I think my bank have committed fraud

BillJones

jennyj26uk wrote: »

Thank you! Yes I am someone who complains before something actually happens!

Yes, that seems to be the case.

I am with the poster above, and suspect that you are trying to commit fraud here. You've seen a chance to claim compensation, despite having suffered no loss, and hope to screw some money out of your bank.

Hopefully you fail, and also find yourself being shut out of other banking services.

And no, I don't read the Mail, I get my news from Bloomberg, and the FT.

A_Couple_In_Love

I don't see the problem here.

The OP has created a topic for a helpful response, not an ear bashing.

The question was that the OP believes that the bank did not ask for a PIN Number or a Signature. Right.... so what?

So can someone remind me why you believe the bank rather than the OP when you don't know:
A): The background of the OP.
: The branch the OP uses.

MSE is turning into a bit of a horrible place lately, and the majority of members are just copying other posters to get some extra "reputation" for themselves. If the second poster on this topic would have been a helpful one, I could take a good gamble you all would have followed.

--

Regarding the original post, I don't actually have much advice to offer. But myself, I would certainly not be happy and I would make a complaint like you said. You should be able to tell the difference between your own signature and one they done themselves.

If you have suspicions with the signature, I don't know how secure they are about letting customers view the CCTV, but it's always worth a go at asking if you can have look at the footage when you took your money out, and use that as your evidence.

Money-Saving-King

A_Couple_In_Love wrote: »

The question was that the OP believes that the bank did not ask for a PIN Number or a Signature. Right.... so what?

So can someone remind me why you believe the bank rather than the OP when you don't know:
A): The background of the OP.
: The branch the OP uses.

Why are you so sure then the op's version is right?

I don't believe the op. I gave my example of when I've heard similar things before in this post:

Money-Saving-King wrote: »

Funny because I work in retail. Every now and again some customer dispute the change and DISTINCTLY remember handing over a £20 note and not a £10. Funny thing is whenever the tills counted it never comes in £10 up!

masonic

A_Couple_In_Love wrote: »

The OP has created a topic for a helpful response, not an ear bashing.

The question was that the OP believes that the bank did not ask for a PIN Number or a Signature. Right.... so what?

So can someone remind me why you believe the bank rather than the OP when you don't know:
A): The background of the OP.
: The branch the OP uses.

I think it is helpful for those people who have doubts about the OP's recollections to challenge the story and highlight inconsistencies, with a view to establishing exactly what really happened.

A + B are irrelevant. Only the facts of what happened matter - lack of knowledge of A and B is likely a good thing, since people would be biased against the OP if she'd said she was under a lot of pressure in her life or hadn't been getting a lot of sleep lately etc. We do know that the branch in question is not the branch the OP uses. The OP has not named the bank or branch (which is a good thing given the accusations made), so nobody is likely to be biased through brand loyalty.

The facts are (as far as I can make out) as follows:

• The OP phoned the bank ahead of the withdrawal. It is not clear whether or not a specific appointment was made or not (the bank may or may not have been expecting her).
• She was told on the phone to bring her passport and two documents with proof of address, which would be checked as part of the withdrawal.
• The OP completed the transaction without questioning any inconsistencies in the process (presumably not noticing anything was amiss at the time).
• However, later, the OP recalled "I am 100% certain I did not sign anything. I did not even get a receipt of acknowledgement. I basically walked into the branch handed over my card and asked to withdraw money. She took my card then gave me the money with my card and that was it. No questions asked." (post 6), later adding, "I strongly suspect this is what has happened" (post 75)
• The OP has "already followed their complaints procedure, several times over", post 75, and the bank responded claiming that they have a signature for the transaction. The OP therefore made the accusation that "The young cashier serving has obviously panicked and rather than lose her job has forged my signature on a slip (probably her manager's idea) to save time and hassle and to save her job.", post 70, going on to claim that the cashier, manager and complaints team are all conspiring to cover up what really happened.
• The OP also notes, "I have had £100 compensation from them as a result of all their lies.", post 68, which is perhaps what led some to question whether the OP was trying it on, although the OP later claims she did not receive any compensation, but in fact turned it down.

So we have the word of at least 3 individuals from the bank (one of whom would not be known to the other two), who claim to have evidence that the OP did in fact sign something when withdrawing the cash. Against that, we the word of one individual who has no evidence, but recalls events taking place differently. In that situation, what reasonable person wouldn't have doubts about the OP's story?

robatwork

This thread won't end satisfactorily. They never do.

