Barclays didn't cancel standing order

AJC25

Good morning all, hope you can offer some advice.

My mum recently moved out of a rented property after the landlord gave her notice due to selling the house.
She moved out on 13th May and is currently staying with her sister until she finds somewhere else to live.
She cancelled the standing order with Barclays around 2 weeks ago (or so she thought). She spoke with an advisor who didn't speak very good English but he assured her it had been cancelled.
Yesterday, after being paid the standing order has gone out again to the landlord. This is for £570.
I've spoken to the landlord on the phone who wasn't very impressed with the state of the house after my mum leaving and has said he's well within his rights to keep it as he's spent £5000 this week refurbishing the house.
My question is, surely the bank are at fault for allowing the standing order to go out again after my mum cancelled it. Isn't it an unauthorised transaction? Also, surely the phone call will have been recorded.
There's a bit of history with the landlord as my mum didn't really take care of the house and he lived across the road. Is he within his rights to not pay this money back?
She was planning on using that money as a deposit on a new place.
She doesn't have proof of cancelling as she doesn't do online banking but she knows when she rang. She just presumed her instructions had been auctioned.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.

GDB2222

AJC25 wrote: »

Good morning all, hope you can offer some advice.

My mum recently moved out of a rented property after the landlord gave her notice due to selling the house.
She moved out on 13th May and is currently staying with her sister until she finds somewhere else to live.
She cancelled the standing order with Barclays around 2 weeks ago (or so she thought). She spoke with an advisor who didn't speak very good English but he assured her it had been cancelled.
Yesterday, after being paid the standing order has gone out again to the landlord. This is for £570.
I've spoken to the landlord on the phone who wasn't very impressed with the state of the house after my mum leaving and has said he's well within his rights to keep it as he's spent £5000 this week refurbishing the house.
My question is, surely the bank are at fault for allowing the standing order to go out again after my mum cancelled it. Isn't it an unauthorised transaction? Also, surely the phone call will have been recorded.
There's a bit of history with the landlord as my mum didn't really take care of the house and he lived across the road. Is he within his rights to not pay this money back?
She was planning on using that money as a deposit on a new place.
She doesn't have proof of cancelling as she doesn't do online banking but she knows when she rang. She just presumed her instructions had been auctioned.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.

Raise a complaint with Barclays. They can listen to the recording, and if they failed to act on clear instructions they are at fault and will reimburse your mother.

No, the LL is not entitled to keep the money, but that's Barclays' problem.

Pixie5740

As above your mum can raise a complaint with Barclays to try and recoup the money. This is a separate issue from any damage your mum caused to the property though. The landlord can take your mum to court and sue her for the cost of repairing the damage.

benjus

The landlord can't just help himself to your mum's money because he feels hard done by.

Did he take a deposit at the start of the rental? If so, was it protected in a deposit scheme? What happened to it after your mum moved out? If the landlord wants to keep money for damages, the first port of call should be the deposit. If your mum disputes the landlord's claims she can use the deposit company's dispute resolution process. If the deposit wasn't protected but should have been, your mum can claim against the landlord for a penalty in court.

If no deposit was taken or the deposit isn't big enough to cover the damages, the landlord can use the courts to claim against your mum. If this is likely to happen and it looks like the landlord has a good case, she might decide to let him keep the £570 - but a good idea to ask for something in writing to confirm that it is a full and final settlement for the disrepair of the property.

In any case, the landlord can only claim for the cost of getting the property to the state that it should have been left when your mum moved out, if the place had been looked after reasonably well. If it was looking a bit tatty when your mum's tenancy started, and the £5000 is the cost of making it look pristine, then the LL certainly can't claim £5000.

Guest101

AJC25 wrote: »

Good morning all, hope you can offer some advice.

