Payment systems are foundational to economic activity, and their evolution tends to reflect broader technological and societal shifts. In the UK, Bacs and Direct Debit have long provided a reliable and cost-effective backbone for processing recurring payments, payroll, and supplier transactions. Their design, based on batch processing over a multi-day cycle, prioritised efficiency and scale at a time when immediacy was neither technically feasible nor widely demanded.
However, expectations have changed. The proliferation of digital services, real-time data, and embedded finance has created demand for payments that are not only reliable but also instantaneous, transparent, and controllable. Faster Payments and, more recently, VRPs have emerged in response to these expectations, enabling transactions to be executed in seconds rather than days and giving users greater visibility and authority over how payments are initiated.
This shift raises a fundamental question about the future structure of the payments ecosystem. While real-time systems clearly offer functional advantages, legacy infrastructure continues to operate at immense scale and low cost. Understanding whether this transition will result in outright replacement or long-term coexistence requires a closer examination of how these systems are currently used and where their respective strengths lie.
The present state of the UK payments ecosystem is best understood as one of functional coexistence rather than direct competition. Bacs and Direct Debit remain deeply embedded in high-volume, low-value transaction flows, where cost efficiency and predictability are paramount. Their continued dominance in areas such as utility billing, subscription payments, and payroll reflects not only their scalability but also the trust that has been built over decades of consistent performance.
By contrast, Faster Payments and VRPs are gaining traction in areas where speed and flexibility are more important than marginal cost efficiency. The ability to move funds almost instantly, at any time of day, introduces a level of responsiveness that batch-based systems cannot match. This makes real-time payments particularly well suited to high-value transactions, time-sensitive disbursements, and scenarios where cash flow visibility is critical.
The distinction between these roles helps explain why displacement has not yet occurred. Rather than rendering Bacs obsolete, Faster Payments and VRPs are expanding the overall capabilities of the payments ecosystem. In doing so, they are capturing specific use cases without necessarily undermining the core functions that legacy systems continue to perform effectively.
One of the most significant factors sustaining Bacs’ position is its cost structure. For organisations processing millions of transactions, even small differences in per-transaction fees translate into substantial financial implications. Bacs transactions typically cost only a few pence, whereas Faster Payments can carry materially higher costs depending on the provider and usage model. This economic reality creates a strong incentive for businesses to retain Bacs for bulk processing, particularly where immediacy is not essential.
In addition to cost, Bacs benefits from scale and operational maturity. Processing close to seven billion transactions annually, it has demonstrated an ability to handle large volumes reliably and predictably. This level of throughput is not easily replicated without significant infrastructure investment, and it reinforces the system’s role as a backbone for critical financial operations.
Equally important is the role of trust, particularly in the context of Direct Debit. The Direct Debit Guarantee provides consumers with a high degree of confidence that errors will be rectified quickly and without dispute. This assurance has become deeply ingrained in consumer behaviour, making it difficult for newer alternatives to achieve the same level of acceptance without offering comparable protections.
While Bacs retains structural advantages, the growth trajectory of Faster Payments highlights a clear shift in demand. Transaction volumes have increased steadily over recent years, reflecting broader adoption across both consumer and business use cases. This growth is not merely incremental; it signals a change in expectations around how quickly money should move within the economy.
The expansion of transaction limits to as much as £1 million at many institutions has further enhanced the utility of Faster Payments, allowing it to compete in areas that were previously the domain of other payment systems. As a result, it is increasingly being used for high-value transfers, real-time payroll solutions, and business-to-business payments where timing is critical.
VRPs represent an additional layer of innovation, introducing programmability into recurring payments. Unlike Direct Debit, which operates on a pull-based model, VRPs allow payments to be initiated by the payer within predefined parameters. This shift fundamentally alters the balance of control, giving users greater oversight while still enabling automation.
At present, VRPs are primarily used for account-to-account transfers within the same user’s control, commonly referred to as “sweeping.” However, their potential extends far beyond this initial use case. As commercial applications develop, VRPs could enable more dynamic forms of billing and payment management, particularly in sectors where amounts vary based on usage or real-time conditions.
Transaction data over recent years provides a clear illustration of how the market is evolving. Bacs volumes have remained broadly stable, hovering around 6.5 to 7.0 billion transactions annually. This stability indicates that, despite the emergence of alternatives, there has been no significant erosion of its core use cases.
