EFT still works. A client in South Africa can pay an invoice from the bank details on the document. That is how most of our work has been paid, and it is still how a lot of it will be paid.
It is not always what a client wants. Some people prefer a card. Some are overseas and do not want to wire rand. Some would rather click a link than sit with a proof of payment. So we applied for Paystack and PayFast. Both are verified for Yamukelwa Software Studio now. Getting there took longer than putting the pages up, and the delay was not in the code.
What they actually look at
A processor is not reading our architecture. It is building a picture of a merchant: a legal name, a bank account in that name, and a public site that a cardholder could have meant to pay. In South Africa that picture sits under FICA. Payfast's own guide for companies asks for CIPC documents, proof of business address, a bank confirmation, identity documents for directors, and beneficial ownership where it applies. Paystack's South Africa page for a registered business asks for a bank confirmation letter no older than six months, a CIPC certificate, the enterprise number, and details of at least one director. The names have to match. If they do not, Paystack's docs say the account cannot be activated.
That matching is ordinary, and it is easy to get slightly wrong. A trading name on the site, a personal account on the form, an address that has moved: any of those sends the pack back. Payfast says that once valid documents are in, verification typically takes around two business days. "Valid" here means the companies register, the bank, and the website are telling the same story.
The website is part of the file. Card schemes expect a legal name, a way to reach someone, terms, a privacy notice, and a refund or cancellation policy. We already wanted those pages for clients. We published terms and a refund and delivery policy before we leaned on the processors. Screenshots of a local build do not count. The pages have to be live, and they have to use the same company name as the application.
Why a studio looks a bit odd
PayFast is the name most of our South African clients already know, which is why we applied there first. The wait was real. We sell custom software against a written proposal. Delivery is digital. There is no basket and no product grid. Payfast's merchant terms still talk about a checkout screen, because most of their merchants do sell things that way. We are not a shop. Explaining that, in writing, is part of the file. Nothing was wrong with the company papers. The work just does not look like ecommerce.
We did not sit on one queue. Paystack has been in South Africa since 2021 (Stripe acquired the company the year before). They ask for overlapping papers and then read the same site through their own process. Running both meant a client could pay on whichever had already cleared, while we kept taking EFT in the meantime.
What we would tell another studio
Put the legal pages up before you apply. Use the same company name on CIPC, the bank letter, and the site. Say early that you invoice for services, not a cart. Do not pause ordinary invoicing while you wait.
We are not asking anyone to treat processors as the enemy. They have a job: know who they are paying out to, and show a card network a merchant that can be found. For a studio, that job is a bit of extra writing. For us it was worth it. Paystack and PayFast are both on the footer now, and the terms name them next to EFT.