | The entry A16 Max Bulk/Batch Payment Initiation Time Interval must be defined to be 10min instead of 5sec to align to the token validity period. | Entry A16 has been updated as follows: ID: A16Name: Max Bulk/Batch Payment Initiation Time IntervalDescription: This is the period of time that TPPs MUST submit the Bulk/Batch Payment Initiation Request to the OFP. The value defined for this is period is currently 10min. The OFP will reject the Payment Initiation Request is submitted outside this time window. | |||||
65 | 4 | Limits and Constants | TPPs | The entry A17 Max FDP Payment Initiation Time Interval must be defined to be 10min instead of 5sec to align to the token validity period. | Entry A17 has been updated as follows: ID: A17Name: Max FDP Payment Initiation Time IntervalDescription: This is the period of time that TPPs MUST submit the FDP Payment Initiation Request to the OFP. The value defined for this is period is currently 10min. The OFP will reject the Payment Initiation Request is submitted outside this time window. | |||||
66 | 4 | Common Components | LFIs TPPs | In Errata2, a rule was added to User Experience Principles to state that “LFIs and TPPs MUST implement their customer experience screens in line with what is provided in each Customer Experience section of the Standard for the relevant functionality. This includes colors, branding, spacing and component design.”, without provision of the necessary assets. |
The relevant logos and color codes are attached and are to be implemented in line with the customer experience screens provided in the Standard. | |||||
67 | 4 | Banking | N/A | Link to the Periodic Payment Schedule of Multi-Payments is incorrect. | Updated section 3.2 with the correct link, as follows: “Long-lived multi-payment consents can be combined with International Payments to enable Service Initiation capabilities for recurring cross-border payments. The initial scope of the Standard will supporting Fixed Recurring IP Payments as follows:
| |||||
68 | 4 | Banking | TPPs | Rule 4.5.1 of https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151849156/International+Payments#4.5-Payment-Charge-Model-for-International-Payments requires mapping of the user language for the charge bearer model to the values used in the API Description. | Updated rule 4.5.1 as follows: “TPPs MUST: 4.5.1 Either allow Users to select the charge model for the international payment order. This can be one of the following:
| |||||
69 | 4 | Banking | TPPs | Links in the section are incorrectly displayed. | Updated section 4.7 with the correct links, as follows: “TPPs MUST: 4.7.1 Support all category purpose codes including their descriptions as defined in the international https://www.iso20022.org/catalogue-messages/additional-content-messages/external-code-sets in order to be able to support the requirements for International Payments. 4.7.2 Either allow Users to select the available purpose of payment from a list or pre-populate it for Users. 4.7.3 Ensure and validate that the format of the payment purpose is according to the international https://www.iso20022.org/catalogue-messages/additional-content-messages/external-code-setsformat.” | |||||
70 | 4 | Banking | https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/ |
151850813/Common+Rules+and+Guidelines#1.-Supported-Accounts-%26-Payment-Rails | LFIs | Rule CRG-1.4.2 of https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/ |
151850813/Common+Rules+and+Guidelines#1.-Supported-Accounts-%26-Payment-Rails states that “In the scenario that IPP is unavailable, (e.g. maintenance) and planned downtime, the LFIs MUST NOT route the Open Finance payments via other payment systems. Instead, LFIs MUST keep the status of the payment to pending and process the payment as normal when IPP is available again.” | Rule CRG-1.4.2 has been updated as follows: |
4
Limits and Constants
“LFIs MUST: |
2.3 Check the payment initiation request parameters against the authorized long-lived Payment Consent. More specifically, the OFP MUST check the following:
The date of the submitted payment initiation request:
is within the validity period of the long-lived Payment Consent (i.e. Consent Expiration Date & Time)
MUST match exactly one of the dates defined by the Periodic Payment Schedule (for Fixed Recurring and Variable Recurring Payments) or the dates included in the Predefined Payment Schedule for the Variable-defined Multi-Payments.
The amount in the submitted payment initiation request:
matches exactly the payment amount for consents of type Fixed Recurring and Fixed On-demand.
matches exactly the payment amount for the date of the payment initiation for consents of type Variable-defined.
is less or equal to the maximum payment value per payment initiation for consents of type Variable Recurring and Variable On-demand.”
| ||||||
71 | 4 | Banking | TPPs | Throughout the https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/x/zQcNCQreferences to Variable-defined consent has been changed to Fixed-defined consent. That is to allow a new type of predefined schedule with known dates but unknow values. This type was introduced as Variable-defined consent keeping in alignment with the wording structures of Fixed/Variable for payment amounts. |
TPPs
The entry A15 Max SIP Payment Initiation Time Interval must be defined to be 10min instead of 5sec to align to the token validity period.