In contrast, Faster Payments volumes have grown consistently, rising from 2.4 billion transactions in 2019 to over 5 billion in recent years, with projections suggesting continued acceleration. This divergence in growth rates suggests that while Bacs is not yet declining in absolute terms, its relative share of the payments landscape is gradually diminishing.
The anticipated crossover point, where Faster Payments volumes surpass those of Bacs, is significant but should not be misinterpreted. Volume parity does not necessarily equate to functional replacement. Instead, it reflects the expansion of real-time payments into new areas of economic activity, rather than the wholesale migration of existing flows.
This distinction is critical in understanding the trajectory of the market. Growth in Faster Payments is driven as much by new use cases as by substitution, reinforcing the idea that the ecosystem is diversifying rather than consolidating in the short term.
For Faster Payments and VRPs to fully replace Bacs and Direct Debit, several structural conditions would need to align. The first is regulatory intervention, particularly in the expansion of VRPs into commercial use cases. Without a mandate or strong incentives from regulators, adoption is likely to remain gradual and uneven.
The second condition is the widespread implementation of modernised infrastructure, such as the New Payments Architecture. By enabling real-time processing as a default rather than an exception, such initiatives could reduce the relative advantage of batch-based systems and make legacy processes appear increasingly outdated.
A third factor is the shift toward real-time liquidity management. As businesses place greater emphasis on cash flow optimisation, the ability to settle transactions instantly becomes more valuable. This is particularly relevant for small and medium-sized enterprises, where delays in payment can have a disproportionate impact on operations.
Finally, the transition depends on the broader adoption of API-driven financial services. As payments become embedded within digital platforms and automated workflows, the flexibility of real-time systems becomes a critical enabler of innovation.
Several emerging use cases illustrate how this transition could unfold in practice. In the subscription and utilities sector, VRPs offer the potential to align payments more closely with actual usage, reducing the need for estimation and reconciliation. This not only improves accuracy but also enhances transparency for consumers.
In the labour market, the rise of the gig economy and demand for flexible earnings access are driving interest in real-time payroll solutions. Faster Payments enables businesses to pay workers instantly, improving financial wellbeing and reducing reliance on traditional pay cycles.
In corporate finance, real-time payments support more efficient treasury operations by allowing organisations to move funds between accounts and entities without delay. This capability enhances liquidity management and reduces the need for buffer capital.
These use cases demonstrate that the value of real-time payments extends beyond speed alone. They enable new ways of structuring financial relationships and managing resources, which in turn drives adoption.
Despite these advantages, several barriers continue to limit the pace of change. Cost remains a primary constraint, particularly for high-volume use cases where the economics of Bacs are difficult to replicate. Until real-time payments achieve cost parity, large-scale migration will remain economically unattractive for many organisations.
Trust is another critical factor. The protections associated with Direct Debit are well understood and widely relied upon. Replicating this level of assurance within a new framework will require not only technical solutions but also time to build consumer confidence.
Behavioural inertia further slows adoption. Payment systems are deeply embedded in both organisational processes and consumer habits, and changing these patterns requires a clear and compelling benefit. Incremental improvements, while valuable, may not be sufficient to drive rapid change on their own.
Finally, the complexity of transitioning infrastructure at scale cannot be underestimated. Coordinating changes across banks, businesses, and regulators is a significant undertaking, and the risks associated with disruption tend to favour gradual evolution over abrupt transformation.
The pace at which payment systems transition from coexistence to replacement is not determined by technology alone but by the alignment of several critical factors. Historical evidence indicates that a tipping point is reached when four conditions converge: ubiquity, cost parity, user experience, and regulatory support.
Ubiquity ensures that a new payment method is universally accessible, removing friction for both consumers and businesses. Without near-universal bank support, even technically superior systems struggle to achieve widespread adoption. Cost parity is equally important, as organisations are unlikely to migrate high-volume processes to a more expensive alternative without a compelling economic justification.
User experience often acts as the most visible driver of change. When a new system offers a clear and tangible improvement—such as instant settlement, greater transparency, or enhanced control—it creates a strong incentive for behavioural change. However, this alone is rarely sufficient without regulatory alignment. Regulatory intervention, whether through mandates, incentives, or structural reforms, can accelerate adoption by reducing uncertainty and ensuring a level playing field.
