Bizarrre situation

Stevio_2

Hi everyone,

I'm in a very strange situation at the moment.

Basically someone has got hold of my mother's credit card information plus Halifax Secure information and opened up accounts with Google Adwords, William Hill and eupaycom.net all in my name charging up to around £700.

Currently, due to the fact that these accounts were opened in my name, Halifax are saying they are my accounts and the case is closed, so therefore have to pay.

Halifax say the Police are investigating, however, whether this is still the case due to Halifax closing the case, I don't know.

At the moment, I'm trying to get information from all three places where accounts were opened, so far Google and William Hill have replied, unfortunately the latter don't seem to be too helpful about providing information about an account which is supposedly mine, plus it seems they only today suspended the account, which I find ridiculous, considering Halifax had already been in touch with them last week.

So why I'm posting is if anyone has any advice on how to proceed, as it's a really crazy situation.

Thanks in advance.

Regards,

Steven

Alfie_E

Stevio wrote: »

Basically someone has got hold of my mother's credit card information plus Halifax Secure information…

This is the key point. Other than the fact that your name has been used, it’s nothing to do with you. It’s not your credit card bill. It’s not you who’s expected to pay it. It’s all down to your mother. She’s the one who’s been the victim of fraud, and she’s the one who has to complain.

Stevio wrote: »

Halifax say the Police are investigating, however, whether this is still the case due to Halifax closing the case, I don't know.

There has been a recent change in how card fraud is reported. See New rules for reporting card, cheque and online banking fraud. It’s up to Halifax to decide if it’s a crime and if it needs to be reported to the police. However, if Halifax have passed on the information, it’ll be up to the police what they do with it.

Stevio wrote: »

At the moment, I'm trying to get information from all three places where accounts were opened, so far Google and William Hill have replied, unfortunately the latter don't seem to be too helpful about providing information about an account which is supposedly mine …

As above, these companies won’t be inclined to talk with you. They’re not your accounts. They’re not even your mother’s accounts.

I assume your mother has already told Halifax that she’s been a victim of fraud and that the card has been stopped. She needs to go through all the transactions made on the card and dispute all the ones that aren’t purchases that she’s made. She needs to tell Halifax that she didn’t authorise them and they’re part of the fraud.

Even if Halifax and the police were to suspect that you committed the crime, your mother should still get her money back. Under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, the most she could be made liable for is the first £50. See using plastic cards as credit-tokens. Only if Halifax were to suspect that your mother set up all these accounts, or gave someone permission to use her card to set them up, might they refused to return the money.

The fact that the card was used in conjunction with Verified by Visa or MasterCard SecureCode does make family members likely suspects. However, it’s perfectly possible for the information to be obtained by some far-away criminal. A computer your mother uses could have had its security compromised with personal information being sent over the Internet to the criminal, or your mother could have been tricked into entering her security information into a web page that wasn’t a true Visa or MasterCard security page.

knowledgeman

Alfie_E wrote: »

This is the key point. Other than the fact that your name has been used, it’s nothing to do with you. It’s not your credit card bill. It’s not you who’s expected to pay it. It’s all down to your mother. She’s the one who’s been the victim of fraud, and she’s the one who has to complain.

There has been a recent change in how card fraud is reported. See New rules for reporting card, cheque and online banking fraud. It’s up to Halifax to decide if it’s a crime and if it needs to be reported to the police. However, if Halifax have passed on the information, it’ll be up to the police what they do with it.

As above, these companies won’t be inclined to talk with you. They’re not your accounts. They’re not even your mother’s accounts.

I assume your mother has already told Halifax that she’s been a victim of fraud and that the card has been stopped. She needs to go through all the transactions made on the card and dispute all the ones that aren’t purchases that she’s made. She needs to tell Halifax that she didn’t authorise them and they’re part of the fraud.

Even if Halifax and the police were to suspect that you committed the crime, your mother should still get her money back. Under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, the most she could be made liable for is the first £50. See using plastic cards as credit-tokens. Only if Halifax were to suspect that your mother set up all these accounts, or gave someone permission to use her card to set them up, might they refused to return the money.

The fact that the card was used in conjunction with Verified by Visa or MasterCard SecureCode does make family members likely suspects. However, it’s perfectly possible for the information to be obtained by some far-away criminal. A computer your mother uses could have had its security compromised with personal information being sent over the Internet to the criminal, or your mother could have been tricked into entering her security information into a web page that wasn’t a true Visa or MasterCard security page.

The simple fact that the accounts are in your mothers name should be irrelevent

I think the issue is that someone clearly has accessed information they shouldnt have been able too and halifax are declining to deal with it as fraud

If this is the case your mother should try and work out who and how its happened, report that person to the police then supply halifax with the details and they would normally take it on

Regarding the police, whilst you cant report the fraud if someone known to your family has commited the crime of theft of items from her that is a crime the police are obligated to investigate

If I was you Id seek clarification for why she is liable, if its simply because the fraudster knew her name dispute the decision in writing and it will be overridden

If its because details i.e passwords etc were known you should try and establish who has done it because the likiehood is that the person knew too much to be some obscure fraudster

What you need to remember is it is not in halifax's interest to hold you liable unless they have a good case for it otherwise in the long term it costs them a lot more

Dylanwing

As above, these companies won’t be inclined to talk with you. They’re not your accounts. They’re not even your mother’s accounts.

