Across the full book there are 162 churned merchants — excluding takeovers and now-active accounts, including fraud. This report focuses on the three highest-volume channels (114 of the 162), with a transcript-grounded deep dive on FS Canvas.
Value metric = expected annual TPV (£): the projected annual card volume captured at signup. Section totals sum these projections — several are round-number placeholders — so read them as an upper-bound indication of size, not realised volume.
One chart, grouped by reason, with the new coding on top and the old coding directly beneath it so each reason’s before/after is side by side. The new coding is shown as a share of the 162 churns (takeovers and active accounts excluded); the old coding keeps its own 109-churn base. Each label reads count then (% of churns). The old coding leaned on a broad “fraud / closed by acquirer” bucket and had no silent-churn category — the re-code splits that apart and surfaces silent churn and takeover.
What changed: on the 162-churn base the old “fraud / closed by acquirer” (32%) resolves into Fraud (25%) and Closed/sold (5%), with 19 takeovers reclassified out of churn entirely; Silent churn emerged as a top-3 reason (18%) where it had no category before; “issues with the acquirer / withheld funds” became Held payout; and “bad service” became “delayed delivery / poor service.” Net effect: a clearer view of what’s actually addressable.
Takeovers and merchants since re-activated are excluded from both the counts and the totals. Reasons are multi-select, so a merchant can carry more than one and counts exceed the merchant total.
Each labelled segment reads count · % of that channel’s churns — e.g. “6 (13%)” means 6 merchants — 13% of the channel’s churns.
Fraud is the largest single bucket in every channel. Setting it aside, silent churn leads the addressable reasons in FS Canvas and Cold call; Facebook is a three-way tie of silent, surcharge and competitor. FS Canvas reflects manual corrections: Nakos is a payout churn (not silent) and Osteria is silent (not technical).
The actionable reasons, each with the numbers up front (count, share, and total expected TPV) and the actual Retention / CS history behind the merchants. Merchant IDs throughout.
Diagnostek (10324005), Tobacconists (4568229), RK Gadget Hub (4493219), BIO Britware (10322153), House of Computers (10094324) and Osteria (10290189). None ever called in — they simply stopped transacting with no reason given. The play is early-life activation, not a retention save.
Says the SM advised him incorrectly — one of only four merchants across all channels citing explicit mis-selling.
Surcharge cost-transparency requests, then — decisively — unhappy with the 36-month binding period she says she’d never have signed.
Surcharge unhappiness stacked on a POS gap (no kitchen display) they say they already knew about, plus a Dojo preference.
The rest of the bucket resent the fee without a mis-sell narrative — CNR Trade also disliked the web app and Z-report and “doesn’t want Flatpay at any rate.”
Setting fraud aside, silent, surcharge and competitor account for the bulk of Facebook churn — and surcharge and competitor are tightly linked through a recurring Dojo pull.
MOSHRAHMAN (10318807), MK London (10093555), Munch Now (4673719), Angel Coffee (4532169) and Alba Media (10296676). Only Alba Media ever called — and raised no issue. Early-life silence rather than a hidden problem.
Cancelled in free trial — “feels like his trust has been broken” over the surcharge; the SM had already arranged to collect the machines.
Claims the SM didn’t advise of the surcharge; unhappy with contract length. Declined a 24-month, no-surcharge, 0.49% counter-offer.
Surcharge bundled with a Dojo preference: Arsenal “loved our terminal minus the surcharge” but is locked to Dojo; Ciao Bella pairs surcharge with battery-life and reporting complaints.
Locked to Dojo by a 2-year business loan — loved our terminal but can’t move. Lending is the lock-in we can’t match.
Previously won back, then a Z-report issue sent them looking; declined 0.56% / 24-month and 0.49%-with-a-Dojo-quote offers.
Moreish flatly “will change this company”; Floof Hut cites Dojo’s lower rate plus a connectivity issue on one branch.
The most varied channel: missing features and competitor co-lead, with surcharge, silent and payout close behind. Higher expected-TPV accounts appear here than elsewhere.
Pay by phone / MOTO is the decisive gap. Megna: 75% of payments are over the phone; Pinner Green MOT needs it too. Hot Wok left for a provider that has it.
The rest of the gap list: POS / till (BOOKS wants SumUp’s POS + digital tax; Meadow needs a POS), business loans (Mero’s wants funding, going to Dojo) and monthly invoicing (Mumms).
Wanted Monday cash-and-carry payouts; the Rapyd switch that would enable it disables AMEX — so we couldn’t satisfy both.
The two biggest competitor churns. Moca prefers Dojo’s reporting (+ surcharge unhappiness); Bhanjyang left over price — “too expensive” — and asked for an invoice.
Leaving for Dojo specifically because it offers the business loan they need — the clearest example of lending as the lock-in.
AYVA wants an invoice for the 36-month binding period on the way out; Stucchi is mid-contract with another provider and wants to leave in trial.
“Feels mis-led” on the surcharge — the explicit mis-selling claim, echoed by 4Lebanese Grill on Facebook.
SEB is losing customers over the fee and has a long-standing Dojo relationship; Health Defence wanted the surcharge removed on corporate/foreign cards.
Surcharge rarely travels alone here — it’s bundled with a competitor pull (Moca→Dojo reporting, BOOKS→SumUp POS + rate).
Wants her full revenue paid out, then one invoice at month-end — monthly invoicing, not per-transaction deductions. Mumms Cafe wants the same.
Cash-and-carry needing Monday-morning payouts to restock — and we couldn’t guarantee a morning payout even switching to Rapyd.
Both want daily payouts, which we don’t accommodate; both declined a rate reduction. Perfect Tailoring separately flagged a payout that arrived far short (£65 of a £553 sale).
Ember & Cork, Rendezvous, Life Barbers, Ocean Foods, Auto Arcade, Wendy’s Nails, Seafood For Kings and Viking. Only Viking (10095507) had inbound calls — trading-name edits — and it was Flatpay-cancelled for low TPV. Seafood For Kings (10084197) is the highest-value silent account and worth a direct win-back.
Three moves — two reason-specific fixes plus one structural lever.
Silent is a top-2 addressable reason in every channel and almost none of these merchants ever called — an early-life engagement gap, not a retention save. A first-90-days activation programme, with direct outreach to the higher-value ones (Seafood For Kings).
Surcharge is 11–19% of churns per channel. Proven mis-selling is a minority (4 explicit “SM didn’t tell me”), but it’s the version we control — make surcharge and the 36-month term explicit at signup. Late removal rarely saves the account.
A work-in-progress experiment to cancel merchants’ old providers on their behalf, so a churned merchant can’t simply fall back to a dormant previous account. Especially relevant against Dojo/SumUp, where the old contract often stays open and available. Early-stage — worth tracking as a structural retention lever alongside the reason-specific fixes above.