My mum recently moved out of a rented property after the landlord gave her notice due to selling the house.
She moved out on 13th May and is currently staying with her sister until she finds somewhere else to live.
She cancelled the standing order with Barclays around 2 weeks ago (or so she thought). She spoke with an advisor who didn't speak very good English but he assured her it had been cancelled.
Yesterday, after being paid the standing order has gone out again to the landlord. This is for £570.
I've spoken to the landlord on the phone who wasn't very impressed with the state of the house after my mum leaving and has said he's well within his rights to keep it as he's spent £5000 this week refurbishing the house. - Incorrect.
My question is, surely the bank are at fault for allowing the standing order to go out again after my mum cancelled it. Isn't it an unauthorised transaction? Also, surely the phone call will have been recorded. - It depends. Really she should've made sure.
There's a bit of history with the landlord as my mum didn't really take care of the house and he lived across the road. Is he within his rights to not pay this money back? - No.
She was planning on using that money as a deposit on a new place.
She doesn't have proof of cancelling as she doesn't do online banking but she knows when she rang. She just presumed her instructions had been auctioned.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.

You can threaten small claims court, but if the LL can counterclaim for damages it would be a waste of time. Possession is 9/10s of the law.


Surely you/ she could've cleaned the house before she left?

G_M

As above

1) formal complaint to Barclays. provide the date & time of the phone call, and ideally the name of the CS rep she spoke to, as well as as much of the conversation as she can remember

2) read:

* Deposits: payment, protection and return

AJC25

Thanks for your responses guys.
The deposit was never put in to a deposit scheme as she was renting privately from an old associate which started in 2007. My mum has had her problems, notably losing her job last year and the landlord used that deposit as a months rent when she couldn't afford to pay.
In terms of cleaning the house before she left, she did but then he said to just leave it as he was selling sold as seen as the new owner will gut it anyway. however he is now refurbishing it?? Don't know what's going on now!
She has rang Barclays twice today and they are basically saying 'tough, you'll have to request it back from him'. Surely this isn't right?
She was asked what sort of resolution she wanted today and she said she wanted them to accept that they didn't carry out her instruction 2 weeks ago and to reimburse her. They said an investigation would be carried out but she wouldn't hear the outcome as it would be a closed investigation??
I've advised her to go in to branch and complain and see what they say.
Surely the landlord can't keep the £570 as she moved out a month ago.

G_M

Has she actually raised a formal complaint with Barclays? This is a pre-requisite before the matter can be escalated to the ombudsman.

The deposit was never put in to a deposit scheme as she was renting privately from an old associate which started in 2007

Have you read the link I provided? If so, you'll know that 2007 was the year deposit protection was introduced, so

a) what exact date in 2007 was the deposit paid?
b) what exact date did the tenancy start?
c) was the tenancy a period tenancy (rolling)? from the start?
d) or was there a fixed term? in which case whan did it end and what happened then?

GDB2222

AJC25 wrote: »

Thanks for your responses guys.
The deposit was never put in to a deposit scheme as she was renting privately from an old associate which started in 2007. My mum has had her problems, notably losing her job last year and the landlord used that deposit as a months rent when she couldn't afford to pay.
In terms of cleaning the house before she left, she did but then he said to just leave it as he was selling sold as seen as the new owner will gut it anyway. however he is now refurbishing it?? Don't know what's going on now!
She has rang Barclays twice today and they are basically saying 'tough, you'll have to request it back from him'. Surely this isn't right?
She was asked what sort of resolution she wanted today and she said she wanted them to accept that they didn't carry out her instruction 2 weeks ago and to reimburse her. They said an investigation would be carried out but she wouldn't hear the outcome as it would be a closed investigation??
I've advised her to go in to branch and complain and see what they say.
Surely the landlord can't keep the £570 as she moved out a month ago.

It's hopeless trying to get the money back from the LL. Your mum would have to sue him, and he'd counter-claim because of the condition of the property. It's quite daunting, going to court, and the LL might win.

If Barclays have made a mistake, then of course they need to put it right. Concentrate on that angle. Mum needs to make a formal complaint and not be fobbed off by someone in customer services. The number is here:
http://www.barclays.co.uk/help/making-a-complaint/how-do-i-make-a-complaint-/#phone