4
x/zQcNCQ page has been updated as follows: |
ID: A15
Name: Max SIP Payment Initiation Time Interval
Description: This is the period of time that TPPs MUST submit the Single Instant Payment Initiation Request to the OFP. The value defined for this is period is currently 10min. The OFP will reject the Payment Initiation Request is submitted outside this time window.
| |||
72 | 4 | Banking | https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/ |
4
TPPs
The entry A16 Max Bulk/Batch Payment Initiation Time Interval must be defined to be 10min instead of 5sec to align to the token validity period.
Entry A16 has been updated as follows:
ID: A16
Name: Max Bulk/Batch Payment Initiation Time Interval
Description: This is the period of time that TPPs MUST submit the Bulk/Batch Payment Initiation Request to the OFP. The value defined for this is period is currently 10min. The OFP will reject the Payment Initiation Request is submitted outside this time window.
LFIs | The LFI customer experience screen displays an option to ‘Review the information you will be sharing’, without indicating what the expected experience is if a user selects the arrow. | The LFI customer experience screen has been updated to display a dropdown with the data clusters being shared, identical to the dropdown displayed at the TPP. | ||||
73 | 4 | Common Components | LFIs | Several inconsistencies and errors in the wireframes related to the LFI Consent Management Interfaces. | Updated all wireframes in all sections of the LFI Consent Management Interfaces page. | |
74 | 4 | Payments with Delegated Authentication |
4
TPPs |
The entry A17 Max FDP Payment Initiation Time Interval must be defined to be 10min instead of 5sec to align to the token validity period.
Entry A17 has been updated as follows:
ID: A17
Name: Max FDP Payment Initiation Time Interval
Description: This is the period of time that TPPs MUST submit the FDP Payment Initiation Request to the OFP. The value defined for this is period is currently 10min. The OFP will reject the Payment Initiation Request is submitted outside this time window.
Update to authentication factors that TPP can use for MFA. | User biometrics, dynamic tokens (using Authenticator apps Authy, Google Authenticator, and Microsoft Authenticator etc. or RFID), mobile phone, plastic card, and other User identification (e.g. Emirates ID). | ||
75 | 4 | Banking |
LFIs & TPPs
In Errata2, a rule was added to User Experience Principles to state that “LFIs and TPPs MUST implement their customer experience screens in line with what is provided in each Customer Experience section of the Standard for the relevant functionality. This includes colors, branding, spacing and component design.”, without provision of the necessary assets.
View file | ||
---|---|---|
|
The relevant logos and color codes are attached and are to be implemented in line with the customer experience screens provided in the Standard.
TPPs | Previous version incorrectly included a duplicate transaction scenario, stating that TPPs should detect where Users have triggered duplicate transactions and display error message to warn about this. However, there are no BRs requesting TPPs to detect transaction duplicates. | Page has been updated to remove this entry from the PIS scenarios. | ||||
76 | 4 | Banking | TPPs | Scenario trigger in first entry in the table is incorrectly stated to be Creditor LFI, | Removed Creditor LFI from the first entry scenario triggers. | |
77 | 4 | Banking |
Link to the Periodic Payment Schedule of Multi-Payments is incorrect.
Updated section 3.2 with the correct link, as follows:
“Long-lived multi-payment consents can be combined with International Payments to enable Service Initiation capabilities for recurring cross-border payments. The initial scope of the Standard will supporting Fixed Recurring IP Payments as follows:
Fixed Payment Amount: This can either be in account currency or payment currency, if FX is involved in the payment
TPPs | Table incorrectly includes PIS stage of Proxy Lookup which is currently out of scope of the Open Finance Standard. | Removed the Proxy Lookup entry from the table | |
78 | 4 | Banking |
Initiated from a User’s payment account held by the LFI in local or foreign currency
To a specific Creditor (Beneficiary) owning a payment account located abroad (cross-border)”
TPPs | Insufficient Funds entry is incorrectly stated as Beneficiary Add and/or Activation PIS stage, instead of Select Account & Confirmation. | Changed the PIS stage to Select Account & Confirmation for the Insufficient Funds scenario | |
79 | 4 | Banking |
TPPs
Rule 4.5.1 of https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1final/pages/151849156/International+Payments#4.5-Payment-Charge-Model-for-International-Payments requires mapping of the user language for the charge bearer model to the values used in the API Description.
Updated rule 4.5.1 as follows:
“TPPs MUST:
4.5.1 Either allow Users to select the charge model for the international payment order. This can be one of the following:
“SHA” or “Shared”:The sender User of the payment will pay fees to the sending LFI for the outgoing transfer charges. The receiving beneficiary will receive the amount transferred, minus the correspondent (intermediary) LFI charges. Thus, transaction charges on the receiver side are borne by the creditor by deducting these from the received amount. This value maps to the ISO 200022 code name “SHAR”.“OUR” or “Borne By Debtor”:All fees will be charged to the sender User of the payment – i.e. the receiving beneficiary gets the full amount sent by the sender of the payment. Any charges applied by the receiving LFI will be billed to the sender of the payment (usually sometime after sending the payment). This value maps to the ISO 200022 code name “DEBT”.“BEN” or “Borne By Creditor”:BEN (beneficiary) means that the sender User of the payments does not pay any charges. The receiver beneficiary of the payment receives the payment minus all transfer charges, including the sending LFI charges if any. This value maps to the ISO 200022 code name “CRED”.70210800446/Common+Rules+and+Guidelines#9.3-Additional-TPP-Obligations | TPPs | Further clarification was required to indicate the TPP’s obligation to capture the User’s Emirates ID in certain scenarios. | TPPs MUST “CRG-9.3.2.1 Capture a user's Emirates ID for all payments where a long-lived consent is required. CRG-9.3.2.2 Capture a user's Emirates ID for all data sharing use cases where transaction data is shared, regardless of the consent type. CRG-9.3.2.3 Capture the user’s Emirates ID prior to initiating the prescribed user journey for the relevant use case.
