Lloyds Bank Account Hacked. Acc closed & cannot get money - can that be right?

moneysavvy35

colsten wrote: »

Never mind any basic principles - it is now some employee in a bank that can decide whether somebody is guilty, without the accused having any means whatsoever to defend themselves.

Banks would, however, no doubt be able to produce masses of circumstantial evidence from a variety of fraud cases that would probably convince a jury that the boy in this particular case is not wholly innocent.

antrobus wrote: »

Proof only matters in terms of legal process.

If the bank were to take civil action against the son in order to recover their losses, then the burden of proof would be on them.

If the son were to take civil action against the bank to claim for damages for some reason, then he burden of proof would be on him.

He who claims must prove.

This is my whole point!!! How do I prove hes innocent. If the bank were that bothered they could prove his guilt if they really want to - but in thier own words they don't have the time to pursue every bank fraud - they just close the account & blacklist the person to prevent further fraud.

I probably wouldn't beable to take it as far as civil court. So in the meantime the bank will not beable to *prove* the guilt. and I won't beable to *prove his innocence* but he comes worse off, because neither party can prove anything. oh but they'll just blacklist him anyway.

Once I've taken it to the FO i'll have to leave it thier, but it does seem based on this thread I will be fighting a loosing battle. I have enjoyed reading everyone's input. and I'll make sure I feedback any response.