Fraudulent Transaction. NatWest say "phone on Monday"

stclair

dalesrider wrote: »

Yes. I am glad I'm not a customer.

I don't care who's system is better than anyone elses. I'm just shocked that Nat West fail to provide staff with the basic tools to do their job....
We moan about our systems.....
Sounds like a road sweeper being sent out without a brush, to me :rotfl:

So. Ok. we will see just what the Op comes back with on monday and see the outcome

Just to set the scene in advance they possibly wont even get a response on Monday as the system will not update until early hours of Tuesday morning.

dalesrider

stclair wrote: »

[/COLOR]

Just to set the scene in advance they possibly wont even get a response on Monday as the system will not update until early hours of Tuesday morning.

Fair do's.

stclair

dalesrider wrote: »

Fair do's.

Ive put in a suggestion for you on your behalf

http://www.natwest.com/global/customer-charter/g1/ideas-bank.ashx

dalesrider

stclair wrote: »

Ive put in a suggestion for you on your behalf

http://www.natwest.com/global/customer-charter/g1/ideas-bank.ashx

Cheers

Added a reply to it.


Seems that banks want to provide this face to the public via all the various online methods. But fail to actually deliver proper tools to staff to do their jobs.

pmduk

I think it's the old problem of banks using antiquated systems cobbled together with chewing gum.

Hominu

pmduk wrote: »

I think it's the old problem of banks using antiquated systems cobbled together with chewing gum.

Of course, anything else would be using up their bonus money.

TiddlyPom

innovate wrote: »

Do you not have online access to your account?

What does it say on your transactions list?

All is says on the online banking is "**** 30Jan12", the * being the last four digits of the old card number. That info wasn't there yesterday, but has appeared today.

ETA: Just having read StClairs post above, this ties in with that.

Having read the info from the FSA link, I can see an amusing conversation taking place on Monday when I call regarding rights vs NatWest's preferred way of doing things. Chap I spoke to did slip up a bit when I was grilling him about how a decision is made whether to refund money or not. He originally said "We're not supposed to give you an immediate answer" then corrected himself to say "we CAN'T ...". I don't trust them to refund the money even when I've told them it's not an authorised transaction.

Will definitely come back an update you after conversation with them on Monday and fill you in although may be later in the day.

Thank you all for all your help.

stclair

My understanding is the bank can "only" refund a transaction once it's "actually" been debited.

In your circumstances the funds have not actually left your account yet.

innovate

stclair wrote: »

My understanding is the bank can "only" refund a transaction once it's "actually" been debited.

In your circumstances the funds have not actually left your account yet.

This just adds insult to injury, and serves to infuriate customers even more.

The OP's online statement showed that £62 had gone from the account, without the OP's authorisation.

How on earth is the OP meant to know that the £62 hasn't "actually" been debited, if their statement says it has been debited?????

Exactly why can a bank not immediately act when a customer tells them about an unauthorised payment, even when the bank's licence says they have to give an immediate refund? How can a bank keep their licence if they are found to break it, and they admit breaking it by not immediately refunding unauthorised payment?

Deferring the customer to the next working day is even more insult because it can easily be establish that the "fraud team" don't stop just because it is the weekend.

OP, I hope you have a written record of the complaint you raised. Natwest should re-imburse you not just the £62 unauthorised, but also all the phone calls you had/still have to make, as well as your time they are wasting by making you call more than once to get this issue resolved. Plus they should give you a fair packet for the distress they caused you.

stclair

innovate wrote: »

This just adds insult to injury, and serves to infuriate customers even more.

The OP's online statement showed that £62 had gone from the account, without the OP's authorisation.

How on earth is the OP meant to know that the £62 hasn't "actually" been debited, if their statement says it has been debited?????

Exactly why can a bank not immediately act when a customer tells them about an unauthorised payment, even when the bank's licence says they have to give an immediate refund? How can a bank keep their licence if they are found to break it, and they admit breaking it by not immediately refunding unauthorised payment?

Deferring the customer to the next working day is even more insult because it can easily be establish that the "fraud team" don't stop just because it is the weekend.

OP, I hope you have a written record of the complaint you raised. Natwest should re-imburse you not just the £62 unauthorised, but also all the phone calls you had/still have to make, as well as your time they are wasting by making you call more than once to get this issue resolved. Plus they should give you a fair packet for the distress they caused you.

I think we need to actually find out whether the transaction is fraudulent first. Then once it's been confirmed the OP can explore avenues where to go with it next.

Maybe you could report them, I`ve not known any banks to give an immediate refund yet under the PSD,