Bank refuses to refund fraudulent transactions

[Deleted User]

Hi! Any help on the following problem would be most appreciated:

A number of fraudulent transactions were made on my card. The bank refuses to refund the money as I had been recorded saying my wife knew my PIN number. When asked to provide a copy of the recording they stated I couldn’t find it.

Any advice would be welcome as the transaction was for a substantial sum.

izools

Were the transactions authorized by Pin, or signature? Were they Cardholder present or cardholder not present transactions?

[Deleted User]

izools wrote: »

Were the transactions authorized by Pin, or signature? Were they Cardholder present or cardholder not present transactions?

The transactions were made online so no PIN was used. It turns out that over 40 attempts were declined before the card limit was reachedout - yet VISA didn't register anything amiss!

The delivery address was investigated but nothing came of it. The bank has also said I have no way to prove I didn't buy them!

izools

Then in that case it is irrelevant whether or not your wife knows the PIN.

Raise a complaint to your bank in writing, sent recorded delivery, outlining what you want done. You have the FOS on your side if the bank do not satisfy your complaint

moonrakerz

izools wrote: »

Then in that case it is irrelevant whether or not your wife knows the PIN.

It is totally relevant ! If you give anyone the PIN of your card for whatever reason you are in breach of the Ts and Cs. It doesn't matter in the slightest how any "fraudulent" transactions were made - if you gave someone else your PIN you are up **** street !

Fiddlestick

moonrakerz wrote: »

It is totally relevant ! If you give anyone the PIN of your card for whatever reason you are in breach of the Ts and Cs. It doesn't matter in the slightest how any "fraudulent" transactions were made - if you gave someone else your PIN you are up **** street !

You realise you don't need the PIN to use the card online, right?

crispy_chris

However at that point you have effectively admitted you are negligent with your account details, I don't know the legalities but I'm sure that can't help!

James

Why not give Action Fraud a call on their free phone number 0300 123 2040.

They should be able to help and advise you.

If you call them let's know how you get on please.

For the Action Fraud Website (click here).

izools

moonrakerz wrote: »

It is totally relevant ! If you give anyone the PIN of your card for whatever reason you are in breach of the Ts and Cs. It doesn't matter in the slightest how any "fraudulent" transactions were made - if you gave someone else your PIN you are up **** street !

That is a fair point as if the OP willingly gave a third party his PIN then it is fair and safe to assume that he also lent / handed that third party his card for use of their own free will which is massively negligent.

Wife or not, anyone else using the account should be a joint cardholder / joint account holder.

Although the bank should be able to substantiate their claim that they have a record of OP admitting this.

INT1

The fact your wife knows your PIN and you had CNP fraud (card not present) is irrelivant.

When were the transactions made?

Were you sent a disclaimer to sign?

If you have notified the bank within a reasonable amount of time of the transaction going on to your statement, then I can't see how they can hold you liable.

You would win that case at an Ombudsman referral providing you notified them of the fraud in a reasonable amount of time.

[Deleted User]

moonrakerz wrote: »

It is totally relevant ! If you give anyone the PIN of your card for whatever reason you are in breach of the Ts and Cs. It doesn't matter in the slightest how any "fraudulent" transactions were made - if you gave someone else your PIN you are up **** street !

That's the point...I have never disclosed my PIN to anyone. The money was refunded to my account then taken back. The excuse was that I had said my wife had the PIN...when I challenged ever saying that (as I hadn't) the bank could not substantiate the allegation.