One of the quickest ways of checking MCCs is through the Amaze Card.
By making an unsuccessful transaction, either with a blocked card or an insufficient wallet balance, you can verify the MCC on the Instarem app, then repeat the transaction using the optimal card for the situation.
However, this feature appears to be unavailable for some users now, which raises questions as to whether it’s just a temporary bug, or something more sinister.
No more MCC checking with Amaze?
Yesterday, reports started coming in that Amaze Cardholders were no longer able to view the MCCs of both declined and successful transactions on the Instarem app, whether current or historical.
While the app still categorised the transaction broadly (e.g. Entertainment, Shopping, Dining), it did not show the MCC field.
But here’s where it gets complicated, because not all users are affected. On my Instarem app, for example, both blocked and successful transactions still display the MCC, just as before.
Based on community discussions, there does not appear to be any distinction between Android and iPhone users. Nor does it seem tied to a specific app version, since users on the same version are seeing different behaviour.
Therefore, at this stage it’s hard to say whether this is a temporary glitch, or some form of A/B testing ahead of a broader rollout. We should have a better picture in the next few days, so sit tight.
For what it’s worth, there would indeed be a commercial reason for Instarem to remove such a feature. Declined transactions still incur expenses for card issuers (to cover the cost of communication technology and fraud checks), and too many declined transactions add up eventually.
What are the alternatives for checking MCCs?
If you’re one of the users affected by the outage, there are still two ways of checking MCCs before making a purchase — but neither is perfect.
DBS digibot method
DBS cardholders can place a temporary block on a credit card and attempt to make a transaction. After this, they can use the digibot to list their declined transactions, which will appear along with the MCC.
Technically, the MCC description is provided rather than the four-digit code (e.g. Department Stores instead of MCC 5311), but this is specific enough for you to find the answer with a quick Google, or by referring to this file.Â
The downside of this method is that it takes significantly longer, as you’ll need to navigate through numerous menu options before you can obtain the MCC. It’s definitely not the kind of thing you want to be doing while holding up the line!
HeyMax
HeyMax allows users to search for the MCC of many popular merchants, and also recommends what cards you can use to pay.
For the most comprehensive results, you’ll need to manually change the search method to “Visa search”, which uses Visa’s API to find a merchant rather than just referring to HeyMax’s database.Â
The problem with the HeyMax method is that sometimes, the registered business name of a merchant may not match its public-facing name (most famously with pornographic websites, to prevent spousal discovery).
Moreover, some merchants — particularly ecommerce platforms — process transactions under a range of MCCs. Therefore, it’s impossible to discover the actual MCC without attempting a transaction — something that the HeyMax lookup tool doesn’t allow for.
I tend to use HeyMax as a “quick and dirty” reference guide, when time is of the essence and the amount in question is relatively small. I certainly wouldn’t chance it with any kind of big-ticket purchase, and neither should you.
Conclusion
Numerous Amaze Cardholders are reporting that they can no longer check MCCs through the Instarem app, whether for current or historical transactions.
However, this does not affect all users equally, so hopefully it’s just a glitch that will eventually be ironed out. In the meantime, you can use the DBS digibot or HeyMax to check MCCs, though these lack the convenience and/or reliability of the Amaze Card method.
Is MCC checking via the Amaze Card working for you?
Unpopular opinion: abusing a free “hack” and imposing business costs on a vendor without even giving them eventual business (by using a non-Amaze card to eventually pay) to check whether a $10 F&B txn is 5814 or not, one should not be sad that this loophole is eventually closed
It should not be a “hack” in the first place though, should it. The real issue here is that banks use a non-transparent method to award miles that leaves everyone guessing about how a particular transaction will be processed. This is not right, nor fair. If banks did the right thing and enabled people to know how a transaction will be processed, then there would not need to be a “hack” to find out what should be available and transparent in the first place.
100% agree. There should be a far easier way to know of a merchant’s MCC since a lot of the rewards are MCC-based and one could lose out a lot of value using the wrong card for a particular MCC.
For offline/contactless transactions, another method I use is to ask the cashier to split the transaction into $5 and the balance. I will first use UOB PV for to pay the $5 and get the 4mpd. This transaction will then be posted on my Heymax Card Tracker, where the MCC will be listed and decide which card to use for the balance. Not the most ideal as Heymax will sometimes lag and post only a few hours or even days later, but still quite accurate.
According to support “MCC codes are only visible for the approved transactions”