Note: TPPs are not required to verify the Emirates ID.” |
80 | 4 | Banking |
TPPs
Links in the section are incorrectly displayed.
Updated section 4.7 with the correct links, as follows:
“TPPs MUST:
4.7.1 Support all category purpose codes including their descriptions as defined in the international https://www.iso20022.org/catalogue-messages/additional-content-messages/external-code-sets in order to be able to support the requirements for International Payments.
4.7.2 Either allow Users to select the available purpose of payment from a list or pre-populate it for Users.
4.7.3 Ensure and validate that the format of the payment purpose is according to the international https://www.iso20022.org/catalogue-messages/additional-content-messages/external-code-setsformat.”
TPPs | Further clarification was required to include additional data in the risk block, and specify which data is mandatory, conditional or optional. | The risk block table has been updated to include additional fields, as well as indicators of which fields are mandatory, conditional or optional. | ||||
81 | 4 | Banking | TPPs | An additional rule was required to specify a payment limit for first-time payments to new beneficiaries. | TPPs MUST “8.3 Impose a payment limit of 15000 AED for all first-time payments made to a new beneficiary.
| |
82 | 4 | Banking |
LFIs
TPPs | Enhancement of the authentication method required for payments with Delegated SCA. |
1.4.1 The authentication methods are limited to the following:
|
The rule will not change to require LFIs to reject the payments if IPP is unavailable.
Rule CRG-1.4.2 has been updated as follows:
“LFIs MUST:
CRG-1.4.2 In the scenario that IPP is unavailable, for example, it is going through maintenance and planned downtime, the LFIs MUST reject the payment and set the status of the payment to the Rejected terminal state.”
4
| |||
83 | 4 | Common Components |
TPPs
Throughout the https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/x/zQcNCQreferences to Variable-defined consent has been changed to Fixed-defined consent. That is to allow a new type of predefined schedule with known dates but unknow values. This type was introduced as Variable-defined consent keeping in alignment with the wording structures of Fixed/Variable for payment amounts.
TPP & LFIs | Provide clarifications to ensure that channels and use cases are mutually supportive. |
All references to Variable-defined have been replaced with Fixed-defined.
A new consent type definition was introduced called Variable-defined. This was added to all the required places in the page.
A new variation entry was introduced https://openfinanceuae.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/standardsv1dot1final/pages/210798542/Multi-Payments#3.3.5-Variable-Recurring-Payments-(VRPs)---Variable-defined-Consent
New object to reflect VariableOnDemand
payment type - which better reflect Business Rules
Errata version
Section
Subsection
Impacts
Description
Action
The inclusion of CRG-1.6, CRG-1.7 & CRG-1.8. |
Technical Specifications
Errata version | Section | Subsection | Impacts | Description | Action | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 1 | Common Components | Updated in | The | Implementers should follow the specification as per | |
2 | 1 | Common Components | Updated in | The optional | Implementers should follow the specification as per | |
3 | 1 | Common Components | Updated in | The | Implementers should follow the specification as per | |
4 | 1 | Common Components | Updated in | The | Implementers should follow the specification as per | |
5 | 1 | Common Components |
TPPs | The |
PeriodSchedule
shows all 3 schedule types - DefinedSchedule
, FixedPeriodicchedule
and VariablePeriodicSchedule
|
optional. | Implementers should follow the specification as per |
The specification in uae-pushed-authorization-endpoint-openapi.yaml
will be updated in the next version.
6 | 1 | Common Components |
Type
string field within the VariablePeriodicSchedule
object (MultiPayment
) is no longer applicable and should have been removed.LFIs TPPs | The enumerations listed within the | Implementers should follow the specification as per |
The specification in uae-pushed-authorization-endpoint-openapi.yaml
will be updated in the next version.
7 | 1 | Common Components |
MultiPayment
object shows the Amount
object as being as mandatory instead of optional.LFIs TPPs | Within the | Implementers should follow the specification as per |
|
. |
8 |
2 | Common Components | LFIs |
The MultiPayment
object shows the MaximumIndividualPaymentAmount
object as being as mandatory instead of optional.
Implementers should follow the specification as per uae-bank-initiation-openapi.yaml
.
