Debit card stolen - Natwest refusing refund

brhiannon2018

Hello - first time poster here.

My brother in law had his debit card stolen during a Christmas party at a public bar in London. The thieves had already withdrawn the limit of £250 cash before then making payments to taxis and shops etc. by the time he had a chance to call Natwest to cancel the card.

He suspects he was shoulder surfed, given that he has not written his pin down and how busy the bar was.

He had received an initial response from Natwest that they have investigated and consider that given the pin was used correctly first time that the user must have confidently knew the pin. They will not refund the money. I understand that the rules binding banks like Natwest require them to refund money unless they can prove fraud or gross negligence on the part of the customer. The FCA and FOS guidance states that correct use of the pin is not conclusive evidence of this and should not be the sole basis for the decision to refuse, but that seems to be what has happened to my BIL.

Now he has to appeal, and I wondered whether anyone had either tips on appealing Natwest’s decision.

Thanks in advance.

jonesMUFCforever

Simple he has to tell it as it is - no flannel or fudging.
Then if the bank refuse to refund start the complaints procedure and ultimately the ombudsman.

(Nothing to do with the thread but I would never in a million years think of paying for drinks in a pub with a card - perhaps its me getting old.)

glider3560

jonesMUFCforever wrote: »

(Nothing to do with the thread but I would never in a million years think of paying for drinks in a pub with a card - perhaps its me getting old.)

Round here, nearly everyone (including the more mature clientele) seem to pay with plastic in the pubs. Maybe with the cheapest pint being £4.20, there may be a reason for it.

It's actually faster, especially with contactless. Staff don't have to count change and they don't have to make two trips to/from the till if change is required.

ariba10

It begs the question.

How did they get cash without the PIN?

EachPenny

glider3560 wrote: »

Round here, nearly everyone (including the more mature clientele) seem to pay with plastic in the pubs. Maybe with the cheapest pint being £4.20, there may be a reason for it.

Agreed. I view my trips to the pub as excellent cashback/stoozing opportunities. We put cash in a kitty and I pay by card. The kitty (less any carry over) goes into my bank account the same or next day

COIAHLGW

He could have paid for drinks at the bar using his card and PIN. Subsequently the card could have been stolen after somebody saw him type in his PIN and the card was in an easy place to steal?

Flobberchops

ariba10 wrote: »

It begs the question.

How did they get cash without the PIN?

OP mentioned the PIN *was* used, hence they suspected shoulder surfing. If I understand correctly that's the reason Natwest are refusing to refund, as the brother-in-law ought to have shielded the PIN, or else they suspect it's a fraudulent claim.

My first reaction was that the brother-in-law is simply out of luck in this case but the FOS guidance that use of PIN shoudln't be the sole reason for denying compensation is something I hadn't heard before. I'd be interested to hear if OP's relative successfully appeals on this basis.

brhiannon2018

Thanks for the initial replies!

He suspects he was watched as he entered his pin in the card machine at the bar and then pickpocketed.

I am hoping that quoting the rules in his appeal letter including the FCA and FOS interpretation/guidance will do the trick.

Flobberchops, that’s an interesting comment and I note that you work in a Bank. As a new poster I annoyingly can’t post a link, but the FOS have stated that the following is their interpretation of “gross negligence”:

“In looking at these matters, we may have to decide whether the customer was "grossly negligent". We consider each case individually, in the light of its particular facts and circumstances. But we view gross negligence as being more than carelessness - and bordering on recklessness. The Banking Code says that it is for the firm to prove gross negligence, not for the customer to disprove it.”

To me, entering your pin into a card reader and somebody seeing you from an angle doing so in a crowded bar doesn’t seem to satisfy the test.

The FCA guidance (which I also cannot link to!):

“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”

I am obviously coming at it from the POV of someone who desperately wants her BIL to get his money back, but it seems that Natwest have either refused the refund on invalid grounds or are withholding proof of gross negligence or fraud...

If anyone has any template letters or similar stories with outcomes then those would be welcome!

I will let you know what happens.

Superscrooge

You can probably get some guidance from template letters on 'resolver'

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/site/resolver

alanq

brhiannon2018 wrote: »

The FCA guidance (which I also cannot link to!):

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