It might just be me being dense, but if they are not his accounts, why is he liable for paying them?

knowledgeman

Dylanwing wrote: »

It might just be me being dense, but if they are not his accounts, why is he liable for paying them?

Because Id imagine the bank feel they(cardholder) are neglient in allowing someone access to the details i.e family or friend and without cardholder neglience the fraud would be impossible

These companies will often run for cover as its not in their interest to admit to things being fraud

Stevio_2

At present I have no evidence as to how they got hold of the information. I can though rule out any family or friends.

By going on what information they used, they somehow got hold of my name, my mother's name, address, credit card information plus the e-mail address used with Halifax Secure and the password.

The thing is, Halifax Secure has only been used twice with transactions, the first time was with my mother's name, not mine. The second time it was myself using the card with my mother's permission, using my name [hence why I'm getting accused of open these accounts].

So it looks like somehow someone got hold of the information electronically, whether it be during the transaction or after, I don't know.

Something I've noticed at the William Hill site is that the sign up page requires you to add a date of birth. Obviously this information I did not provide with the aforementioned transaction. I've told William Hill my date of birth and asked them to see if it matches their records, of course, whether they tell me is a different matter.

sarymclary

Stevio wrote: »

At present I have no evidence as to how they got hold of the information. I can though rule out any family or friends.

By going on what information they used, they somehow got hold of my name, my mother's name, address, credit card information plus the e-mail address used with Halifax Secure and the password.

The thing is, Halifax Secure has only been used twice with transactions, the first time was with my mother's name, not mine. The second time it was myself using the card with my mother's permission, using my name [hence why I'm getting accused of open these accounts].

So it looks like somehow someone got hold of the information electronically, whether it be during the transaction or after, I don't know.

Something I've noticed at the William Hill site is that the sign up page requires you to add a date of birth. Obviously this information I did not provide with the aforementioned transaction. I've told William Hill my date of birth and asked them to see if it matches their records, of course, whether they tell me is a different matter.

I believe this may well be a sticking point for a claim of fraud. The terms and conditions of all credit cards state that you do not share any of your security info with a third party. If you were using her card to make purchases, they would be quite right to assume security information had been shared, and the security of your mother's account compromised.

Having recently made my own claim for fraudulent activity on one of my accounts (successfully), this was one of the first things I was asked, and I had to sign a declaration stating the case too.

simongregson

The above is not the case for credit cards,


"
Some firms think that if cardholders were grossly negligent in their care of a card and/or PIN, then they can always be held liable for the full amount of any transactions made with that card by a fraudster. But that is not the case. There must be an appropriate provision in the card’s terms. The lack of care must have been the cause of the loss. And even then, the consumer’s liability may be limited if the card was used as a credit-token. If it was, the effect of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 is that:

Cardholders are liable for withdrawals that they have made (or that somebody acting as their agent has made).
Cardholders can be made liable to a maximum of £50 for losses arising from the use of the card when it was not in the possession of someone authorised to have it. (The Act does not say in what circumstances, but we will look to the card terms in each case.)
Cardholders can be made liable for losses arising from the use of the card by someone who has possession of it with the cardholder’s consent. (Again, the Act does not say in what circumstances.)
Cardholders are not liable at all after they have told the card issuer that the card has been lost or stolen.
These provisions cannot be excluded by the account terms."

Note that it is up to the card company to show that the loss resulted directly from another person having the card details, it is not the case that simply because someone else has used the card the cardholder is automatically liable for all fraud on the account.

Stevio_2

Thanks for the replies!

Update: William Hill like I expected won't give any information, they say to go through bank or police.

An odd development is that Google appear to have assigned the Adwords account to my Google account, even though I didn't open it. I found this out after getting an e-mail from them with the subject: "How did we do?"

As I'm a bit concerned that my own account could be compromised, I've changed the password on the Adwords account. I haven't entered the Adwords account though, even though I'm curious to see if there's any funds left, plus I wouldn't mind knowing what they spent advertising on.

Still nothing from the dodgy looking eupaycom.net.

knowledgeman

Stevio wrote: »

Thanks for the replies!

Update: William Hill like I expected won't give any information, they say to go through bank or police.

An odd development is that Google appear to have assigned the Adwords account to my Google account, even though I didn't open it. I found this out after getting an e-mail from them with the subject: "How did we do?"

As I'm a bit concerned that my own account could be compromised, I've changed the password on the Adwords account. I haven't entered the Adwords account though, even though I'm curious to see if there's any funds left, plus I wouldn't mind knowing what they spent advertising on.

Still nothing from the dodgy looking eupaycom.net.

The fact google have related it to a family member further suggests it is someone known to yourselves

This "fraudster" knows far too much information

LittleVoice

If the William Hill balance is a gambling debt, presumably they cannot enforce it in law.