In the context of VRPs, progress across these dimensions is uneven. While the user experience and control benefits are well established, ubiquity and commercial models are still developing. This imbalance helps explain why adoption, though promising, has not yet reached the level required for systemic replacement.
The evolution of payment systems has historically followed a recognisable pattern in which legacy methods persist for extended periods before being rapidly displaced once a superior alternative reaches scale. This pattern can be observed across multiple transitions, from the decline of cheques to the rise of electronic payments, and from the gradual reduction in cash usage to the widespread adoption of cards and contactless technologies.
The shift from cheques to electronic payments is particularly instructive. Cheques were once a dominant mechanism for both consumer and business transactions, valued for their flexibility and widespread acceptance. However, as electronic payment systems matured, offering faster processing, lower operational friction, and improved reliability, cheque usage declined sharply. Today, while cheques still exist, they are no longer central to the payments ecosystem and are largely confined to niche or legacy use cases.
A similar trajectory can be observed in the transition from cash to cards and contactless payments. Although cash remains in circulation, its role has diminished significantly as digital alternatives have provided greater convenience, security, and integration with modern commerce. Importantly, this transition did not occur overnight; it accelerated once infrastructure, consumer behaviour, and merchant acceptance reached a critical mass.
More recently, global examples demonstrate how quickly payment system replacement can occur when conditions are favourable. In India, the introduction of Unified Payments Interface (UPI) led to explosive growth in real-time, account-to-account payments, overtaking many legacy systems within just a few years. Similarly, in Brazil, the launch of Pix achieved mass adoption in approximately two to three years, becoming the default payment method for a wide range of use cases.
These examples illustrate that replacement is not only possible but can occur rapidly once a tipping point is reached. Crucially, these systems did not merely coexist with legacy infrastructure; they redefined user expectations and became the primary mode of transaction for both consumers and businesses.
While historical precedents suggest that large-scale displacement is possible, the transition from Bacs and Direct Debit to Faster Payments and VRPs is more likely to unfold in stages rather than as a single, abrupt shift. In the current phase, Faster Payments has already established dominance in ad hoc and immediate transactions, while Direct Debit continues to underpin recurring billing due to its cost efficiency and embedded trust.
An emerging second phase is characterised by the gradual expansion of VRPs into more complex and commercially relevant use cases. As businesses seek greater flexibility and improved user experience, VRPs are increasingly being explored as an alternative for subscriptions, account sweeping, and dynamic billing models. This phase reflects a functional substitution, where specific use cases migrate to newer rails without displacing the legacy system entirely.
A third phase, while not yet fully realised, represents a plausible future in which Direct Debit becomes a niche or legacy mechanism. In this scenario, Bacs would continue to exist but would be relegated primarily to bulk processing and low-cost fallback scenarios. This mirrors the trajectory observed with cheques, which remain operational but are no longer central to everyday financial activity.
Taken together, these phases suggest that “total replacement” is unlikely to occur as a single event. Instead, it is more accurately understood as a gradual erosion of relevance, where newer systems assume functional dominance even if legacy infrastructure persists in the background.
What distinguishes the current transition from previous payment system evolutions is the broader technological context in which it is occurring. Unlike earlier shifts, which primarily involved replacing one payment rail with another, the move toward Faster Payments and VRPs is taking place alongside the rise of Open Banking, API-driven ecosystems, and real-time data integration.
This convergence is fundamentally changing the architecture of payments. Rather than operating as standalone processes, payments are increasingly embedded within digital platforms, triggered automatically by events, and integrated with broader financial workflows. The result is a shift from static, batch-based processing to dynamic, programmable finance.
In this environment, the value of a payment system is no longer defined solely by its ability to move money but by its ability to integrate seamlessly with other services. VRPs, in particular, exemplify this shift by enabling payments to be initiated, adjusted, and governed through APIs, creating new possibilities for automation and personalisation.
As a result, the transition is not simply about replacing Bacs with a faster alternative. It represents a reconfiguration of how payments are initiated, managed, and experienced, with implications that extend beyond the payments themselves.
