Scumtander: Awful customer service from Santander regarding unauthorised transaction

Tezcatlipoca

My wife has the misfortune of banking with Santander.

At the start of each month, we both move money from our own accounts into our joint account to cover the rent, council tax, and other household bills.

So, here we are at the start of July, and she can't transfer her usual amount because some <person> has somehow made two fraudulent transactions on her Santander account for £125 each to Oyster.

She phoned Santander and explained that these two transactions were not authorised and were therefore fraudulent.

After being given the run around, and having to explain the situation again and again to different people, she was finally told that...

... she must wait 15 days before they even class it as fraud and begin investigating :huh::mad:

No immediate refund, no card cancellation, just "please wait 15 days".

Their excuse? She has an "existing relationship" with Oyster, therefore she must wait.

Can she do anything in the meantime? "Phone Oyster".

So, she phoned Oyster. They can't do anything or tell her anything, other than that it definitely was not her Oyster card that was topped up. Also, apparently the figures in question are actually somehow above the maximum top up amount for Oyster.

She phoned Santander back. Went through it all again. Won't budge. "15 days 15 days 15 days..."

!!!!!!?

Here's what the FSA has to say:

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/consumerinformation/product_news/banking/know_your_rights/solving

FSA wrote:

What should I do about a payment from my account that I didn’t authorise?

Your bank must refund an unauthorised transaction. Money can only be taken from your account if you have authorised the transaction or your bank can prove you were at fault.

Contact your bank immediately if you notice a payment out of your account that you did not authorise. If you are sure that you did not authorise the payment you can claim a refund.

My wife did not authorise it, and she contacted her bank immediately.

FSA wrote:

Why won’t my bank refund me?

Your bank must only refuse a refund for an unauthorised transaction if:

- it can prove you authorised the transaction – though your bank cannot simply say that use of your password, card and PIN conclusively proves you authorised a payment; or

- it can prove you are at fault because you acted fraudulently or, because you deliberately, or with gross negligence, failed to protect the details of your card, PIN or password in a way that allowed the transaction.

- Santander has not mentioned having proof that my wife authorised the transaction, it merely says its procedures require it to wait 15 days as she has an "existing relationship" with the payee.

- Santander has not mentioned having proof that my wife is at fault due to acting fraudulently or negligently etc., it merely says its procedures require it to wait 15 days as she has an "existing relationship" with the payee.

FSA wrote:

How quickly must my bank refund me for an unauthorised transaction?

The bank must make the refund immediately unless it has evidence that one of the above reasons applies.

Your bank may ask you to answer some questions and fill out a form confirming what has happened, but it cannot delay your refund while it waits for you to return the form. If the bank has evidence that one of the above reasons for refusing a refund applies, it may investigate before making a refund but must look into it as quickly as possible.

Santander has no evidence that one of the above reasons applies.

Santander has not asked my wife to "answer some questions and fill out a form confirming what has happened".

Santander is not conducting an investigation before making a refund - it is making my wife wait 15 days before it even considers it to be fraud or gives her a refund.


:mad:


My wife passed the phone to me the last time she was on the phone to Santander, as she was getting too upset.

I tried to keep my cool, but after the robot kept going on about "15 days 15 days 15 days" each time I quoted the FSA, I did raise my voice... :erm:

Unbelievably useless.


I have had unauthorised transaction issues with NatWest twice in the past. Each time it happened, my account was refunded as soon as I phoned them, even though the payees were both companies I had an "existing relationship" with (Santander's excuse for their 15 day wait).

This farce with Santander is one of the worst examples of customer service I have ever experienced, rivalling the time that DSG "lost" my TV when they had it for repair.

My wife is now thinking about ditching them for her current account, although isn't sure as "they're probably all as bad as each other".

thomasdown

I sympathise with you I really do. Welcome to the Santander club of lets pi*s our customers off. Read the many threads on here slating them, there customer service is truly shocking. Take for instance me being frauded last December for just over £1600, just before xmas? Only to be told it will have to be investigated. Great xmas it was with no money? Do what I did, if you're not happy with them just change banks.

SnowTiger

Tezcatlipoca wrote: »

No immediate refund, no card cancellation, just "please wait 15 days".

Their excuse? She has an "existing relationship" with Oyster, therefore she must wait.

