Barclays Bank Hell

InsideInsurance

Archi_Bald wrote: »

What are you on about? Where does "this site very much advocate" that a bank can reverse any faster payments on the say-so of the sender of the money?

Where did I mention faster payment?

You mention its theft for a bank to take away money simply on a third party's say so and I point out that actually it is standard practice in the form of chargebacks (didnt mention faster payment) and that this site advocates the use of chargebacks (which you suggest would be illegal). Likewise you can find monies reclaimed if a cheque turns out to be dodgy

Seemingly in this case it is unlikely to have been a chargeback but it could also have been a claim that something was an unauthorised transaction and so an attempt to reclaim the monies. If both parties bank with Barclays then Barclays act as judge, jury and executioner.

All businesses come across bad debters at some point, its part of the joys of doing business, rather than getting annoyed at the instruments that facilitate the bad debt (eg chargebacks, late withdrawn cheques etc) its much better to deal directly with the debtor and the methods available to recover such debts

grumbler

Even in case of a chargeback I don't think that bank *just* takes the money from the company's account like this happened to the OP.
Whatever were the reasons behind this, Barclays' actions were arrogant and unacceptable.

Archi_Bald

InsideInsurance wrote: »

Where did I mention faster payment?

You may not have mentioned it but the entire thread is about an online (i.e. faster) payment that has allegedly been reversed, 6 weeks after the transaction had been made, and on the say-so of the sender.

Chargebacks for unauthorised debits (CPAs and DDs), which are encouraged by MSE, are a completely different matter. You will not find any trace of me ever having said those would be illegal.

heidi09 wrote: »

My husband did some building work for a woman two months ago and she paid him the money into his Barclays bank account via online transfer.

InsideInsurance

Archi_Bald wrote: »

Chargebacks for unauthorised debits (CPAs and DDs), which are encouraged by MSE, are a completely different matter. You will not find any trace of me ever having said those would be illegal.

You stated:

Archi_Bald wrote:

Taking money from a customer's account on the say-so of another customer is a further breach of law. It is called theft

You never qualified it that this is only called theft when its faster payment but that its perfectly acceptable/ normal when its chargeback, DD, CPA, recalled cheques etc

I suspect you'll find terms and conditions allow for funds to be removed when an issue is discovered with a deposit without it restricting it to only deposites of certain types. In fact my account states:

Sometimes a payment may be recalled by the bank that made it (for example, because theperson who paid you did not have enough
money, or it was fraudulent), and sometimes a payment goes into your account by mistake.

This happens rarely, but please keep an eye on your account, and tell us straight away if money appears in it that seems to be a mistake. This is because, to make things right, we can take the payment back out of your account – even if we have allowed you to make a payment or to take cash out against it.

We don’t have to tell you before we take the payment back. We will return the payment, even if you have spent the money. If this means any of our charges are triggered, we will still apply them (for example, a Reserve Usage Fee or a Paid Transaction Fee).

John1993_2

InsideInsurance wrote: »

Where did I mention faster payment?

I'd ignore him, if I were you, he seems just to want to argue for the sake of argument, and sees no need to try to do so in good faith.

Archi_Bald

I am not voicing opinions, I am stating facts.

http://www.barclays.co.uk/Helpsupport/Fasterpayments/P1242561384878

Q11. Can a payment sent via Faster Payments Service be stopped or recalled?
No. Faster payments cannot be stopped or recalled once you've confirmed your instructions.

Archi_Bald

InsideInsurance wrote: »

You never qualified it that this is only called theft when its faster payment but that its perfectly acceptable/ normal when its chargeback, DD, CPA, recalled cheques etc

This thread isn't about DD, CPA, recalled cheques etc. It's aboput what the OP called an "online transfer", which in this day and age is a Faster Payment.

InsideInsurance

Archi_Bald wrote: »

I am not voicing opinions, I am stating facts.

That is an FAQ for you as a sender of a payment.

The quote from the T&Cs in my previous thread is also from Barclays and states they will take money out of your account, with no exclusion for faster payment, if the senders bank recalls the transaction.

Personally, I'd rate the T&Cs about if my bank can take money out of my account as being more relevant to this thread than an FAQ about if my bank will attempt to help me get money back if I send a payment to someone else.

Knowing Barclays it isnt surprising they wont help, I've now had to Ombudsman cases where Barclays refused to do a chargeback on fraudulant transactions from my debit card and ombudsman upheld both complaints.

pqrdef

Cards are now more popular than cash. Banks have achieved this by emphasising that payments are guaranteed.

Now they want to repudiate that guarantee and say it's all down to the merchant whether he trusts the customer - knowing that merchants haven't any choice, because it would be death to stop taking cards and insist on cash.

Banks also have a lot of trouble with people sending FPs to the wrong account, and they get a lot of flak for being unhelpful. They need to improve their systems to make that mistake much more difficult to make, but like America, they'll explore all the wrong options before they do the right thing.

They've now decided that they will simply reverse the transaction on demand and wash their hands of it.

T&Cs like the ones above will become more common. I think Nationwide have added something similar. Obviously they've done this for a reason and new instructions have been issued.

Can't see much prospect of getting anywhere with a formal complaint. The banks want the risk to be the customer's.

And so the banks are not just judge, jury amd executioner, but they also rewrite the law, since now the customer can be the victim of deception when he isn't the one deceived.

Soon the only way to operate will be to go through a third-party payment system like PayPal, which will try to do the job that the banks don't want to do.

opinions4u

Can't see much prospect of getting anywhere with a formal complaint. The banks want the risk to be the customer's

Right or wrong, assuming this gets to the FOS and is as stated by the mysteriously absent OP, the customer will win.