What is fraud?

Atidi

DrRoebuck wrote: »

Thanks - it is a good point about rental car companies having terms regarding future transactions, but seeing as they already deducted petrol money the week after the rental, I assumed that was all concluded. This just seems way too long after the event.

Goldcar make it exceedingly hard to even find a contact email address, but I've written to rentalcars.com to see if they can help.

Don't you think it would have been better to have given time to receive a response before making wild accusations of fraud?

DrRoebuck

Atidi wrote: »

Don't you think it would have been better to have given time to receive a response before making wild accusations of fraud?

Well, if you're very observant you'll see I asked whether this was fraud, as opposed to making any accusations. And I contacted Goldcar and rentalcars.com back in September about other charges they (Goldcar) had made, without response. My query merely sought to ask whether I should agree with Tesco that this wasn't fraudulent. And the consensus answer is yes I should.

Thank you to those that responded, was very helpful

InsideInsurance

DrRoebuck wrote: »

And the consensus answer is yes I should.

Thank you to those that responded, was very helpful

To be honest, the consensus is that you need to find out more information first.

You are wrong to say you need to explicitly give authorisation for each transaction however they would be wrong to say it isnt fraud just because you gave them your card number.

I had a similar battle with Barclays a couple of years ago who refused to treat it as fraud and refused to do a chargeback so it ultimately went to the FOS and my complaint was upheld.

Until you find out exactly what the charge was for its impossible to say if its fraud or not

BMN

It can be difficult to understand but for it to be fraud then somebody has to have been defrauded. If you give a company your card details then the bank hasn't been defrauded, therefore it isn't fraud

Note: an unauthorised transaction is not the same as fraud.

John_Pierpoint

Carhireuk.com gets a drubbing on BBC Radio 4 "Moneybox"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03j63jl

This sounds like another example of "The duck test".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test

Atidi

DrRoebuck wrote: »

Well, if you're very observant you'll see I asked whether this was fraud, as opposed to making any accusations. And I contacted Goldcar and rentalcars.com back in September about other charges they (Goldcar) had made, without response. My query merely sought to ask whether I should agree with Tesco that this wasn't fraudulent. And the consensus answer is yes I should.

Thank you to those that responded, was very helpful

I am very observant. May I remind you what you posted.

DrRoebuck wrote: »

Hi, quick query.

I rented a car through rentalcars.com and Goldcar back in September (I didn't realise how appalling Goldcar was - should've checked first, but that's another story).

This week a new transaction has appeared, debiting money from my card, from Goldcar.

I called my card company to say this is fraudulent activity and they (Tesco) told me that because Goldcar did not obtain my details fraudulently, this is not fraud so I have to go via chargeback to recover it.

Surely this is wrong? If I go to a restaurant and pay by card, then two months later the restaurant charges a new amount to my card, is that not fraud?

Thank you.

(My highlighting)

I can only go on the information you provide, and I apologise if the advice I gave was not the answer you wanted to hear (even if it was entirely correct and appropriate based on the question you asked)

KayDee_2

Tesco may be technically correct but they are definitely not acting in the interests of their customers - just themselves.

I have a similar dispute with Tesco Credit Card/Bank. I reported unauthorised activity to them expecting to be able to take control of the card. Huge amounts were being charged to my card by my 12 yr old son. I told them exactly what was happening the first month I noticed it. I asked them NOT TO ALLOW ANY FURTHER TRANSACTIONS WITH MICROSOFT because IT WAS NOT ME AND I DID NOT APPROVE THEM. They would not stop the charges. They said it was not fraud?? Despite telling them - no transactions were being made by me.... I could not get control of my card registered with xbox..... in short £2000 worth later.....Microsoft agree to reverse the charges but Tesco.... guess what... INCREASED THE LIMIT issued another card (to try and give me control of the account again) but NO WAY WILL REQUEST CHARGE REVERSAL FROM Microsoft.

In their advertisements Tesco make the following statement;If your cash is stolen...

One of the reasons for this is the security of paying by credit card. If your cash is stolen, you can pretty much forget you ever had it. Whereas if your card is stolen, you can cancel the card immediately before any fraudulent purchases are made. Plus, credit card companies have increasingly sophisticated safeguards in place to protect you in the event of unauthorised use.

I think the advertising standards agency need to look at this.