The specification in uae-pushed-authorization-endpoint-openapi.yaml
will be updated in the next version.
1
Common Components
The Subscription
object and the Webhook
object are shown as being as mandatory instead of optional.
Implementers should follow the specification as per uae-bank-initiation-openapi.yaml
.
The specification in uae-pushed-authorization-endpoint-openapi.yaml
will be updated in the next version.
1
Common Components
The enumerations listed within the AccountSubType
parameter reflect the legacy list of account sub types instead of CurrentAccount
and Savings
Implementers should follow the specification as per uae-bank-initiation-openapi.yaml
.
The specification in uae-pushed-authorization-endpoint-openapi.yaml
will be updated in the next version.
1
Common Components
Within the FilePayment
object, the RequestedExecutionDateTime
parameter should have been renamed to RequestedExecutionDate
Implementers should follow the specification as per uae-bank-initiation-openapi.yaml
.
The specification in uae-pushed-authorization-endpoint-openapi.yaml
will be updated in the next version.
2
Common Components
The Open Finance Standards do not provide a mechanism for the TPP to transmit a User identifier to the LFI prior to Authentication taking place. Having the mechanism to do this, supported by the standards, has been highlighted by ecosystem participants as a very important enhancement.
The Pushed Authorization Request (PAR) OpenAPI description has been updated to include the login_hint
parameter, which is an OpenID Connect parameter that allows a Relying Party to send an indicator (“hint”) of the End User.
The open finance framework implementation of this parameter allows a TPP to send the Emirates ID or Trade License Number, as appropriate, using an encrypted JSON Web Token (JSON Web Encryption - JWE). The mechanics of creating the login_hint
parameter value are described in the PAR OpenAPI description.
The steps for creating and processing the JWE are as follows:
The TPP shall:
Implement support for providing the Emirates ID or Trade License Number based on customer and use cases requirements.
Create the payload based on the details found in the PAR OpenAPI description.
Discover the JWKS endpoint for the LFI that holds the Customer account, to which the request will be directed.
Retrieve the public encryption key for the LFI.
Encrypt the payload as a JWE using the public encryption key for the LFI, and include indicators such as
kid
that will allow the LFI to correlate the corresponding private key.Set the
login_hint
parameter to the value of the JWE.Send the PAR to the LFI endpoint at the API Hub.
The OFP shall:
Pass the value of the
login_hint
parameter to the LFI at the Ozone Connect Validate and/or Augment operation, depending on their configuration.
The LFI shall:
Based on their implementation, select the private encryption key that matches the public key used by the TPP.
Decrypt the value of the
login_hint
parameter and deserialise the payload value.Use the Emirates ID or Trade License Number as required in the processing of the Validate or Augment operation.
Please note that the use of login_hint
is optional and is intended to provide for enhanced customer experiences based on foresight of the customer identity. It is not a replacement for Authentication and Authorization.
TPPs and LFIs should follow the described mechanism to implement using the login_hint
parameter to send either the Emirates ID or Trade License Number with a Pushed Authorization Request.
Please see updated OpenAPI description document.
OFP TPPs | The Open Finance Standards do not provide a mechanism for the TPP to transmit a User identifier to the LFI prior to Authentication taking place. Having the mechanism to do this, supported by the standards, has been highlighted by ecosystem participants as a very important enhancement. | The Pushed Authorization Request (PAR) OpenAPI description has been updated to include the The open finance framework implementation of this parameter allows a TPP to send the Emirates ID or Trade License Number, as appropriate, using an encrypted JSON Web Token (JSON Web Encryption - JWE). The mechanics of creating the The steps for creating and processing the JWE are as follows:
Please note that the use of TPPs and LFIs should follow the described mechanism to implement using the | ||||
9 | 2 | Common Components | TPPs | Several arguments of the JWT-Secured Authorization Request (JAR) implemented in Pushed Authorizaton Request Endpoint OpenAPI did not offer detailed descriptions for their usage. | The PAR Endpoint have been updated to offer more extensive document. TPPs should review the | |
10 | 2 | Bank Data Sharing | Updated in | The |
| |
11 | 2 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs TPPs |
|
| |
12 | 2 | Common Components | Updated in | The |
| |
13 | 2 | Common Components | TPPs | The |
| |
14 | 2 | Common Components | LFIs TPPs |
|
| |
15 | 2 | Common Components | Updated in |
| The | |
16 | 2 | Common Components |
Several arguments of the JWT-Secured Authorization Request (JAR) implemented in Pushed Authorizaton Request Endpoint OpenAPI did not offer detailed descriptions for their usage.
The PAR Endpoint have been updated to offer more extensive document.
TPPs should review the description
values provided in the PAR Endpoint OpenAPI description.
Please see updated OpenAPI description document.
2
Bank Data Sharing
The Purpose
property in the Consent response was incorrectly labelled as optional
Purpose
is now mandatory in the Consent response, with the minItems
property set to 1 to indicate the array must not be empty.
Please see updated OpenAPI description document.
