You can update a SEPA Direct Debit Core mandate without halting recurring collections, because a mandate amendment rides along with the next scheduled collection (1). The amendment must be agreed between you and your customer, and only specific changes concern the payment service providers involved.
How do I update a SEPA Core mandate without stopping my recurring collections?
Treat the change as a mandate amendment agreed between you and the debtor, since either the creditor or the debtor can amend the mandate at any time (1). Four amendments concern the creditor PSP or the debtor PSP: a changed unique mandate reference after internal organisational changes (restructuring), a changed Creditor Identifier after a merger, acquisition, spin-off or organisational change, a changed creditor name, and the debtor deciding to use another account within the same PSP or in another PSP.
For these changes, dematerialise the mandate, archive the document and send the amended mandate information to your creditor PSP as part of the next collection (1). The European Payments Council's SEPA Direct Debit Core Scheme Rulebook requires the mandate-related information to accompany every collection once a mandate is new or amended, so the amendment rides along with the next scheduled collection rather than needing a separate stop-and-restart step (1).
Creditor and debtor are each responsible and liable for amending the mandate characteristics they own (1). The process for issuing and signing the original mandate is handled between the creditor and the debtor, as covered in our earlier setup article (2).
How do I flag the amendment and the original mandate details so the next collection is not rejected?
In the PSP-to-PSP collection message, the Amendment Indicator notifies whether the underlying mandate is amended or not (3). When it is set to true, the Amendment Information Details become mandatory. The Original Mandate Identification is mandatory only if changes occur in the mandate identification, and is otherwise not to be used.
When the debtor moves to a new account, the Original Debtor Account carries the code SMNDA, meaning Same Mandate with a New Debtor Account (4). Where the account change stays within the same PSP, the IBAN is allowed instead (3). If the creditor changes the Creditor Identifier and/or the mandate reference a second time, the last valid (most recently applied) one should be indicated as the original in that second amendment (4).
Do not send amendments that merely repeat the original details (4). The Clarification Paper recommends that the debtor PSP reject such a collection with reason code MD02, mandate data missing or incorrect. If a collection carrying amendments is rejected, repeat those amendments when you re-present it, and note that a rejected recurrent collection is re-presented as recurrent. Where a collection has received an R-transaction, mandate amendments in the collection do not impact the sequence type of the next presented collection. Where the Creditor Identifier and/or the mandate reference changes for a second time, the last valid, meaning most recently applied, value should be indicated as the original in that second amendment.
Mandate changes and what travels with the next collection
Change | What goes with the next collection | How to check it |
|---|---|---|
Debtor moves to another account, at the same PSP or at another PSP | Amendment Indicator true and Original Debtor Account set to SMNDA; at the same PSP the code IBAN is allowed | Original Debtor Account holds SMNDA, or IBAN for a same-PSP change |
Unique mandate reference changes (for example after restructuring) | Amendment Indicator true and the previous mandate reference given as the original; on a second change, the most recently applied one | Original Mandate Identification is filled only when Mandate Identification changes |
Creditor Identifier changes (merger, acquisition, spin-off or organisational change) | Amendment Indicator true and the previous Creditor Identifier given as the original | Original Creditor Scheme Identification is filled only when the scheme identification and/or name changes |
Amendment values identical to the original details | Do not send them as amendments | Debtor PSP is recommended to reject with MD02 (mandate data missing or incorrect) |
Collection carrying amendments is rejected | Repeat the mandate amendments in the re-presented collection; the sequence type of the next collection is not affected | A rejected recurrent collection is re-presented as a recurrent direct debit |
What pre-notification and timing apply to collections after a mandate update?
Before sending a collection to your creditor PSP, tell the debtor the amount and due date (1). This can be an invoice, a schedule of repetitive debits, an individual advice or another electronic notice agreed with the debtor (4). The Pre-notification must be sent by the Creditor at the latest 14 Calendar Days before the Due Date unless another timeline is agreed between the Debtor and the Creditor (1).
If you agree a shorter timeline, allow the debtor enough time to fund the account, because an improperly handled pre-notification may result in a Return or a Refund (4). You may send the collection to your PSP once the pre-notification has gone out, but not earlier than 14 calendar days before the due date unless otherwise agreed (2). The debtor PSP must receive it at the latest one inter-PSP business day before the due date.
When the identity of the creditor has changed because of a merger or acquisition, the new creditor must inform the debtor of the related mandate amendments by any means, such as a letter or mail, to avoid a dispute by the debtor over a collection not recognising the creditor name or identifier on the account statement (1).
What happens if the mandate data is not updated correctly?
A collection can be rejected before inter-PSP settlement for technical reasons, such as an invalid format, or because the debtor PSP cannot process it (1). A collection whose amendments equal the original details may be treated as erroneous and possibly as an unauthorised debit, which is why MD02 is the recommended reject reason (4).
The substitution or mixture of creditor identification attributes may lead to R-transactions, because the debtor may refuse the presented collection as it no longer recognises the creditor, or may submit a request for a refund (4).
A refund for an unauthorised transaction can occur when the debtor requests one and the creditor cannot provide unquestionable evidence of the mandate or does not respond (4). It is strongly recommended that the creditor contacts the debtor to clarify the issue before issuing any further collections.
Sources
- SEPA Direct Debit Core Scheme Rulebook 2025 Version 1.2, European Payments Council, 30 September 2026
- SEPA Direct Debit Core Scheme Rulebook, European Payments Council AISBL, 5 October 2025
- Inter-PSP Implementation Guidelines, European Payments Council (EPC), accessed 4 November 2026
- CLARIFICATION PAPER, European Payments Council AISBL, 5 October 2025