I have used Tesco as my main Credit Card provider for over 12 years and always thought it was ok. When this issue is sorted, I will NEVER use TESCO again, not even to fill up with Petrol. That's how bad I feel about it.

bris

This is not fraud and it is not unauthorised, you gave them the authorisation the day you signed the agreement, this covers any charges they believe you owe after you hand the car back.

This is now a civil case between both parties, if you believe the charges are not warrantied then this is what the small claims court is for.

The bank wont get involved because they simply cant take ones word over the other, only the court can do that.

John_Pierpoint

KayDee wrote: »

Tesco may be technically correct but they are definitely not acting in the interests of their customers - just themselves.

I have a similar dispute with Tesco Credit Card/Bank. I reported unauthorised activity to them expecting to be able to take control of the card. Huge amounts were being charged to my card by my 12 yr old son. I told them exactly what was happening the first month I noticed it. I asked them NOT TO ALLOW ANY FURTHER TRANSACTIONS WITH MICROSOFT because IT WAS NOT ME AND I DID NOT APPROVE THEM. They would not stop the charges. They said it was not fraud?? Despite telling them - no transactions were being made by me.... I could not get control of my card registered with xbox..... in short £2000 worth later.....Microsoft agree to reverse the charges but Tesco.... guess what... INCREASED THE LIMIT issued another card (to try and give me control of the account again) but NO WAY WILL REQUEST CHARGE REVERSAL FROM Microsoft.

In their advertisements Tesco make the following statement;If your cash is stolen...

One of the reasons for this is the security of paying by credit card. If your cash is stolen, you can pretty much forget you ever had it. Whereas if your card is stolen, you can cancel the card immediately before any fraudulent purchases are made. Plus, credit card companies have increasingly sophisticated safeguards in place to protect you in the event of unauthorised use.

I think the advertising standards agency need to look at this.

I have used Tesco as my main Credit Card provider for over 12 years and always thought it was ok. When this issue is sorted, I will NEVER use TESCO again, not even to fill up with Petrol. That's how bad I feel about it.

As a Tesco share holder I do not expect to be responsible for your son's criminality.

That is the job of his mother and father.

https://www.gov.uk/age-of-criminal-responsibility

magpiecottage

bris wrote: »

This is not fraud and it is not unauthorised, you gave them the authorisation the day you signed the agreement, this covers any charges they believe you owe after you hand the car back.

This is now a civil case between both parties, if you believe the charges are not warrantied then this is what the small claims court is for.

The bank wont get involved because they simply cant take ones word over the other, only the court can do that.

John_Pierpoint wrote: »

As a Tesco share holder I do not expect to be responsible for your son's criminality.

Both wrong, I'm afraid.

FCA Rule BCOBS 5.1.11 says, "(1) Where a banking customer denies having authorised a payment, it is for the firm to prove that the payment was authorised.
(2) Where a payment from a banking customer's account was not authorised by the banking customer, a firm must, within a reasonable period, refund the amount of the unauthorised payment to the banking customer and, where applicable, restore the banking customer's account to the state it would have been in had the unauthorised payment not taken place."

There is nothing to say that simply because a member of the cardholder's household carried out the transaction.

In the case of the car hire, if the hire company cannot explain why it is entitled to the money it has claimed I do not think it can take it. Simply saying "it is in the terms and conditions" and assuming that entitles it to do so with no explanation of what the charge is for would, I think be unfair within the context of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts regulations 1999.

Therefore, I think unless and until such an explanation is forthcoming the OP is entitled to argue that it is an unauthorised transaction.

My recommendation is that each poster sends an e-mail to [EMAIL="TBCCmailbox@tescobank.com"]TBCCmailbox@tescobank.com[/EMAIL] saying that they are complaining that Tesco has failed to comply with BCOBS 5.1.11 and demanding this is rectified.

Tesco will have 8 weeks from the date of receipt of the e-mail to get a response in the post (if it is after 5 p.m. or a weekend or bank holiday it will be deemed to be from the next working day).

If they do not do so within that time, or you find the response unsatisfactory you can go to FOS.


John_Pierpoint may not like this answer - or how the FCA rules might negatively impact on his investment.

However, when making an investment it is important to carry out due diligence on the commercial risks that will be faced. That includes regulatory risk.

Put simply, the law, in effect, says "tough"!

If you don't like holding an investment that is exposed to that risk then I suggest you sell your shares.