ATM Dispute

willo65

noelphobic wrote: »

The machine should be emptied of cash on a regular basis and new cash put in. Then the cash that has been taken out should be balanced against what the records say has been withdrawn. If there is a misbalance and they have more money than they think they should have then they should be able to pay you back.

I used to have a job trying to balance the accounts for ATMs (but not for any of the banks mentioned here!) and it could be a nightmare at times.

When the ATM is balanced all the cash in the machine will be counted so they don't really need to replace the cash and they will be able to tell if the machine was over or not.

opinions4u

We are hoping someone on here will be able to help us! At the end of last month I tried to withdraw £300 from an RBS machine, at Tesco, from a Barclays account. It told me to take my cash, which didn't come out. The machine then went out of service.

The audit log will clearly show the time of your transaction and the time the machine went out of service.

It would also show the time the ATM returned to service.

It is not beyond the realms of possibility that the machine dispensed your cash to a lucky passer by on re-opening.

Don't give up on this one. If the bank's involved don't settle with you take it to the Ombudsman.

They will insist on seeing the transaction / closing / opening times.

With the closing time so close to your transaction time, the Ombudsman will almost certainly rule that on the balance of probability the ATM didn't dispense the cash to YOU and as such rule in your favour.

ATMs are pretty extraordinary machines that are something like 99.8% reliable. I have great faith in them, but they are mechanical and do occasionally go wrong.

noelphobic

willo65 wrote: »

When the ATM is balanced all the cash in the machine will be counted so they don't really need to replace the cash and they will be able to tell if the machine was over or not.

The ATMS I used to balance were always emptied and new cash put in. The cash that was taken out of the machine was then taken back to the depot to be counted. The balancing is not done by security men on site, it is done by admin staff in an office somewhere.

willo65

noelphobic wrote: »

The ATMS I used to balance were always emptied and new cash put in. The cash that was taken out of the machine was then taken back to the depot to be counted. The balancing is not done by security men on site, it is done by admin staff in an office somewhere.

Sorry, i misunderstood your post I thought you were trying to say this is how they should do it because at the moment ATM's aren't balanced etc and not making the statement this is what happens with ATM's filled by 3rd party. Thanks for correcting

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

Wow more paranoid ramblings.

ATM disputes will happen. Technology is never 100% reliable and incidents will happen.

Procedures exist for dealing with these - which I have utilised sucessfully.

If the bank are saying the ATM balanced etc it will have and its more likely you walked away too early impatiently, dropped the cash, pickpocketed etc= or downright attempts at fraud;

Too often people want to blame banks for their errors.

If the bank had discovered it was short (or over) then they would have given the cash back.

opinions4u

LinasPilibaitisisbatman wrote: »

If the bank are saying the ATM balanced etc it will have and its more likely you walked away too early impatiently, dropped the cash, pickpocketed etc= or downright attempts at fraud;

The OP stated:

It told me to take my cash, which didn't come out. The machine then went out of service.

It really doesn't sound like paranoia or fraud to me.

It sounds like the machine went wrong.

Your post in insulting.

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

opinions4u wrote: »

The OP stated:



It really doesn't sound like paranoia or fraud to me.

It sounds like the machine went wrong.

Your post in insulting.

and if the machine had went wrong then the audit trail would have shown that it hadnt paid out the full amount and the OP would have got their money back.

noelphobic

LinasPilibaitisisbatman wrote: »

and if the machine had went wrong then the audit trail would have shown that it hadnt paid out the full amount and the OP would have got their money back.

it would probably not show every single transaction, just whether or not it balanced.

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

Which it wouldnt have if it hadnt paid out the full amount to the OP.

jonesMUFCforever

noelphobic wrote: »

it would probably not show every single transaction, just whether or not it balanced.

The audit roll will show every transaction including times and when the machine was taken out of service.