2
Bank Service Initiation
PaymentTransactionId
was incorrectly labelled as mandatory, but could not be populated until a valid payment reference had been created at the payment rails on which the payment instruction was transmitted.
PaymentTransactionId
is now optional, with additional description that states: “The PaymentTransactionId must be populated if the payment is processed by the LFI.”
Please see updated OpenAPI description document.
LFIs TPPs |
| The Schema Object | ||||
17 | 2 | Common Components | Updated in |
| The Schema Object | |
18 | 2 | Common Components | Updated in |
|
| |
19 | 2 | Common Components |
The Purpose
property of the AEAccountAccessAuthorizationDetailConsentProperties
Schema Object was incorrectly defined as optional.
Purpose
is now mandatory, with the minItems
property set to 1 to indicate the array must not be empty.
Please see updated OpenAPI description document.
2
Updated in |
|
| |
20 | 2 | Common Components |
The Subscription
property of all consent request Schema Object was labelled as mandatory. This was incorrectly defined as TPPs do not have to implement Event Notifications over Webhooks.
Subscription
updated to be optional.
Please see updated OpenAPI description document.
LFIs TPPs | The |
| |
21 | 3 | Common Components |
AEAccountSubTypeCode
does not match the enumeration values found in the Data Sharing OpenAPI description.
AEAccountSubTypeCode
updated to only CurrentAccount
and Savings
.
Please see updated OpenAPI description document.
2
Common Components
AEServiceInitiationDefinedSchedule
does not match the Bank Service Initiation OpenAPI description as maxItems
should be set to 50.
The Schedule
array of the AEServiceInitiationDefinedSchedule
has been amended with the maxItems
property set to 50.
Please see updated OpenAPI description document.
LFIs TPPs | Additional elements required from TPP to facilitate Billing for Data Sharing | AEAccountAccessAuthorizationDetailConsentProperties updated to include OpenFinanceBilling object. UserType:
Purpose:
| |
22 | 3 | Common Components |
RequestedExecutionDateTime
does not match the Bank Service Initiation OpenAPI description as the property has been renamed RequestedExecutionDate
with the format
property set to date
.
The Schema Object AERequestedExecutionDateTime
has been renamed AERequestedExecutionDate
and the format
value set to date
.
Please see updated OpenAPI description document.
LFIs TPPs | Additional elements required from TPP to facilitate Billing for Data Sharing | Purpose field has been moved into the OpenFinanceBilling object | |
23 | 3 | Common Components |
AEServiceInitiationLongLivedPaymentConsent
does not match the Bank Service Initiation OpenAPI description as Amount
, MaximumIndividualPaymentAmount
, and PeriodicSchedule
are set to mandatory.
The Schema Object AEServiceInitiationLongLivedPaymentConsent
has been updated to remove mandatory fields.
Please see updated OpenAPI description document.
TPPs OFP | Version and servers read v1.0 | Version and servers in OpenAPI document changed to v1.1 for consistency with rest of specification | |
24 | 3 | Common Components |
AEServiceInitiationLongLivedPaymentConsentPeriodicSchedule
does not match the Bank Service Initiation OpenAPI description as it implements named properties rather than a oneOf
.
AEServiceInitiationLongLivedPaymentConsentPeriodicSchedule
has been updated to implement a oneOf
.
Please see updated OpenAPI description document.
2
TPPs OFP | AEAccountAccessAuthorizationDetailsConsent fields incorrectly updated in draft3 to be capitalised (Type and Consent) - this is not compliant with the RAR spec | AEAccountAccessAuthorizationDetailsConsent updated to "type", "consent" and "subscription" | |
25 | 3 | Common Components |
AEServiceInitiationVariablePeriodicSchedule
does not match the Bank Service Initiation OpenAPI description as MaximumCumulativeValueOfPaymentsPerPeriodType
and MaximumCumulativeNumberOfPaymentsPerPeriodType
are labelled as mandatory.
AEServiceInitiationVariablePeriodicSchedule
has been updated to make MaximumCumulativeValueOfPaymentsPerPeriodType
and MaximumCumulativeNumberOfPaymentsPerPeriodType
optional.
Please see updated OpenAPI description document.
TPPs OFP | AEAccountAccessAuthorizationDetailsConsent fields incorrectly updated in draft3 to be capitalised (Type and Consent) - this is not compliant with the RAR spec | AEAccountAccessAuthorizationDetailsConsent updated to "type", "consent" and "subscription" | ||||
26 | 3 | Common Components | TPPs OFP | AEInsuranceAuthorizationDetailsConsent fields incorrectly updated in draft3 to be capitalised (Type and Consent) - this is not compliant with the RAR spec | AEInsuranceAuthorizationDetailsConsent updated to "type", "consent" and "subscription" | |
27 | 3 | Common Components |
The Amount
and Currency
Schema Objects are not consistent with the same Schema Object in the Bank Service Initiation OpenAPI description.
