ATM Error - £300 not paid out

matttye

cyberbird wrote: »

I suggest you re-read the thread. I am the OP.

You are missing the point. The ATM is broken. The bank have acknowledged this. The issue is that the clerk thinks, like you, that to deal with the matter they would have to breach the data protection act. That is nonsense.

I think you are confusing what has happened here with what some people do to try and defraud the bank. I'm sure the people you are talking about claim their card has been stolen. If they falsely claimed that the machine was broken then they would stand no chance of succeeding.

If the bank doesn't allow cards to be used by other people (either without power of attorney or following some sort of bank procedure), then they cannot realistically follow up on any report of missing funds.

I sympathise for the situation and wish you luck, but the rules have been flouted, therefore the bank is not willing to assist. This makes sense to me.

The bank isn't just going to take reports from random people about accounts that they cannot confirm exists without breaching DPA.

cyberbird

matttye wrote: »

The bank isn't just going to take reports from random people about accounts that they cannot confirm exists without breaching DPA.

No, but that's not what is being reported.

The report is that their (Santander's) ATM, just outside their front door is broken. They have already acknowledged that they know this. They don't even need to know which account is involved. They then just need to follow up by checking the suspense account in the ATM which will be in credit to the amount of all the failed transactions and the record of transactions from the ATM and then re-credit all the accounts.

No personal information needed. They don't have to do anything while I'm there and don't need to get back to me. It's got nothing to do with the data protection act.

matttye

cyberbird wrote: »

No, but that's not what is being reported.

The report is that their (Santander's) ATM, just outside their front door is broken. They have already acknowledged that they know this. They don't even need to know which account is involved. They then just need to follow up by checking the suspense account in the ATM which will be in credit to the amount of all the failed transactions and the record of transactions from the ATM and then re-credit all the accounts.

No personal information needed. They don't have to do anything while I'm there and don't need to get back to me. It's got nothing to do with the data protection act.

I don't know enough about ATMs to argue with what you're saying, ill just say this; the receipt says you received £300 and the account is down £300. That indicates the ATM thinks you got the money.

If the ATM just stopped giving out money then it sounds like it would be as simple as you say, but what if it failed to give you money but the next person who came along managed to get theirs? That is when a report would need to be made about the accounts missing funds (so that the bank/ATM provider has some idea of whose accounts it needs to credit).

dalesrider

cyberbird wrote: »

I suggest you re-read the thread. I am the OP.

I know that.... But this is the internet and with no disrepect to yourself. What proof do we have as to you having permission.

You asked for advice. You are getting it from someone who deals with these types of queries on a daily basis.

cyberbird wrote: »

You are missing the point. The ATM is broken. The bank have acknowledged this. The issue is that the clerk thinks, like you, that to deal with the matter they would have to breach the data protection act. That is nonsense.

Well in that case you do not need to do anything and they will resolve the issue without you having to do anything.
If it does not then THE ACCOUNT HOLDER has to raise the issue.
These are the practises that have been put in place to protect account holders.

You do not like this then try and take it up with FOS. They will back the bank 100% and send you away.

cyberbird wrote: »

I think you are confusing what has happened here with what some people do to try and defraud the bank.

No. What I am trying to do is get you to understand WHY the bank will not take your request to look at this matter.

SnowTiger

cyberbird wrote: »

I suggest you re-read the thread. I am the OP.

You are missing the point. The ATM is broken. The bank have acknowledged this. The issue is that the clerk thinks, like you, that to deal with the matter they would have to breach the data protection act. That is nonsense.

Why do you think the bank isn't dealing with the matter?

You're not the account holder, so that can't discuss specifics of the matter with you. However, you've reported the cash machine was faulty and they've acknowledged it. What more do you expect?

Chances are that the money will be re-credited to the account anyway.

Online and telephone banking have been available since last century. There really isn't any need for customers to hand over their card and PIN to a third-party.

meer53

So OP, has your Mum contacted the bank yet ? This is the only way to get this sorted out. Doesn't matter about the ongoing debate on here really does it ?

cyberbird

meer53 wrote: »

So OP, has your Mum contacted the bank yet ? This is the only way to get this sorted out. Doesn't matter about the ongoing debate on here really does it ?

No, the debate may be interesting but it is mainly off topic. People (not everybody) are talking about what they want to talk about rather than just taking my post as fact and giving advice on that.

The update, which I have just had by a telephone conversation with my wife, is that the bank will check the atm for a positive balance and if no credit is made within 48 hours she is to phone back.

The bank first spoke to my mother in law and thankfully there wasn't any security information set up for the account. My wife then spoke to them. There was no mention of T&C's.

If the bank just rely on there being a positive balance then customers are at risk. How do they know who the extra money belongs to?

jonesMUFCforever

cyberbird wrote: »

No, the debate may be interesting but it is mainly off topic. People (not everybody) are talking about what they want to talk about rather than just taking my post as fact and giving advice on that.

The update, which I have just had by a telephone conversation with my wife, is that the bank will check the atm for a positive balance and if no credit is made within 48 hours she is to phone back.

The bank first spoke to my mother in law and thankfully there wasn't any security information set up for the account. My wife then spoke to them. There was no mention of T&C's.

If the bank just rely on there being a positive balance then customers are at risk. How do they know who the extra money belongs to?

They won't if it is different banks - that is why it is imperative that the customer makes a claim.

JuicyJesus

cyberbird wrote: »

If the bank just rely on there being a positive balance then customers are at risk. How do they know who the extra money belongs to?

What else are they supposed to go on?

They only know whose money it is when that person raises a claim.

katebl

If memory serves me correctly (worked for a high street bank 8 years ago and was responsible for filling and maintaining cash machines), any cash not taken - or dispensed by the machine - goes into a seperate tray inside called the purge tray, not back into the original cash trays. The receipt roll will give details of the card number, time, date and amount of the purge, and then the customer can be credited back accordingly (the owner of the machine may need to contact the relevant card issuer company, I can't quite remember). This should be checked every time the machine is replenished. I would fully expect the funds to be returned automatically within a week or so, but by all means pursue the bank if you can.