OP will disappear, which would be a shame as I am sure we all want to know the outcome once the evidence is produced to the OP.

Gram_Parsons

jennyj26uk wrote: »

Yes I love how so many people on these forums jump to conclusions about the people posting. You know nothing about me. I work full time so when stuff like this happens I don't really have time to pursue it! When it happened I was like "oh great something else to sort out and chase up". I see it as a serious complaint and a serious breach of security. I also agree with another poster that I can totally believe people in positions of power and authority covering their backsides when things go wrong and this is clearly what has happened here, I used to be an assistant manager in a store and I saw my own manager cover her mistakes all the time. Believe it or not it happens! My problem is the fact that my bank have lied to me over and over again. And they know I'm right as I have had £100 compensation from them as a result of all their lies. I always pursue complaints about my bank as they are so quick to demand money and continue to screw people over on a daily basis.

Why haven't you taken your account elsewhere then?

27col

matttye wrote: »

Says the guy posting on this forum on a Friday night!

Not that there's anything wrong with that... but it's kinda hypocritical given what you've just said.

Actually. I do get out on a Friday night if I have a bowls game to play. But at my age it's the only reason that I would. Too many drunks and louts about for my liking.

matttye

masonic wrote: »

I think it is helpful for those people who have doubts about the OP's recollections to challenge the story and highlight inconsistencies, with a view to establishing exactly what really happened.

I don't. There's no way anybody can find out anything other than what the OP is telling us, so either advise or move on to another thread. What's the point in arguing with the OP's version of events?

This fact finding mission you guys seem to be on is completely pointless because: -

(a) None of us were there;
(b) It's not possible to find out anything other than what the OP is telling us;
(c) Just answer the fricking question and then at least the thread can become a resource for people if they ever actually do find themselves in this situation.

Can't think of anything more pointless than trying to prove the OP is lying.

masonic

matttye wrote: »

(b) It's not possible to find out anything other than what the OP is telling us;

I agree, but the OP is telling us contradictory things in some places. I'm willing to accept the OP might be getting a little confused in the heat of the moment or making slight exaggerations she might later look back on as not entirely correct. Hence my requests for clarification about some of the things she has said.

(c) Just answer the fricking question and then at least the thread can become a resource for people if they ever actually do find themselves in this situation.

What use exactly would a thread with a simple yes/no responses be to someone else who finds themselves in the same situation? I suppose if it were 95+% no, as it is likely to be, then that might be useful in showing how unlikely the situation is, but that's of little use to someone who is certain of their own experience.

I think the thread in its current form is more useful than that. There are actually some quite useful bits of information that have been shared through discussion of the issue, which wouldn't have come to light if we did as you demand and "Just answer the fricking question".

Can't think of anything more pointless than trying to prove the OP is lying.

I can only speak for myself, but that's not what I'm trying to do. I'm trying to understand and rationalise the OP's account of the events.

matttye

masonic wrote: »

I agree, but the OP is telling us contradictory things in some places. I'm willing to accept the OP might be getting a little confused in the heat of the moment or making slight exaggerations she might later look back on as not entirely correct. Hence my requests for clarification about some of the things she has said.


What use exactly would a thread with a simple yes/no responses be to someone else who finds themselves in the same situation? I suppose if it were 95+% no, as it is likely to be, then that might be useful in showing how unlikely the situation is, but that's of little use to someone who is certain of their own experience.

I think the thread in its current form is more useful than that. There are actually some quite useful bits of information that have been shared through discussion of the issue, which wouldn't have come to light if we did as you demand and "Just answer the fricking question".


I can only speak for myself, but that's not what I'm trying to do. I'm trying to understand and rationalise the OP's account of the events.

If you only have one information source, then any advice needs to be based on that information otherwise it's useless.

When there's more than one source, that's when you can start to question the account given and compare it to that of another information source.

The OP has remained adamant throughout that she didn't sign anything, so any post questioning that is entirely useless and without merit because there's not a shred of evidence to counter what she's saying. If you had somebody at the bank vehemently denying any forgery then you'd be right to question the OP's account, but given the current state of information there's no point. For all of this debate on here, for all we know if the employee who allegedly forged the signature was asked about it, they might admit it outright.

I don't think either of us will change our views on it though