Undercharged but money later taken?

blue_monkey_2

OP, the only thing you can do is speak to the bank I am afraid as they are the people that can advise you better.

Can you let us know the outcome please, as a retailer I'd be interested to know as I am sure that they shop are not supposed to keep your card details for this reason and you need to find out how to deal with this side of it too. Thanks.

busiscoming2

I have been reading the previous posts and would also like to know what the banks take on this is. It must surely be illegal, but maybe answers how you can have money fraudulently charged to your account by a tiny minority of unscrupulous staff.
My oh experienced this, he paid by debit card for £50 of diesel at about 7.30am when I checked the bank statement on the same day another transaction for £30 (same garage) had gone through, checked with the bank this time it was for unleaded and was timed about 6 mins later. Bank did refund and looked into it, but he had to change card and pin, never did find out what really happened, but hearing this who knows? (and no it wasn't oh!)

jonesMUFCforever

geordie_joe wrote: »

What mechanism is in place for the bank to verify that it was a mistake.

As far as the bank is concerned someone authorised a payment to be taken from a bank account, that payment was taken. At a later date they then asked to take more money from the account and the bank just let them take it.

How would you feel if you bought an item for £100, paid by debit card. Then a month later the shop doubled the price of that item and took another £100 from your bank account, saying "sorry, the price you paid was a mistake, so we took the extra from your account".?

If any retailer takes MORE than they are entitled to then you raise a dispute with their bank and they will get a refund. This is because the shop will not be able to provide evidence that 2 transactions for £100 each have taken place.
I did point this out in a previous post.
In this case the shop has taken £54 no more than was agreed. It made an error and corrected it - the OP has not lost out in any way - unless it can be proved that they have used the card again for further transactions.
I rest my case.

ben500

jonesMUFCforever wrote: »

If any retailer takes MORE than they are entitled to then you raise a dispute with their bank and they will get a refund. This is because the shop will not be able to provide evidence that 2 transactions for £100 each have taken place.
I did point this out in a previous post.
In this case the shop has taken £54 no more than was agreed. It made an error and corrected it - the OP has not lost out in any way - unless it can be proved that they have used the card again for further transactions.
I rest my case.

Irrespective of the value the op made an authorisation for ONE transaction and was subsequently charged via the same company for a SECOND transaction, the question is by what method was the second transaction made and what evidence was submitted to obtain it? As for resting your case go ahead but you are clearly missing the point here as there is no dispute over the total amount due only the means by which the adjustment to the original transaction was made and whether or not it was lawful to do so.

ispartacus75

Cant wait to see the replies to this one. How many posters are going to have the attitude 'dont be so stupid'.

Scenario
You go into a shop. You buy goods for £54 but are mistakenly charged £45. A week later the shop helps itself to the £9 difference from your bank without informing you beforehand.
Soon after you go into a different shop and purchase goods for £45 but are mistakenly charged £54. A week later you realise the mistake and walk into the shop and help yourself to the £9 overcharge from the till without informing them beforehand.

Which of the above 2 is likely to result in the police being involved? Yet what is the difference between the 2? The only one I can see is that the shop helped themselves electronically while you helped yourself physically. We are expected to inform the shop that we have been overcharged and provide evidence to back this up before we can expect a refund. Are the shops not expected to do the same if we have been undercharged?

Now lets see someone try and defend the shop or say that the 2 things arent the same!

Greatgimp

It's the same problem everytime. You buy a car, a holiday, a house. If it goes wrong you have to prove it, the company denies it, you fight for it. You sometimes win. It's always in favour of the big taxpaying moneymaking machine of a corporation. So much for consumer rights!

PZH

Greatgimp wrote: »

It's the same problem everytime. You buy a car, a holiday, a house. If it goes wrong you have to prove it, the company denies it, you fight for it. You sometimes win. It's always in favour of the big taxpaying moneymaking machine of a corporation. So much for consumer rights!

ispartacus75

Greatgimp wrote: »

It's the same problem everytime. You buy a car, a holiday, a house. If it goes wrong you have to prove it, the company denies it, you fight for it. You sometimes win. It's always in favour of the big taxpaying moneymaking machine of a corporation. So much for consumer rights!

And to think that some people on here would rather keep it that way.

nickmack

jonesMUFCforever wrote: »

In this case the shop has taken £54 no more than was agreed. It made an error and corrected it - the OP has not lost out in any way - unless it can be proved that they have used the card again for further transactions.
I rest my case.

I don't think there's any dispute the till receipt stated £54, so the shop are entitled to this, as the amount agreed for the transaction.

The OP has already stated, they don't have a problem paying £54, but are concerned at the method used to take the 'missing' £9.

It seems this case perhaps has less to do with the retailer and more to do with the bank, as they seem to have authorised a 'cardholder not present' transaction.

The concern is about whether mechanisms are in place to stop an unscrupulous retailer taking say £90 and the cardholder then battling to get this back.

ben500

I'd go further than that nick and be asking as to what method was used and what evidence supplied to support the withdrawal. I have witnessed signatures being forged myself in the past to such ends rather than contact the customer concerned and risk being told "your knocked". There are very serious implications to this situation.