While much of the focus is on potential replacement, it is equally important to recognise that the Bacs ecosystem itself is evolving. Innovations such as agentic AI, embedded payments, and the growth of account-to-account (A2A) transactions are reshaping how Bacs-based processes are managed and integrated into broader financial systems.
Agentic AI represents a significant development in this context. Unlike traditional automation, which relies on predefined rules and human oversight, agentic AI systems are capable of autonomously planning and executing payment-related tasks based on defined objectives and real-time data. In the Bacs environment, this is being applied to areas such as reconciliation, exception handling, and fraud detection, where large volumes of transactions have historically required manual intervention.
A number of financial institutions and technology providers are already deploying these capabilities. Companies such as Finzly are integrating AI agents into backend payment workflows, while organisations like Stripe are enabling AI-driven transaction initiation. Major networks including Mastercard and Visa are also developing agent-based payment solutions that operate within predefined user parameters.
At the same time, payments are becoming increasingly “invisible,” embedded within digital experiences rather than requiring explicit user interaction. This trend is particularly evident in platform-based ecosystems, where payments are triggered automatically within applications, devices, or services. The growth of embedded finance is extending this model into business contexts, enabling more sophisticated financial operations such as dynamic supplier financing and flexible payment terms.
The maturation of Open Banking APIs is further accelerating the shift toward account-to-account payments. As these systems become more reliable and widely adopted, they offer a viable alternative to card-based payments by combining lower costs with faster settlement. This trend aligns closely with the capabilities of Faster Payments and VRPs, reinforcing their role in the evolving ecosystem.
Finally, regulatory developments are reshaping the governance of payments. The consolidation of oversight, including the integration of the Payment Systems Regulator into the Financial Conduct Authority, reflects a broader move toward more comprehensive regulation of digital and real-time payment methods. This is likely to increase standardisation and trust, while also accelerating the adoption of newer systems.
Taken together, these developments suggest that the future of Bacs is unlikely to be defined by abrupt obsolescence, but rather by gradual repositioning within a more complex and dynamic payments landscape. While its core strengths in cost efficiency and scale will ensure its continued relevance in the near term, its role is likely to become more specialised over time.
In practical terms, this means that Bacs may increasingly be used for scenarios where cost sensitivity and volume outweigh the need for immediacy. At the same time, higher-value, time-sensitive, and more complex payment flows are likely to migrate toward real-time systems that offer greater flexibility and integration.
Importantly, the introduction of technologies such as agentic AI may extend the lifespan of Bacs by improving operational efficiency and reducing manual overhead. However, these enhancements do not fundamentally alter the underlying characteristics of batch processing, which remain less aligned with the direction of travel in the broader payments ecosystem.
Ultimately, the trajectory of Bacs will depend on how quickly alternative systems can match its advantages while exceeding its limitations. If real-time payments achieve cost parity, regulatory support, and widespread adoption, the balance may shift more decisively. Until then, Bacs will continue to play a critical, if gradually evolving, role within the UK payments infrastructure.
Rather than signalling an imminent replacement, current trends point to a period of coexistence in which multiple payment systems serve different but complementary roles. The eventual outcome will depend not only on technological progress but also on economic incentives, regulatory direction, and the pace at which users are willing to change established behaviours.
The history of payment systems suggests that once a superior alternative reaches sufficient scale, displacement can occur rapidly and decisively. But, rather than a single moment of replacement, the shift is likely to be asymmetric, occurring use case by use case. For a period, this may feel gradual and incremental. However, as tipping points are reached—particularly in areas such as cost, regulation, and adoption—the pace of change could accelerate quickly.
In functional terms, VRPs have the potential to replace Direct Debit across many scenarios, even if legacy systems remain technically operational.
For organisations operating within this landscape, the strategic imperative is to recognise that the future is unlikely to be defined by a single dominant payment method. Instead, success will depend on the ability to leverage multiple systems effectively, aligning each with the use cases where it delivers the greatest value.
Here at paygate, we have a long heritage of helping businesses achieve Bacs payment efficiency. Our payment platform is one of the longest established Bacs approved software solutions available on the market. To our customers, we’re trusted experts.
We’d love to speak to you about your payment challenge, answer any questions or offer advice. Complete the form below to reach out.