Amount
Schema Object renamed to AEActiveOrHistoricAmount
and properties updated to match Bank Service Initiation definition. CurrencyCode
renamed to AEActiveOrHistoricCurrencyCode
and updated to match Bank Service Initiation definition.
Please see updated OpenAPI description document.
TPPs OFP | AEServiceInitiationAuthorizationDetailConsent fields incorrectly updated in draft3 to be capitalised (Type and Consent) - this is not compliant with the RAR spec | AEServiceInitiationAuthorizationDetailConsent updated to "type", "consent" and "subscription" | |||
28 | 3 | Common Components | LFIs TPPs | Additional elements required from TPP to facilitate Billing for |
Insurance |
OBInsuranceAuthorizationDetailConsentProperties updated to include OpenFinanceBilling object. |
one mandatory fields - |
Purpose
|
description: Type of User
enum:
Retail
Corporate
Purpose:
|
|
BudgetingAnalysis
FinancialAdvice
AuditReconciliation
3
Common Components
Additional elements required from TPP to facilitate Billing for Data Sharing
Purpose field has been moved into the OpenFinanceBilling object
3
Common Components
version and servers - incorrectly updated in errata2
version and servers in OpenAPI document reverted back to v1.0 for consistency with rest of specification
3
Common Components
AEAccountAccessAuthorizationDetailsConsent fields incorrectly updated in draft3 to be capitalised (Type and Consent) - this is not compliant with the RAR spec
AEAccountAccessAuthorizationDetailsConsent updated to "type", "consent" and "subscription"
3
Common Components
AEAccountAccessAuthorizationDetailsConsent fields incorrectly updated in draft3 to be capitalised (Type and Consent) - this is not compliant with the RAR spec
AEAccountAccessAuthorizationDetailsConsent updated to "type", "consent" and "subscription"
3
Common Components
AEInsuranceAuthorizationDetailsConsent fields incorrectly updated in draft3 to be capitalised (Type and Consent) - this is not compliant with the RAR spec
AEInsuranceAuthorizationDetailsConsent updated to "type", "consent" and "subscription"
3
Common Components
AEServiceInitiationAuthorizationDetailConsent fields incorrectly updated in draft3 to be capitalised (Type and Consent) - this is not compliant with the RAR spec
AEServiceInitiationAuthorizationDetailConsent updated to "type", "consent" and "subscription"
3
Common Components
| ||||||
29 | 3 | Bank Data Sharing | LFIs TPPs | Consent response updated to align with PAR updates | AEReadConsentResponse updated to include OpenFinanceBilling OpenFinanceBilling has two mandatory fields specified by the TPP (UserType and Purpose); and one optional field specified by the LFI (IsLargeCorporate) | |
30 | 3 | Bank Data Sharing | LFIs TPPs | It has been identified that some LFIs display beneficiary CreditorAccounts that include Credit Card accounts, Proxy accounts, and Utilities This affects beneficiaries, standing orders and scheduled payments | AECashAccount5_0 has been updated to allow for additional enumerations enum:
| |
31 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs TPPs | Additional elements required from TPP to facilitate Billing for Payments | New object in the AEPaymentConsentResponse with one optional field specified by the LFI (IsLargeCorporate) | |
32 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs TPPs | Additional elements required from TPP to facilitate Billing for Payments | New object in the AEPaymentRequest and AEPaymentIdResponse with one mandatory field Type, and one optional field for the MerchantId - both specified by the TPP at point of payment initiation Type:
description: The type payment for billing | |
33 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs TPPs | Additional elements required from TPP to facilitate Billing for |
OBInsuranceAuthorizationDetailConsentProperties updated to include OpenFinanceBilling object.
