Fraudulent Bank Transfer removed from my account

ayayay

noh wrote: »

That's not so.
If it was as you suggest, the money did not belong to the OP when it arrived in his account. It was still the property of the person from whose account it was fraudulently obtained and the OPs bank was correct in returning it.

No, that's not right. A cash transfer is not the same as say a stolen car.

As I said in my earlier post, the issue is not clear cut. If the recipient received cleared funds, then they have a defence. Its called "innocent change of position". The fact is that there are 3 innocent parties here, the hacked "sender" , the bank, and the recipient. Someone has to bear the loss. Probably the bank unless the "sender" was negligent.

Let the ombudsman sort it out

meer53

bpm wrote: »

Thank you ayayay, a logical suggestion and an accurate summation of the issue at hand.

I have seen cases before (and had one) where I had received the money and verified it was there, to later find that it was in some way fraudulent. It made no difference as the money was received as payment in good faith and was therefore mine. For the bank to turn around at a later date and remove that money from me was astounding! Especially as Id already spent it, but I didnt think that needed adding to the conversation as it would have confused matters. So now Im doubly in trouble!

Very strange that this has happened twice to the OP ?

Jake'sGran

bpm wrote: »

Of course I sent it Royal Mail Insured Signed For Delivery, and yes I have a signature of "someone" who signed for it. Rather un intelligible but a signature all the same.
Yes I have an address but that person now (in 1 day) appears not to live there.
Yes the money WAS cleared into my account prior to me posting the items. I verified this with my online service to check the funds had already cleared.
The money was apparently sent from the mans account I posted the item to but without his knowledge, ie, a hacker went into his online account, transferred the money and then through "a friend" or "a friendly postman" took delivery of this item at this address where no one now seems to know him.

This response makes it clear to me that the bank is at fault and you will have to be paid the £5000 by them. I am sure that if I had next to nothing in my bank account my bank would not accept an outgoing payment of £5k.

It's possible that the buyer might have cancelled the payment
verbally but, in that case, how did it get into your account?.
You now need to go through your banks complaint procedure and if they deny any blame in the matter contact the banking ombudsman. You could also write to Diana Wright (she accepts emails) in The Sunday Times - Questions of Money. In a case like this she will get stuck in and decide where the blame lies.

bpm_2

Thank you for the assistance Jakes Gran. I have now escalated this claim to higher authorities with thinly veiled threats of letters to my MP and the Financial Ombudsman.

Though I know my T&Cs state than ANY transaction believed to be fraudulent or mistaken can be reversed. Firstly this is illegal as you cannot make a rule which breaks a preceding law. Therefore in law any payment made to me where I have given due consideration is legally mine. Secondly this is what the banks insurance covers them for, so that people do not lose money when the banks own systems are compromised.

It is currently reported as a fraud crime to the Met Police. I am now waiting for the bank to call me back with an answer.

gordikin

bpm wrote: »

Thank you for the assistance Jakes Gran. I have now escalated this claim to higher authorities with thinly veiled threats of letters to my MP and the Financial Ombudsman.

Though I know my T&Cs state than ANY transaction believed to be fraudulent or mistaken can be reversed. Firstly this is illegal as you cannot make a rule which breaks a preceding law. Therefore in law any payment made to me where I have given due consideration is legally mine. Secondly this is what the banks insurance covers them for, so that people do not lose money when the banks own systems are compromised.

It is currently reported as a fraud crime to the Met Police. I am now waiting for the bank to call me back with an answer.

So you have reported it to the Met.? Why would you do that unless you were the victim of the crime?

Care to expand on the rule that breaks a preceding law statement, because I've never heard that phrase before. In fact I don't understand most of that paragraph.


Banks don't have insurance...they self insure...so you're wrong there.

bpm_2

Aren't I a victim of a crime? I had £5000 of goods which I exchanged for £5000 in money. I now have neither as the bank took it from me without my permission and against my will. That's a crime if I ever heard one.

Basically you cant make a law which breaks a law. As an example, If I ran a plumbing business and got you to sign T&Cs before I started work and one of the terms said I was allowed to help myself to all the goods in your house, it doesnt matter. Even though you signed it, as that rule breaks the law of theft it is invalid at inception.

Banks may well self insure, the point is they have fraud insurance that covers them for these circumstances. They advertise this very point heavily on TV currently, but dont seem to honour it when push comes to shove.

zppp

bpm wrote: »

Banks may well self insure, the point is they have fraud insurance that covers them for these circumstances. They advertise this very point heavily on TV currently, but dont seem to honour it when push comes to shove.

Where do they advertise it on TV? I've seen no adverts.

Also, you have not been defrauded by your bank, you have been defrauded by the individual who recalled the payment, which they are allowed to do if it was sent by BACS. Therefore, discussing whether the banks are insured for losses from fraud is a moot point IMHO.

As you have stated previously though, let the Met and FOS deal with it for you.

bpm_2

zppp wrote: »

Where do they advertise it on TV? I've seen no adverts.

Also, you have not been defrauded by your bank, you have been defrauded by the individual who recalled the payment, which they are allowed to do if it was sent by BACS. Therefore, discussing whether the banks are insured for losses from fraud is a moot point IMHO.

As you have stated previously though, let the Met and FOS deal with it for you.

How can I have been defrauded by an individual who Ive never met or spoken to? The "individual" spoke to the bank about a fraudulent payment on his account, which the bank then replaced. Separately the bank removed the same amount of money from my account to pay for their loss, I had no contact with the "individual" over this transaction return.

The hacker who got into the system and transferred the money to my account for the goods is the obvious criminal, but he committed a crime against HSBC for which I'm being charged. Surely a valid reason for saying the bank is at fault here not me?

deutsch

what did you sell for £5000?

bpm_2

UPDATE:

Well I got my money returned plus compensation for the inconvenience. HSBC took their time over it though.

Just goes to show that if you are in the right and you know the law then (eventually) you will win.

If banks can defraud you and you're dumb enough to accept it, they will!