If you’d like to discuss your business requirements and how paygate can help, get in touch.
"*" indicates required fields
In the near term, Bacs and Direct Debit are unlikely to be fully replaced. While Faster Payments and Variable Recurring Payments (VRPs) offer clear advantages in speed, flexibility, and control, Bacs retains significant strengths in cost efficiency, scalability, and trust. Instead of outright replacement, the payments ecosystem is evolving toward a hybrid model in which different systems are used for different purposes.
Over time, however, VRPs may functionally replace Direct Debit in certain use cases—particularly where real-time, variable, and user-controlled payments are preferred. This would represent a gradual shift rather than a sudden transition.
Faster Payments provides near-instant settlement, operates 24/7/365, and supports significantly higher transaction limits than in the past. These features make it particularly well suited to time-sensitive payments, high-value transactions, and scenarios where immediate cash flow visibility is important.
In contrast, Bacs operates on a three-day processing cycle and is limited to working days. However, it remains more cost-effective for high-volume transactions, which is why it continues to dominate areas such as payroll and bulk payments.
The key difference lies in control and payment initiation. Direct Debit operates on a “pull” model, where the merchant initiates the payment from the customer’s account. VRPs, by contrast, use a “push” model, where the customer authorises payments within predefined parameters, giving them greater control over timing and amounts.
VRPs also enable more dynamic and flexible payment structures, making them well suited to use cases such as variable subscriptions or usage-based billing. However, they currently lack an equivalent to the Direct Debit Guarantee, which remains an important factor in consumer trust.
Bacs continues to be widely used primarily due to its low cost, reliability, and deep integration into existing financial processes. For organisations processing millions of transactions, even small cost differences are significant, and Bacs remains one of the most economical options available.
Additionally, the long-standing trust associated with Direct Debit, particularly the consumer protections it offers, reinforces its continued use. Combined with behavioural inertia and the complexity of migrating systems, these factors make large-scale replacement slower than technological capability alone might suggest.
The speed of transition will depend on four key factors: ubiquity, cost, user experience, and regulation. Real-time payment systems must achieve near-universal adoption across banks, reach cost parity with Bacs for high-volume use cases, and deliver a clear improvement in user experience.
Regulatory support will also play a critical role, particularly in expanding the use of VRPs and modernising payment infrastructure. Once these factors align, adoption could accelerate rapidly, potentially leading to a tipping point where real-time payments become the default for many use cases.
✓
| paygate on prem | paygate v2 | paygate v3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
Security policy manager * Includes: password complexity manager, inactive timeout, time restrictions, IP address restrictions | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
AWS ISO27001 hosted * Primary fail over and back up UK data centres | ✓ | ✓ | |
SFTP file uploads/downloads *Secure way to move files across the internet, customers can use their own certificates | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Gemalto security tokens MFA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Email MFA | ✓ | ||
| SMS MFA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
APP MFA * Works with common auth apps such as Google Authenticator, Authy. Works on Android or iOS. | ✓ | ||
| PG Platform ISO27001 | ✓ | ||
Fraud tool *Currently support Blacklists and Whitelists. In a blacklist you add various sortcodes / account numbers and the system will prevent any payment to those accounts. In a whitelist you add sortcodes and account numbers and the system will ONLY allow payments to accounts on the whitelist. We include various tools to help build and maintain the lists. | ✓ | ||
GDPR subject access request * Search tools to help perform a GDRP lookup. Then can optionally ‘sanitise’ personal data from the system. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
GDPR Data cleansing *Remove historical data by bulk or individual. | ✓ | ||
Browser compatbility * We maintain support for Chrome, Edge and Firefox. | ✓ | ||
Built for performance * Version 3 runs on super modern, high-end infrastructure | ✓ | ||
Single Platform * Customers have a single user account that they can use across all services (Enterprise, Online, Validate, etc). | ✓ | ||
Agent rebuilt key management system * Very secure way to get files to and from the Paygate cloud. Supports ways to automate files being sent into the paygate cloud and retrieving reports from the cloud. Key management was rebuilt for V3 to further increase security. | ✓ | ||
HTTPS uploads/downloads * paygate v3 supports both SFTP and HTTPS. | ✓ | ||