This object has one mandatory fields - Purpose
Purpose:
description: Purpose of data sharing request
type: string
enum:
AccountAggregation
RiskAssessment
PremiumHistory
ClaimHistory
Onboarding
Verification
QuoteComparison
FinancialAdvice
3
Bank Data Sharing
Consent response updated to align with PAR updates
AEReadConsentResponse updated to include OpenFinanceBilling
OpenFinanceBilling has two mandatory fields specified by the TPP (UserType and Purpose); and one optional field specified by the LFI (IsLargeCorporate)
3
Bank Service Initiation
Additional elements required from TPP to facilitate Billing for File Payments
New object in the AEFilePaymentIdResponse with one optional field for the NumberOfSuccessfulTransactions - updated by the LFI after the file is fully processed
3
Common Components
The existing PersonalIdentifiableInformation object supports only 1 creditor being identified for a payment consent
In the AEPaymentPII example in the PersonalIdentifiableInformation field - have made the creditor identification details an array to support original business requirements
This has not been updated in the Bank Initiation spec (as each individual payment will only have 1 creditor)
File Payments | New object in the AEFilePaymentIdResponse with one optional field for the NumberOfSuccessfulTransactions - updated by the LFI after the file is fully processed | |||||
34 | 3 | Common Components | OFP TPPs | The existing PersonalIdentifiableInformation object supports only 1 creditor being identified for a payment consent | In the AEPaymentPII example in the PersonalIdentifiableInformation field - have made the creditor identification details an array to support original business requirements This has not been updated in the Bank Initiation spec (as each individual payment will only have 1 creditor) | |
35 | 3 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs TPPs | The DebtorAccount and CreditorAccount will be taken from the consent, so that an additional check is no longer required if only one DebtorAccount or CreditorAccount is specified in the consent | Removed DebtorAccount from the AEPaymentPII example in the PersonalIdentifiableInformation field - as this will be taken from the consent | |
36 | 3 | Bank Data Sharing |
It has been identified that some LFIs display beneficiary CreditorAccounts that include Credit Card accounts, Proxy accounts, and Utilities
This affects beneficiaries, standing orders and scheduled payments
AECashAccount5_0 has been updated to allow for additional enumerations
enum:
IBAN
AccountNumber
MaskedPAN
MobileNumber
UtilityName
EWallet
3
Bank Service Initiation
Additional elements required from TPP to facilitate Billing for Payments
New object in the AEPaymentConsentResponse with one optional field specified by the LFI (IsLargeCorporate)
3
Bank Service Initiation
Additional elements required from TPP to facilitate Billing for Payments
New object in the AEPaymentRequest and AEPaymentIdResponse with one mandatory field Type, and one optional field for the MerchantId - both specified by the TPP at point of payment initiation
Type:
enum:
Collection
LargeValueCollection
PushP2P
PullP2P
Me2Me
description: The type payment for billing
MerchantId:
description: "MerchantId"
type: "string"
minLength: 8
maxLength: 20
4
Common Components
TPP
Business Rules state that consent cannot be more than a year
ExpirationDateTime
updated to mandatory in:
AEAccountAccessAuthorizationDetailConsentProperties
AEServiceInitiationAuthorizationDetailProperties
OBInsuranceAuthorizationDetailConsentProperties
4
Common Components
TPP
Reconsent objects removed from standard, as this is not part of the existing Business Rules
RichAuthorizationRequestObjects
have Reconsent objects removed
LFIs TPPs | The account statuses did not match the regulations for Inactive, Dormant, and Unclaimed provided by CBUAE. |
| ||||
37 | 4 | Common Components | TPPs | Business Rules state that consent cannot be more than a year |
| |
38 | 4 | Common Components | TPPs | Reconsent objects removed from standard, as this is not part of the existing Business Rules |
| |
39 | 4 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs |
|
| |
40 | 4 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs | The TPP is no longer expected to send in the | Removed | |
41 | 4 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs |
| Removed | |
42 | 4 | Bank Service Initiation |
The DebtorAccount and CreditorAccount will be taken from the consent, so that an additional check is no longer required if only one DebtorAccount or CreditorAccount is specified in the consent
Removed DebtorAccount from the AEPaymentPII example in the PersonalIdentifiableInformation field - as this will be taken from the consent
3
Bank Data Sharing
The account statuses did not match the regulations for Inactive, Dormant, and Unclaimed provided by CBUAE.
AEAccountStatusCode
has been changed as follows:
NotActive
has been moved toInactive
and now references the CBUAE guidance on inactive status.Dormant
now references the CBUAE guidance on dormant account status.Unclaimed
now references the CBUAE guidance on unclaimed account status.Suspended
has been clarified with more description to improve understanding.
TPPs LFIs (very minimal impact to LFIs - as it is purely a different way of identifying existing functionality) | For explicitness have added | Added | ||||
43 | 4 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs LFIs (very minimal impact to LFIs - as it is purely a different way of identifying existing functionality) |
| To simplify implementation and better align with Business Rules we have created a:
These are both arrays of up to 53 items.
| |
44 | 4 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs LFIs (very minimal impact to LFIs - as it is purely a different way of identifying existing functionality) |
| Both
| |
45 | 4 | Bank Service Initiation |
TPP
ReadRefundAccount
field has been simplified to be an option in the Permissions
array
ReadRefundAccount
field has been simplified to be an option in the Permissions
array
4
Bank Service Initiation
TPP
Errata for ExpectedInitiationWindow
which is
Removed ExpectedInitiationWindow
TPPs LFIs (very minimal impact to LFIs - as it is purely a different way of identifying existing functionality) | New object to reflect |
Where
| |
46 | 4 | Bank Service Initiation |
TPP
IsPayByAccount
flag is not in the Business Rules
Removed IsPayByAccount
flag
4
Bank Service Initiation
TPP
For explicitness have added IsDelegatedSCA
to indicate a TPP Delegated SCA model - for schema validation and non-repudiation
Added IsDelegatedSCA
boolean flag
4
Bank Service Initiation
TPP
DefinedSchedule
to be better aligned with Business Rules
To simplify implementation and better align with Business Rules we have created a:
FixedDefinedSchedule
VariableDefinedSchedule
These are both arrays of up to 53 items.
