Mangopay executive says refund flows are becoming a platform priority

Refunds are moving up the payments agenda for digital platforms, with 43% of UK platforms examining alternative payment infrastructure citing stronger control over refund flows as a main reason for considering change, according to research cited by Mangopay. Andy Wiggan, chief product officer at Mangopay, said platforms are looking beyond checkout to the full movement of funds across pay-ins, payouts, reconciliation, treasury management and refunds.

Wiggan’s comments come against a policy backdrop in which the UK government’s National Payments Vision sets an ambition for a more innovative and competitive payments ecosystem serving consumers and businesses. He said the market’s earlier focus on embedded finance, digital wallets and Open Banking had largely concentrated on reducing friction at the point of payment, while platforms are now paying closer attention to what happens after a transaction is completed.

Refunds shift from back office to customer experience

Traditional refund systems generally reverse a payment and send the money back to the customer’s original account. Wiggan said that model has usually met operational and regulatory needs in conventional commerce, where a transaction can be treated as a discrete event.

Platform businesses operate on a different basis, he said. Marketplaces, creator-economy services and gig platforms rely on repeated participation by buyers, sellers and service providers. In that setting, a refund is part of a continuing relationship rather than the conclusion of a single sale.

That distinction is shaping how platforms think about payments infrastructure, according to Wiggan. Instead of assessing refunds solely on whether the money has been returned, platforms are increasingly asking whether the process preserves the user’s confidence and keeps the experience coherent.

How wallet-based refunds work

In an integrated wallet model, a refund can be credited to a customer’s wallet inside the platform rather than being sent directly back to an external bank account or card. Wiggan said this can give users immediate access to returned funds while keeping them within the platform’s payment environment.

The mechanism may also give platforms more visibility over the flow of money. A wallet-based refund keeps the refunded balance available for later use on the same service, subject to the platform’s design and applicable rules. Wiggan framed the main purpose as reducing friction and making the payment journey feel continuous, rather than treating commercial reuse of funds as the primary objective.

Consumer expectations have also changed, he said. Faster Payments, mobile wallets and account-to-account payments have made speed, transparency and control more familiar in everyday transactions. Wiggan argued that those expectations increasingly apply to refunds as well as to initial purchases.

Trust after payment

Payment trust has often been associated with pre-transaction controls, including fraud prevention, Strong Customer Authentication and user verification. Wiggan said trust is also shaped by events after money has changed hands, particularly in sectors where cancellations, returns or booking amendments are frequent.

He identified travel, ticketing and retail marketplaces as examples where the refund experience can become one of the more prominent interactions between a customer and a platform. A process that is quick and clear can support confidence, while delays or uncertainty can damage perceptions of the service, according to Wiggan.

His argument reflects a broader shift in how payment infrastructure is being assessed by platform businesses. Refunds, once treated mainly as a post-purchase operational function, are increasingly viewed as part of the customer experience and as one component of how money circulates within a platform.

This story draws on original reporting from Finextra Research.