Classify first, then act. The agent sorts each exception the moment it lands: rejected, status unknown, unapplicable incoming payment, recall request, screening hit. It resolves unknown status by asking the scheme, never by sending again, returns incoming payments that cannot be applied within your rules, and drafts customer messages. Recalls, fraud and screening hits go to a named payments analyst.
What is an instant payment exception, and who owns it?
Instant payments settle in seconds and, once settled, generally cannot be pulled back without the recipient's cooperation. Most go through cleanly. The exceptions are the ones that do not: a payment rejected by the receiving bank, a payment whose status never came back, an incoming payment for an account that is closed, a request from another bank to return funds sent in error.
Exceptions are time-critical in a way batch payments are not. A customer is waiting at a till or a closing; the receiving bank expects an answer within the scheme's time limits. The controls around irreversibility are covered in instant payments and irreversibility.
The head of payment operations owns the process. Payments analysts own cases the agent passes on. Financial crime owns screening hits. The wider frame is in our guide to AI agents in banking.
What does the agent do at each step, and at what depth?
- Agent, depth 1: classifies the exception. By scheme reason code and direction, outgoing or incoming. Evidence: classification and code.
- Agent, depth 1: for unknown status, runs a status inquiry. It asks the scheme or receiving bank whether the payment settled. It never sends a second payment to "make sure". Evidence: inquiry and response.
- Agent, depth 2: for rejected outgoing payments, tells the customer why. Account closed, details invalid, name check failed. It drafts the message with what to do next. Evidence: message sent.
- Agent, depth 3: retries only where safe. A payment rejected for a technical reason before settlement can be resubmitted once, with the same payment reference, within the customer's limits. Evidence: retry verdict linked to the original.
- Agent, depth 4 within bounds: returns unapplicable incoming payments. If the beneficiary account is closed or the details do not match any account, the payment goes back to the sender under your rules and the scheme's time limits. Evidence: return verdict and scheme message.
- Agent, depth 2: prepares recall cases. When another bank asks for funds back, the agent checks whether the funds are still in the account and drafts the request to the account holder for consent. Evidence: case and draft.
- Person, payments analyst: decides recalls, fraud-linked exceptions and anything above limits. Evidence: decision and reasons.
- Person, financial crime: handles screening hits. The agent only routes them. Evidence: hand-off reference.
| Step | The agent does | Depth | Stays with a person |
|---|---|---|---|
| Classify | Reads reason code and direction | 1 | Nothing |
| Unknown status | Runs a status inquiry | 1 | Nothing |
| Rejected outgoing | Explains to the customer | 2 | Nothing |
| Safe retry | Resubmits once with the same reference | 3 | Further retries |
| Unapplicable incoming | Returns to sender within rules | 4 | Returns above limits |
| Recall request | Prepares the case and consent request | 2 | Analyst decides |
| Screening hit | Routes the case | none | Financial crime |
Which controls matter, and what evidence do they leave?
No resend on unknown status. This is the most expensive mistake in instant payments: two settled payments where the customer wanted one. Evidence: refused verdicts on any new payment while a status inquiry is open.
Same reference on retry. A retry with a new reference is a new payment. Evidence: reference matching on each retry.
Scheme time limits as bounds. Returns and responses must happen inside them. Evidence: timing on every verdict.
Recalls need consent. Funds that settled to a customer's account are the customer's until they agree to return them or a legal process says otherwise. The agent never debits them on its own. Evidence: consent recorded before any return of recalled funds.
Name check results respected. In the EU, the Instant Payments Regulation requires payment service providers to verify the payee's name. A failed or partial match is not an exception to work around; see Instant Payments Regulation verification of payee and AI agents. Evidence: match result on each payment.
Screening outside the agent. Evidence: no agent verdicts on screening outcomes.
What should you measure?
- Exceptions by type and direction, per day.
- Duplicate payments caused by resends. Target zero.
- Returns made inside scheme time limits, and any outside them.
- Time from exception to customer message.
- Recall cases and their outcomes.
Where does it usually go wrong?
Panic resends. A timeout looks like a failure, so the payment is sent again. Both settle.
Retries change the details. The agent "fixes" an account number before retrying, turning a technical retry into a new payee.
Incoming payments are held indefinitely. Funds for a closed account sit in suspense past the scheme's limit. Return them on time.
Recalls are treated as instructions. A recall request is a request. The account holder's consent, or a legal basis, comes first.
Exceptions and returns are confused. Returns of non-instant payments follow different timelines; see handling payment returns with an AI agent.
Where Pryme fits
In Pryme, each exception type is a separate capability, certified on your own past exceptions and checked at the moment of action against the scheme's time limits and your limits. New payments while a status inquiry is open are refused, recalled funds are held for consent and a named analyst, and every step is filed. Reversing a settled payment on our own rail is withheld for every agent.
Questions people ask
Can the agent tell the customer the payment definitely failed?
Only once the status inquiry confirms it. Until then it should say the status is being checked and that the customer should not send the payment again.
What if the receiving bank never answers the status inquiry?
The case goes to an analyst after the set time. The customer is told plainly that the payment is under investigation.
Can the agent return a payment the customer says was sent to them by mistake?
It can prepare the return at the customer's request, with their consent recorded. Returns of more than small amounts, or where fraud is suspected, are held for an analyst.