Natwest problem - Recalling payment

pmduk

The one thing to learn from this is to not pay for items by bank transfer, it's the same as giving cash to a stranger.

JuicyJesus

innovate wrote: »

Whilst I agree that the OP's chances to recover their money are very slim, I don't believe it is not worth trying. The FOS have just very recently decided that Barclays are to repay £68K to a woman who transferred that amount to a Barclays account held by fraudsters.

It is a waste of time and will only give OP false hope to wait a year for an Ombudsman's decision. Could you link to a news story about this £68k please, because I'm sure there's something there you've neglected to mention which makes it totally different from this case, especially since in all the Ombudsman's decisions I've read the reasoning and result has been consistent.

It is quite unacceptable that Lloyds (or TSB) should get away with a) giving an account to a fraudster and b) keeping this account open even after people have been defrauded. If it had happened to me, I would be straight on to Mr Horta-Osario's office.

1) How were Lloyds to know they were a fraudster when they opened the account? So they should be able to sense who is a fraudster when someone comes into a branch and not open an account for them? If they can tell the future, why didn't they use it to foresee that PPI would be a minefield?

2) How do you know the account is still open? It is probably closed by now.

3) Even if it weren't, you think Lloyds should just close peoples' accounts because a random third party comes along and says "I paid for a laptop and this guy didn't deliver it"?

Lloyds haven't done anything wrong, and trying to extract money from them for the actions of someone they have no control over is hilarious. I am also dead set against people misusing the already overworked FOS system for complaints with no chance of success on the basis that they might get lucky. You should go to FOS if you have a coherent case to argue, and there simply isn't a coherent case against Lloyds here.

YorkshireBoy

JuicyJesus wrote: »

Could you link to a news story about this £68k please

This one?...


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-25986699

noh

JuicyJesus wrote: »

It is a waste of time and will only give OP false hope to wait a year for an Ombudsman's decision. Could you link to a news story about this £68k please, because I'm sure there's something there you've neglected to mention which makes it totally different from this case, especially since in all the Ombudsman's decisions I've read the reasoning and result has been consistent...............

Here's the news story.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-25986699

As you say the FOS did not decide that the victim should be compensated.
Barclays refunded the £68k as a gesture of goodwill.

JuicyJesus

noh wrote: »

As you say the FOS did not decide that the victim should be compensated.
Barclays refunded the £68k as a gesture of goodwill.

Yup. It looks like the FOS didn't even investigate before Barclays offered the money out of goodwill. Lord knows why when they have robustly defended themselves before over far smaller amounts, as per the Ombudsman decision links above.

Encase92

Well thank you everyone for the replies, the latest news is Lloyds contacted me this morning and said they don't have the authority to look at the account but they recommended me to go see the police or fraud teams, so I told them I have contacted ActionFraud, and they said if ActionFraud contact Lloyds, it may be a possibility, so I am just waiting on that now.

I have told them I have all the evidence with my conversation with the suspect in e-mails along with what they said and were going to do. I have linked their bank account details, website, e-mail account etc as well. Better than nothing.

Encase92

JuicyJesus wrote: »

Lloyds haven't done anything wrong, and trying to extract money from them for the actions of someone they have no control over is hilarious. I am also dead set against people misusing the already overworked FOS system for complaints with no chance of success on the basis that they might get lucky. You should go to FOS if you have a coherent case to argue, and there simply isn't a coherent case against Lloyds here.

I was told to go to the FOS by Natwest themselves. When I finished talking to them on the phone they gave me their number to phone.

Edit -- General question, can't the bank contact the account holder to get a reply? At least if the bank contacted him, that would get his attention.

JuicyJesus

Encase92 wrote: »

I was told to go to the FOS by Natwest themselves. When I finished talking to them on the phone they gave me their number to phone.

They have to give everyone making a complaint FOS' number and the right to go to FOS when they make a final response. It has nothing to do with the merits of what your complaint is, they literally have to as part of the regulations surrounding complaints.

And when you call FOS they will tell you they'll look into it for you and it has a good chance of success because they tell that to everyone, even if the complaint is nonsense. FOS make more money if they accept more complaints, and adjudicators make more money if they handle more complaints.

NatWest incidentally have even less responsibility than Lloyds do. They only followed your instruction.

Encase92

JuicyJesus wrote: »

They have to give everyone making a complaint FOS' number and the right to go to FOS when they make a final response. It has nothing to do with the merits of what your complaint is, they literally have to as part of the regulations surrounding complaints.

And when you call FOS they will tell you they'll look into it for you and it has a good chance of success because they tell that to everyone, even if the complaint is nonsense.

NatWest incidentally have even less responsibility than Lloyds do. They only followed your instruction.

Yes but when I phoned FOS the guy said Natwest shouldn't just hand out their number like that, and he seemed to dig at Natwest because apparently they do this alot. Also my complaint wasn't nonsense, it is a legit complaint. I would have done it sooner but I tried waiting a couple of weeks to see if my order would deliver.

Of course I knew nothing about this "bank transfer cannot be recalled" problem. This is a learning curve for me obviously BUT when you use Natwest Online Banking to pay, it says "payment OR transfer" but when you input the amount, there is NOTHING differentiating between a "payment" and a "transfer".

JuicyJesus

Encase92 wrote: »

Of course I knew nothing about this "bank transfer cannot be recalled" problem. This is a learning curve for me obviously BUT when you use Natwest Online Banking to pay, it says "payment OR transfer" but when you input the amount, there is NOTHING differentiating between a "payment" and a "transfer".

How would that make a difference...?

Also my complaint wasn't nonsense, it is a legit complaint. I would have done it sooner but I tried waiting a couple of weeks to see if my order would deliver.

It's somewhat nonsense since you're complaining to the people who aren't responsible for the fraud. Your complaint is with the person who scammed you. Not NatWest and not Lloyds.