Debit Card Payment Taken Twice - What Are My Rights?

jan_barnes

Background - daughter had to have medical treatment whilst on holiday in Greece and paid by HSBC debit card approx £108 but has now received bank statement and the charge has been debited twice.

She went to the HSBC branch nearest to her uni and was told she had to contact the Greek medical centre to ask for refund. She rang the medical centre and was told to email them which she has done. She has not heard anything from them in reply to the email

Question - what can she do next? Doesn't the bank have a duty of care to customers to help in these situations?

neilmcl

You may be able to do a chargeback. Contact the card provider again.

How long ago did she email them?

naedanger

jan_barnes wrote: »

Background - daughter had to have medical treatment whilst on holiday in Greece and paid by HSBC debit card approx £108 but has now received bank statement and the charge has been debited twice.

She went to the HSBC branch nearest to her uni and was told she had to contact the Greek medical centre to ask for refund. She rang the medical centre and was told to email them which she has done. She has not heard anything from them in reply to the email

Question - what can she do next? Doesn't the bank have a duty of care to customers to help in these situations?

If she only authorised one payment and the bank are unwilling to refund the other unauthorised payment then should submit a formal complaint to her bank. (Their website should explain how to complain. She should then follow their complaint process which will include the option to complain to the Financial Ombudsman Service if the bank do not resolve the matter to her satisfaction.)

Manxman_in_exile

I presume you are certain that only a single payment was authorised?


Is there any documentary evidence from the Greek medical centre regarding the treatment provided and their charges? (eg an invoice, debit card receipt etc)

jan_barnes

she emailed them approx 2 weeks ago and again yesterday

jan_barnes

She has the receipt

agrinnall

jan_barnes wrote: »

She has the receipt

The problem is that the receipt ties up with one payment but doesn't prove that the duplicate payment wasn't also authorised and a second invoice issued. I'm not doubting what you say, but it's possible that the bank may make that argument, so if you can get any evidence that there was only one payment requested then that will greatly help your case.

unholyangel

agrinnall wrote: »

The problem is that the receipt ties up with one payment but doesn't prove that the duplicate payment wasn't also authorised and a second invoice issued. I'm not doubting what you say, but it's possible that the bank may make that argument, so if you can get any evidence that there was only one payment requested then that will greatly help your case.

Only its not up to the OP to prove it was unauthorised (because how can you prove something didnt happen?). Its supposed to be the banks that prove it was authorised as they are the ones who are only supposed to pay out payments you authorise.

The banks obligations are to the account holder, not the payee.

Your bank can only refuse a refund for an unauthorised payment if:

it can prove you authorised the transaction – though your bank cannot simply say that use of your password, card and PIN conclusively proves you authorised a payment
it can prove you are at fault because you acted fraudulently or because you deliberately, or with ‘gross negligence’, failed to protect the details of your card, PIN or password in a way that allowed the transaction
you told your bank about an unauthorised payment 13 months or more after the date it left your account, so make sure you contact the bank as soon as possible

https://www.fca.org.uk/consumers/unauthorised-payments-account

agrinnall

unholyangel wrote: »

Only its not up to the OP to prove it was unauthorised (because how can you prove something didnt happen?). Its supposed to be the banks that prove it was authorised as they are the ones who are only supposed to pay out payments you authorise.

The banks obligations are to the account holder, not the payee.



https://www.fca.org.uk/consumers/unauthorised-payments-account

Yes, I agree, but if there is evidence of authorisation presented by the payee then the one receipt that the OP's daughter has does not counter that.

unholyangel

agrinnall wrote: »

Yes, I agree, but if there is evidence of authorisation presented by the payee then the one receipt that the OP's daughter has does not counter that.

Nor does it support it - after all, given the OP is saying the transaction is unauthorised, why would they have anything other than 1 receipt?

My point was that if the bank do try any sort of argument along those lines that rather than pander to them by collecting evidence to try and prove something thats impossible to prove, they should remind the bank that its the banks place to prove that they have paid out in accordance with their contractual duties - ie that they will pay out on authorised payments and not allow unauthorised access to your money that they are making a profit from "safekeeping" for you.

Especially since OP's version of events sounds incredibly more likely than the medical centre providing either a single course and undercharging by exactly 50% and getting OP (well her daughter but you know what I mean) to authorise the additional payment to correct it but not correcting the receipt. Or giving two courses of treatment at the same time but for some bizarre reason, invoicing and charging for them separately.

jan_barnes

Many thanks for your information - Greek medical centre has finally refunded the money!