Yep, a similar thing was highlighted by BBC Watchdog. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/watchdog/2012/04/bank_fraud.html>:

Ray Saddington returned from a holiday in Cyprus to find two unauthorised payments had been made on his card. He would later discover that they were to the DVLA, for tax discs on cars he didn't even own. They were for a purple Volvo and a silver Mondeo. Ray approached his bank for a refund but was told that the transaction weren't fraud because he had used this merchant before.

Yes, you heard that right. If a criminal uses your card to buy something from a retailer - and you've used that same retailer before - Barclays might not be prepared to accept there's been fraud. Why? It could either be that the retailer has your details and may have accidently debited your account or because this is in line with your normal pattern of spending.

If I were her I'd get a written complaint in to Santander NOW. Don't wait until the matter is sorted... or not.

pmduk

One of their staff apologists was on here recently praising their great fraud department. Unfortunately your experience appearrs closer to the norm. All you can do now is to open a fomal complaint and make arangements to open an account with a proper bank.

poorgirl-54

santander is the worst bank, ur experience is terrible, but standard of how santander treat customers, they dnt care

Tezcatlipoca

tl;dr - After a (long) visit to the branch, and more hassle, my wife has had her refund



Full -

A recap:

- Santander told my wife that she had to wait 15 days before they would even start a fraud investigation, let alone consider refunding her the £250, all because of this "existing relationship" with Oyster. No block on the card, no fraud investigation, no refund, no help, no sympathy...

- The FSA website clearly states "The bank must make the refund immediately".

- The FSA website clearly states "Your bank must only refuse a refund for an unauthorised transaction if it can prove you authorised the transaction – though your bank cannot simply say that use of your password, card and PIN conclusively proves you authorised a payment".

- The FSA website clearly states "Your bank must only refuse a refund for an unauthorised transaction if it can prove you are at fault because you acted fraudulently or, because you deliberately, or with gross negligence, failed to protect the details of your card, PIN or password in a way that allowed the transaction."

- The FSA website makes no mention of a 15 day wait due to having an "existing relationship" with the retailer/payee.


Today's update:

My wife remembered something that I would have thought would cast doubt on the "existing relationship" nonsense: The last time she used her account for Oyster was way back when her card was still an Abbey card... with a different number to the one she has now. The current card has never been used with Oyster.

My wife visited the local branch today, to try and talk to an actual person and get somewhere with this mess, rather than be fobbed off again by the CSR robots on the phone.

She waited and waited and waited. She was insistent that she speak to someone actually capable of helping her, and that she did not simply want them to put her through to the fraud phoneline again, as that would not get anywhere.

Eventually she was seen, and went over the whole issue with the branch staff member.

The branch staff member phoned the fraud phoneline herself, and managed to eventually break through the 1st line of robots and actually got through to someone who could help instead of simply repeat lines from a script.

The situation was explained once more.

The more senior person from the fraud phoneline went over my wife's recent transactions with her... revealing two earlier fraudulent transactions that were rejected. My wife stated she definitely did not attempt to make either transaction. She also knew nothing at all of them due to them being rejected straight off, and so not appearing on her statement. Question: Why on Earth was this not done the first time my wife phoned the fraud phone line? Or the second time? If a customer phones and reports an unauthorised transaction, does it not make sense to go over their other recent transactions with them to make sure that there were no other unauthorised transactions or attempted unauthorised transactions, even if the reported one was with a retailer the customer had an "existing relationship" with?

As this now made it quite clear-cut that my wife's account was a victim of fraudulent unauthorised transactions, a fraud investigation was opened and my wife was given a reference number. She was told that she should get the two successful unauthorised transactions refunded. The refunds were processed at the end of the working day A replacement card is on its way.

I also managed to catch Santander's attention via the power of Twitter. I moaned about Santander to MSE's Martin Lewis and BBC Money's Paul Lewis, while "mentioning" Santander's Twitter account each time. Santander replied to me this morning, asking me to contact them via a "media relations" email that they give out to people who complain on Twitter. I passed it to my wife, and she emailed it earlier. They phoned back while she was out.


Oh, and this thread is currently the no. 2 Google search result for "Scumtander", with two threads I created elsewhere taking 1st and 3rd place

daveyjp

For problems always use a branch. Call centre operators are too often judged by throughput of calls, not satisfaction of solution to the customer.

Worst numbers in a call centre for the operators are "callers waiting" and "calls not completed". Both suggest operators aren't working hard enough and problems slow them down.

vax2002

You could sue them, they could put your ccj in a pile with the others they ignore.