Is this Credit Card fraud?

InsideInsurance

bris wrote: »

Not fraud, the op authorised the use I don't see it as any different to another card holder.

Op was negligent by giving the details out in the first place and failed to control the use of the card.

If the op did want to press charges (doubtful) then the CPS would drop it on the basis that the card holder allowed the use of the card, to much doubt for a successful prosecution.

The OP authorised a single transaction, that doesnt give anyone the right to make subsequent transactions on their card. Would you be happy if the last shop you went into put through an extra $1,000 a day each time the taking were a bit low with the defence that you had given them the card number for the first transaction?

The OP was negligent, and may have broken the terms of their credit agreement, but that doesnt absolve the father.

The police/CPS would review the case and it would be heavily dependent on what the father has said to the police on if they felt a prosecution is worth while


The problem the OP will face is that its the type of story that is often concocted in various situation to get out of something. In my Motor Claims days you'd often get situations where parent or child who isnt named on the policy has a crash in the insured's car. If the car was stolen then there is cover for the damage, if it was taken with permission then there is no cover for damage to the car, needless to say most claim it was stolen but dont/refuse to report the theft to police.

londonTiger

Also dont forget that your OH may have been declined a mortgage in spite of the credit card tomfoolery.

Not enough property to go around so lenders can afford to be choosy and only lend to the best prospects.

stebiz

SareyC wrote: »

Thanks for your comments. Yes we thought it would be hard to prove which transactions my partner authorised and which he didn't. We accept there was some negligence on my partners behalf. The balance is paid off but it shows as numerous red marks on his report for missed payments, arrears and he debt being sold to a debt management company which was then put on an arrangement to pay off. We're so stuck what to do?

Do you still have a good relationship with your inlaw and would your relationship last if you put them through a court case?

chattychappy

bris wrote: »

Not fraud, the op authorised the use

Whether or not the OP agreed, fraud by false representation is a S2 Fraud Act 2006 offence. In summary, there are 3 elements:

1) you need a representation as to fact or law, express implied, known to be untrue or misleading.
2) Dishonesty
3) Intent to make a gain for yourself or expose somebody to the risk of loss.

When you present a card to a merchant you are representing that the card is yours and you are entitled to use it. There is case law on this, so (1) seems pretty clear to me. (2) would be subject to the "ghosh" test - personally I think using the card in this way would be found to be dishonest, but perhaps more tricky. This is certainly the best defence - in the circumstances, a reasonable person wouldn't have regarded the action as dishonest. (3) is clear because any credit transaction entails a benefit to the customer and risk to the CC.

REMEMBER, it is the CC's money. The fraud is on them, at least in the first place.

If you look at the CPS/sentencing guidelines, you would see that a prosecution would be very unlikely and even if successful, the sentence relatively low.

londonTiger

chattychappy wrote: »

If you look at the CPS/sentencing guidelines, you would see that a prosecution would be very unlikely and even if successful, the sentence relatively low.

CPS wil lalso bear in mind that this is a son trying to file criminal charges on his father. Very high chance of cold feet and plaintiff pulling out last minute and not going ahead with the charges.

They have difficulty getting domestic rape / violence cases to go through so how would a petty "fraud" case go down?

I don't know how the CPS works but I'm going to go out on a limb here and say the CPS will drop charges unless the plaintiff demonstrates high levels of motivation to proceed with charges and take it to court.

At the end of the day, what is a silly mark on a credit file compared to family? I could sympathise if father stole money from son. But he paid it all back plus interest, plus fees. If you want to nitpick go ahead. First you have to fight your family in court (potentially destryoing relationships). Then when you win you have to fight the CRAs to remove the record from your name (they're not very good at this sort of stuff and takes time)/

p.s. having a lazy day in front of the computer typing away. I suspect OP is just seeing whether they can easily shift bad credit entries onto a relative who no longer needs any credit.

Buzby

The CPS would not be minded to pursue not just for that, but the real possibility of collusion - if only the CC holder could prove not being complicit, but how do you prove a negative?

The debt has been repaid - but the intangible (a fried credit report) is something neither the police nor CPS would be involved in. Any ability to resolve a bad file would rest with the CRA that reported it, and whilst it would not be a slam dunk, certainly seeking a resolution by providing as much factual details to enable a review.

Captain_Flack.

londonTiger wrote: »

CPS wil lalso bear in mind that this is a son trying to file criminal charges on his father. Very high chance of cold feet and plaintiff pulling out last minute and not going ahead with the charges.

They have difficulty getting domestic rape / violence cases to go through so how would a petty "fraud" case go down?

[/B]I don't know how the CPS works but I'm going to go out on a limb here and say the CPS will drop charges[/B] unless the plaintiff demonstrates high levels of motivation to proceed with charges and take it to court.

At the end of the day, what is a silly mark on a credit file compared to family? I could sympathise if father stole money from son. But he paid it all back plus interest, plus fees. If you want to nitpick go ahead. First you have to fight your family in court (potentially destryoing relationships). Then when you win you have to fight the CRAs to remove the record from your name (they're not very good at this sort of stuff and takes time)/

p.s. having a lazy day in front of the computer typing away. I suspect OP is just seeing whether they can easily shift bad credit entries onto a relative who no longer needs any credit.

You don't know much in all honesty. You'd need to get cps to authorise a charge first. And please don't compare fraud to domestic rape, they are not similar matters.

InsideInsurance

The question of if the police/ CPS prosecute is a secondary matter. Most financial services companies will require that the crime has been reported. We all understand that there can be various reasons why an actual prosecution isnt pursued but the police report that is generated will give them enough information to decide if they feel it was fraud or a made up story to try and resolve an issue

StirlingDave

The best alternative would be to put a notice of correction on your credit record. You are entitled to put, within reason, any explanation you wish. A note could be attached saying the payments were missed due to the card being unknowingly used by a family member and you were unaware there was an available balance and it was quickly paid off in full. If the rest of the credit record is perfect, many companies will take that into account and it won't mess things up.

I had a few missed payments a few years ago when I had a bad medical problem and was advised by my bank to explain that when I enquired about a loan and it got through ok after that.

grumbler

Unfortunately, the computers, that rule everywhere nowadays, can not and do not read the notices.