Urgent help needed (bank accounts)

d123

Ahmsbelkz wrote: »

Losing a card outside can be eligble for a fraudelent bank transfer by someone else. It has happened in many cases, they can also follow you find out your pin and steal it without you having it in a safe place. Its a possibility, all I know is thats what happened according to nationwide however they thought it was me who made the deposit attempt of £1300.

If they had your card and pin surely they’d be withdrawing your money, not trying to deposit their money...

Ahmsbelkz

The account had no money in it as it was fairly new. Was going to be used just for direct debits luckily...

Robin9

Before you opened the Nationwide Account - what happened to your salary and what happen now.

Your last post says that the a/c was going to be used for DD only - how were you going to make credits to the a/c ?

DCFC79

d123 wrote: »

If they had your card and pin surely they’d be withdrawing your money, not trying to deposit their money...

That's what I thought, hadn't crossed my mind that a transfer into the account would be of any benefit to the person who did it, if they had the cards PIN then yes it would be of benefit.

d123 wrote: »

Though I'm still unsure how the simple loss of a bank card overnight can cause what is being alleged...

Seems quick to me but this is the banking sector, be standard for them.

d123

DCFC79 wrote: »

Seems quick to me but this is the banking sector, be standard for them.

I’m still puzzled how the £1300 was (attempted to be) deposited outside of banking hours though...

Robin9

d123 wrote: »

I’m still puzzled how the £1300 was (attempted to be) deposited outside of banking hours though...

What would make more sense is (attemted to be)
WITHDRAWN rather than Deposited.

d123

Robin9 wrote: »

What would make more sense is (attemted to be)
WITHDRAWN rather than Deposited.

That is true.

EachPenny

Robin9 wrote: »

What would make more sense is (attemted to be) WITHDRAWN rather than Deposited.

A hypothetical example (not saying this is what happened in the OP's case):

Man goes to pub. Meets [stranger/friend/acquaintance]. [Stranger/friend/acquaintance] says "I've got a problem, I need to get a [friend/boss/colleague] to pay me some money, but I don't want my [wife/partner/accountant] to know anything about it." "Can you do me a massive favour and let my [friend/boss/colleague] pay the money into your account and then give me the cash. I'll make it worth your while."

First man is a bit unsure so [stranger/friend/acquaintance] adds "They owe me £1300, but you'd be doing me a massive favour so if you give me a grand you can keep the rest." First man is now hooked and gives [stranger/friend/acquaintance] his account details.

[Stranger/friend/acquaintance] contacts his [gambling/drugs/money laundering/terrorist] associates and tells them to do the online transfer. £1300 of 'dirty' money is deposited into first man's account. First man and [stranger/friend/acquaintance] go to cash machine to make first withdrawal - which may or may not work. They agree to meet up the following day to withdraw the rest of the money.

At some point soon after, first man discovers his account is blocked and contacts bank. Bank explain the account is locked due to fraudulent activity. First man panics and tells bank he has lost his debit card, and the 'fraud' has nothing to do with him. Bank knows first man has assisted, or at least not protected his account, so has facilitated attempted illegal activity. Bank closes first man's account.

That to me sounds like a plausible way in which someone could get their banking facilities withdrawn as a result of someone depositing money into their account.

d123

EachPenny wrote: »

A hypothetical example (not saying this is what happened in the OP's case):

At some point soon after, first man discovers his account is blocked and contacts bank. Bank explain the account is locked due to fraudulent activity. First man panics and tells bank he has lost his debit card, and the 'fraud' has nothing to do with him. Bank knows first man has assisted, or at least not protected his account, so has facilitated attempted illegal activity. Bank closes first man's account.

That to me sounds like a plausible way in which someone could get their banking facilities withdrawn as a result of someone depositing money into their account.

Agreed, but your timescale and the OPs story of losing his card on a night out and the whole scam having been perpetrated and his account already closed by the time he called the bank the following morning are different scenarios.

EachPenny

d123 wrote: »

Agreed, but your timescale and the OPs story of losing his card on a night out and the whole scam having been perpetrated and his account already closed by the time he called the bank the following morning are different scenarios.

As I said, hypothetical example.

But the timescales are the same. The account could be blocked (blocked/closed, means the same thing to some people) as soon as the bank's computer spots that money has been paid into the account from a source which is flagged as high risk.

What you'd expect the bank to do is to ask the customer about the payment and give them an opportunity to explain they were an innocent victim of someone mistakenly paying money into their account. But if there were other unusual activity on the account, for example attempts to withdraw large amounts of cash after the deposit was made, then it would be a bit difficult to prove innocence.

You might also expect an innocent victim with only one bank account to complain vigorously at the time about having their banking facilities withdrawn, not 'agree' to it. But that obviously depends on the victim as some may not have the knowledge or capability needed to make use of the complaints process.