In browser File and Folder handling * Allows customers to securely organise their files and folders that are stored on paygate | ✓ |
| PG on prem | PG Ev2 | PGv3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Logging tickets by email | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Logging tickets by portal | ✓ | ||
| Logging tickets by phone | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Dedicated account management | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Uptime improvements | ✓ | ||
| Ongoing development | ✓ | ||
| Bug fixing | ✓ | ||
|
Auto File Import *Automatically imports a payment file and validates it. Users no longer need to manually browse for and import a file, paygate will do this in the background and present the validation results to the user. |
✓ |
| PG on prem | PG Ev2 | PGv3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Designer in browser * In V2 Workflows use an older style desktop app. In V3 workflows are built and managed in the Paygate Browser app. It’s much easier to deploy and manage. |
✓ | ||
| Designer 3rd party app | ✓ | ✓ | |
|
Improved logging * A feature mainly for PS/CS to help them diagnose problems with workflows. Problems can be diagnosed and fixed faster. |
✓ | ||
|
New scheduler triggers * A new trigger type that allows the user to set up a workflow like you set up a meeting in Outlook. For some, this is more flexible and easier to understand than using CRON. |
✓ | ||
|
Triggers for multiple workflows * You can use a single trigger to start multiple workflows. It’s a simple feature that will make things easier to manage if you have a lot of workflows. |
✓ | ||
|
Workflow validation * Troubleshoots new workflows, validation |
✓ | ||
|
Workflow chaining * Allows a workflow to call another workflow. Using this you can simplify large complicated workflows in smaller separate ones. Easier to manage and diagnose issues. |
✓ | ||
|
New nodes * Various new nodes that help to build new types of workflows or help manage existing workflows. |
✓ | ||
|
Full documentation V3 will be fully documented with help guides and tutorials.
and tutorials * |
✓ | ||
|
Multiple filename variables * Supporting multiple filename variables should make designing complex workflows a bit easier. |
✓ | ||
|
Future developments * Pure Excel Importer – XLSX; BACS Calendar Widget; Workflow Timeline; Workflow / Mobile App notification / management; S3 Connector |
✓ | ||
|
Download and distribute A Reports * When you have workflow and HSM you can automate the entire BACS report download process. They can automatically be converted to other formats for integration into finance apps. They can be emailed to customers as html, pdf or zips. They can be made available for collection via SFTP. Or, if you use Agent, they can be security delivered to the customer’s private network. |
✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Partial submission | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
|
Lightsout submission * No signing |
✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Standard nodes for initiation | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| PG on prem | PG Ev2 | PGv3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Batched bureau submissions | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Manual & Automated submission builder | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Customer import | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Bacs reporting tools | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Recall Bureau Customers by ID | ✓ | ||
|
Submission Re-entry * Complete your submissions over any amount of time
|
✓ | ||
|
Familiar workflow throughout *It will be familiar to V2 customer but they will notice improvements. |
✓ | ||
| Revamped manual submission mode *This is completely new in V3 Bureau.
Those customers wanting a more manual way of building their submission (Rather than using Jobs) will find a new, efficient way of working.
|
✓ | ||
|
Drag and drop files from anywhere *Like in other areas of V3. User can just drag and drop file in Bureau for processing. They can also use the Restricted File Browser and Server file browser – that add more security – if they wish. |
✓ | ||
|
Support for multiple file formats per submission * No longer limited to single Standard 18 submission for example
|
✓ | ||
|
Better default filename support *Makes working with files easier. |
✓ | ||
|
Usage Reporting over data range *Small but useful improvement to reporting. User can set a date range on the usage report. |
✓ |
| PG on prem | PG Ev2 | PGv3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Validate *Validate is integrated in V3 and so customers that have both products can access them from the same client with the same account. |
✓ | ||
|
API Access *Validate API and the Payment API.
|
✓ | ||
| 4x Faster | ✓ | ||
|
Save Submissions *Save an ‘in-progress’ submission and return to it later. Build up a submission during the day |
✓ | ||
| Improved payment and submission searching | ✓ | ||
|
Customisable dashboard *Many useful, module specific, dashboard widgets, e.g. Payments, collections, workflow, etc. |
✓ |
| PG on prem | PG Ev2 | PGv3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enhanced reporting including real-time usage | ✓ |
