The Open API specification prescribes the mandatory "code" attribute in VerificationOfPayeeError with a fixed set of codes (FORMAT_ERROR, CLIENT_INVALID, CLIENT_INCONSISTENT, TIMESTAMP_INVALID).

The OpenAPI specification defines the service URL as "/vop/v1/payee-verifications". Could the "Inter-PSP" VoP services be differentiated from internal (PSU->PSP) VoP services? For example, it would help to assume URL such as "/vop/fi2fi/v1/payee-verificat

The API “Verification of Payee” is only dedicated to the inter-PSP’s space.

Is it mandatory for the scheme participants to support all the VOP request types (i.e., both combinations A and B) described in section 3.2 of the VOP scheme rulebook?

Supporting the combination, A is mandatory, but combination B is optional. The scheme participants do not have to support one (or several) identifier code(s) from the beginning; they can update the EDS whenever they are ready.

Will the EPC propose a standardisation of the bulk process?

In the second half of 2025 the Verification Of Payee Working Group will look into the possibility to give guidance about the bulk process.

In case a customer (Requester) wants to execute a payment by discarding the VOP result and the warning message (i.e., in case of no match/verification check not possible/no response) and it has resulted in financial loss, who will be liable?

For liability related questions, please refer to the Regulation (EU) 260/2012 as modified by the Regulation (EU) 886/2024 (Instant Payments Regulation - IPR), and to the Clarification of requirements of the

Should the reason code provided in the VOP Response be displayed back to customer (Requester)?

According to the IPR, the Requesting PSP must notify the Requester about the outcome of the VOP check. It is up to the Requesting PSP to decide how to comply with this requirement.

Is it planned to publish standards for ISO20022-messages for the customer-to-bank-sphere related to the VOP scheme?

At the moment, only inter-PSP API specifications were published, and it is not foreseen to publish ISO20022 messages for the customer-to-bank space.