Unauthorised Direct Debit - time limit for refund and FSO

MobileSaver

I discovered some unauthorised direct debit transactions from a few years back but my bank is refusing to refund them due to the transactions being over 13 months old. (The retailer concerned has confirmed they are probably fraudulent.) I have in the last month complained to the bank that they are refusing to implement the direct debit guarantee but to no avail so far.

The Financial Ombudsman Service states the time limit for them to look into a complaint is "six years from the event the consumer is complaining about" but I am unsure whether "event" means the original unauthorised transactions or the recent refusal to refund the unauthorised transactions.

Does anyone have any experience of the FOS and how an "event" is defined?

phillw

MobileSaver wrote: »

The Financial Ombudsman Service states the time limit for them to look into a complaint is "six years from the event the consumer is complaining about" but I am unsure whether "event" means the original unauthorised transactions or the recent refusal to refund the unauthorised transactions.

It's got to be 6 years since the original transactions, for example they aren't going to let you complain about 20 year old transactions and then give you a further 6 years to complain about the handling of your complaint.

Banks are supposed to keep records for 6 years, once they destroy that data then you can't complain about it through the ombudsman as it would be impossible for them to put their case forward.

Although if any of the transactions were within the 6 years then it might be worth pushing them to see if they would offer a good will compensation. I'm not sure an ombudsman would find in your favour unless the bank had misled you over the transactions.

Ben8282

If you don't check your bank statements for years and have only just realised that you have had unauthorised debit transactions 'a few years back' I really have very little sympathy for you.
If you say the instigator of these direct debits has indicated that they believe them to be fraudulent, then why not get them to refund you? The bank paid these direct debits in good faith; you should have taken action at the time not years after the event.

MobileSaver

Ben8282 wrote: »

If you don't check your bank statements for years ...

This wasn't my normal current account but an old dormant account that didn't get used very much. The unauthorised DDs only came to light recently when the account went overdrawn and overdraft charges were applied, at which point alarm bells rang.

I am taking this up with the merchant but still have a complaint against the bank that their "13 month rule" seems unfair and at odds with the DD Guarantee. The DD Guarantee makes no mention of a time limit and says they should immediately refund me, not jump through hoops to get my money back.

Ben8282 wrote: »

The bank paid these direct debits in good faith;

The DDs were not paid in good faith. It turns out there were two DDs both with my sort code and account number but both DD mandates had someone else's name as the account holder. So not only did the bank accept a DD not in my name but accepted two against my account that had two different names!

PeacefulWaters

Forget direct debit guarantees.

These are unauthorised transactions. Make a fraud claim. And check your bank statements in future.

Ben8282

MobileSaver wrote: »

This wasn't my normal current account but an old dormant account that didn't get used very much. The unauthorised DDs only came to light recently when the account went overdrawn and overdraft charges were applied, at which point alarm bells rang.

I am taking this up with the merchant but still have a complaint against the bank that their "13 month rule" seems unfair and at odds with the DD Guarantee. The DD Guarantee makes no mention of a time limit and says they should immediately refund me, not jump through hoops to get my money back.



The DDs were not paid in good faith. It turns out there were two DDs both with my sort code and account number but both DD mandates had someone else's name as the account holder. So not only did the bank accept a DD not in my name but accepted two against my account that had two different names!

How can you possibly know this?

MobileSaver

Ben8282 wrote: »

How can you possibly know this?

The merchant told me...

dunstonh

One assumes the merchant is looking at this too and will be arranging a refund?

MobileSaver

PeacefulWaters wrote: »

Forget direct debit guarantees.

These are unauthorised transactions. Make a fraud claim.

Is there a practical difference between an unauthorised/fraud transaction and what the DD people refer to as an "organisation unknown" transaction?

It's not clear who you are suggesting I make a "fraud claim" against?

dunstonh wrote: »

One assumes the merchant is looking at this too and will be arranging a refund?

The merchant's initial response was that the standard procedure is that the bank does an indemnity claim. I'm awaiting a further response from the merchant since the bank refused to do this.

I'm more than a little surprised that no-one seems to think the bank are in any way at fault here...

The merchant accepted the DD details in good faith. I don't expect a merchant to track every DD they ever take and flag up when one account number has two account names but I do expect MY bank to flag up (and refuse) a DD that has MY account but someone else's name.

Almost everyone has heard of the DD Guarantee and the very simple and unequivocal "if an error is made you are entitled to a full and immediate refund from your bank." I'm shocked that my bank are refusing this because according to them transactions over 13 months do not apply.

jonesMUFCforever

Quote ''I'm more than a little surprised that no-one seems to think the bank are in any way at fault here...

The merchant accepted the DD details in good faith. I don't expect a merchant to track every DD they ever take and flag up when one account number has two account names but I do expect MY bank to flag up (and refuse) a DD that has MY account but someone else's name.''

The bank were not in the wrong - you had statements showing these transactions but chose not to do anything about them.
You do not seem to have any idea how the DD system works - AUDDIS the system lets big companies set up DD's without any input or checks from your bank.

This last statement is why now you need to speak to them about getting your money back.

PeacefulWaters

s there a practical difference between an unauthorised/fraud transaction and what the DD people refer to as an "organisation unknown" transaction?

Yes. Unauthorised transactions are covered by legislation. Direct debit refunds are merely an industry standard.

It's not clear who you are suggesting I make a "fraud claim" against?

Tell your bank the transactions are unauthorised. They should refund you.

I'm more than a little surprised that no-one seems to think the bank are in any way at fault her

I don't think they're at fault for the transactions. I think you've been extraordinarily negligent in the management of your account. But you have not authorised the transactions. The bank should reimburse. If they don't, escalate to the FOS.