The
FixedDefinedSchedule
is a pair ofPaymentExecutionDate
andAmount
The
VariableDefinedSchedule
is a pair ofPaymentExecutionDate
andMaximumIndividualAmount
4
Bank Service Initiation
TPP
FixedPeriodicSchedule
and VariablePeriodicSchedule
to be better aligned with Business Rules - to have payments initiated on dates that are on the PeriodStartDate
+ the subsequent PeriodType
Both FixedPeriodicSchedule
and VariablePeriodicSchedule
to have mandatory fields only.
VariablePeriodicSchedule
updated to have as mandatory only:
Type
PeriodType
PeriodStartDate
MaximumIndividualAmount
4
Bank Service Initiation
TPP
New object to reflect FixedOnDemand
payment type - which better reflect Business Rules
FixedOnDemand
to have mandatory:
Type
PeriodType
PeriodStartDate
Amount
Controls
Where Controls
is an object with at least one of the following properties specified:
MaximumCumulativeValueOfPaymentsPerPeriod
MaximumCumulativeNumberOfPaymentsPerPeriod
4
Bank Service Initiation
TPP
New object to reflect VariableOnDemand
payment type - which better reflect Business Rules
VariableOnDemand
to have mandatory:
Type
PeriodType
PeriodStartDate
Controls
Where Controls
is an object with at least one of the following properties specified:
MaximumIndividualAmount
MaximumCumulativeValueOfPaymentsPerPeriod
MaximumCumulativeNumberOfPaymentsPerPeriod
4
Bank Service Initiation
TPP
Removed duplication of MaximumIndividualPaymentAmount
and Amount
at the MultiPayment
consent top level - as is now duplication
Removed duplication of MaximumIndividualPaymentAmount
and Amount
at the MultiPayment
consent top level
4
Bank Service Initiation
TPP and LFI
Errata for PaymentConsumption
object as errata:
CumulativeValueOfPaymentsPerPeriod
is not always relevant for a Long Lived Payment Consent - however, is marked as mandatoryCumulativeNumberOfPaymentsPerCurrentPeriod
suggests that this is the same value for all period - however, the intent is that this is only for the current periodCumulativeValueOfPaymentsPerCurrentPeriod
suggests that this is the same value for all period - however, the intent is that this is only for the current periodCumulativeNumberOfPaymentsPerCurrentPeriod
andCumulativeValueOfPaymentsPerCurrentPeriod
are intended to include all payments except for payments in aRejected
state
Updates:
CumulativeValueOfPaymentsPerPeriod
updated from mandatory to optionalCumulativeNumberOfPaymentsPerCurrentPeriod
renamed toCumulativeNumberOfPaymentsInCurrentPeriod
suggestsCumulativeValueOfPaymentsPerCurrentPeriod
renamed toCumulativeValueOfPaymentsInCurrentPeriod
CumulativeValueOfPaymentsPerCurrentPeriod
, andCumulativeValueOfPaymentsInCurrentPeriod
definitions updated to “The cumulative value of payment instructions in the current period initiated under the consent schedule, excluding instructions in a Rejected state.“
4
Bank Service Initiation
TPP
PersonalIdentifiableInformation
object is now optional for the POST /payments
action - as these details may be derived in most cases from the consent (after changes in v1.0-errata3
)
PersonalIdentifiableInformation
is optional in POST /payments
request
4
Bank Service Initiation
TPP
ChargeBearer
for International Payments does not need the FollowingServiceLevel
option
Updated ChargeBearer
to only
Code Block |
---|
- "BorneByCreditor"
- "BorneByDebtor"
- "Shared" |
4
Bank Data Sharing
LFI
PartyType
and AccountRole
describe customer to account relationship - so are not relevant for the /parties
endpoint
PartyType
and AccountRole
from the GET /parties
endpoint responseTPPs LFIs (very minimal impact to LFIs - as it is purely a different way of identifying existing functionality)) | New object to reflect |
Where
| ||||||
47 | 4 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs LFIs (very minimal impact to LFIs - as it is purely a different way of identifying existing functionality) | Issues with
| Removed duplication of Updated | |||
48 | 4 | Bank Service Initiation | LFIs TPPs | Errata for
| Updates:
| |||
49 | 4 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs |
|
| |||
50 | 4 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs |
| Updated
| |||
51 | 4 | Bank Data Sharing | LFIs |
| Removed | |||
52 | 4 | Common Components | LFIs TPPs | OpenAPI description did not convey the decoded version of the property, making it difficult for implementers to understand. | PII types (Payment, | |||
53 | 4 | Insurance | TPPs | API operations to retrieve policies were not differentiated by industry, which has been highlighted as being desirable in early industry sessions for the next insurance release. | API operations for motor insurance are now hosted at | |||
54 | 4 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs | The |
| |||
55 | 4 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs | The | Removed | |||
56 | 4 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs |
| Merged two Schema Objects into one, with one | |||
57 | 4 | Bank Service Initiation | TPPs | Enhancements requested for the | Updates to the |