Historic Bank Account Fraud

msmithukk

I am looking whether anyone can assist me concerning bank account and debit card fraud.

In 2001 I opened a joint account with my wife with *B* and they provided us a £5,000.00 overdraft and after moving in 2003 they failed to update my address, when replacement cards were sent they got sent to the old address, while we were on holiday. Upon our return I called them and they advised they were due any day and to wait patiently, they never said they had sent them to the old address. We were then away from home visiting family in Scotland and ended up being away a month. Upon our return no cards had arrived and they sent replacements and again nothing arrived and then we began receiving statements saying we owed them money, for debit card transactions and direct debits we knew nothing about.

I called *B* local branch and they advised to send it in writing and they will deal with it, over the next 12 months they investigated and then came back saying they would refund the direct debits and associated charges. They had written to the companies claiming the direct debits who confirmed the mandate was not for me or my wife at any address. The letter acknowledged the debit card fraud but did not mention any resolution. Back and forward for another 12 months with various departments and I got no where.

*B* took action against me and obtained judgement without the case going to trial, a piece of evidence I relied on was no longer available and therefore the banks solicitors argued my case couldn't succeed if I no longer had this evidence. The evidence in question was a voicemail recording, however they completely disregarded about 25 letters from various department acknowledging the matter but not handling it. I couldn't attend the hearing and subsequently they obtained judgment and then they secured it with a charging order.

A year later they started a case against my wife, I defended the claim and the matter began proceeding through the courts. The solicitor handling the matter engaged with me and during proceedings she accepted the fraud and therefore *B* offered settlement with £0 payable and withdrew proceedings.

I contacted the solicitor I had with my case and she told me they had judgement and if I mad e deal about it, then she would seek an order for sale. Since then I have been back and forth with *B* and they told me to take the case to the FOS, after doing so they claimed jurisdiction and no resolution was sought. The ombudsman advised taking the case back to court and I have been gathering some money to cover fees before doing so.

A few weeks ago I wrote to the solicitors and queried my case with them, I advised that I was taking the matter back through the courts, unless it could be resolved informally. A few days later the operations manager called me and asked for details of the issue, I gave him details and advised that they handled my wife’s case and withdrew proceedings. I was advised that for them to investigate and potentially resolve the matter, he needed details of regulations which governed the fraud demonstrating *B* failures. If I could supply the regulations with proof he would gladly take matters forward without going to court.

I need details of regulations which were in force between 2003 - 2006 concerning debit card and bank account fraud. My identity theft was reported to the police and *B* was aware and ignored it. I recall the banking code being in place and maybe the lending code, but I welcome anyone’s recollection or links to actual regulations or publications concerning them. Thanks in advance.

Westie983

I think you maybe confused with the banks, as 'B' bank was launched in 2016, 15 years after your problems first happened.

https://www.cybg.com/our-brands/

Could you mean Clydesdale bank instead?

It sounds like it has been investigated and they have not come to a resolution you said they have refunded the charges, so you are now back in the position before the fraud happened.

I would have thought the regulations they are requesting comes from their own team or your solicitor can help, its not for you as the claimant to provide these.

Maybe worth contacting your solicitor again who should try to help, i'm not sure what help we can be on a public forum, as the regulations should be provided on request from 'B"

Westie983

msmithukk

Hi the historic issues doesn’t concern clysdale, it’s a different bank I had used asterisks to avoid showing the full name, then I’m not blamed for bad mouthing them.

The solicitor I need to get back to is the banks solciitor, however for him to progress with it, I am to quote the relevant regulations that I was protected by.

So by return he expects,

Example - *B* failed to comply with the banking code section 12, FSA payment handbook section 1 etc, then he will consider the fraud

Zanderman

msmithukk wrote: »

Hi the historic issues doesn!!!8217;t concern clysdale, it!!!8217;s a different bank I had used asterisks to avoid showing the full name, then I!!!8217;m not blamed for bad mouthing them.

You don't need to use code!

'B' is, as you'll now realise, the name of a new banking brand, which just goes to show that using code can lead to complete misunderstandings.

Just use the bank's name, they're not going to come after you!

(unless you post something extremely libellous, which I very much doubt you'd do, and even then the most likely worst outcome would be a ban on MSE)

eskbanker

The FCA handbook includes an archive facility allowing you to research provisions in force in the past, accessible via a 'show timeline' feature at https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook, which prompts "To access the FCA Handbook Archive choose a date between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2004."

EarthBoy

msmithukk wrote: »

Hi the historic issues doesn’t concern clysdale, it’s a different bank I had used asterisks to avoid showing the full name, then I’m not blamed for bad mouthing them

So it's Barclays Bank then?

Westie983

msmithukk wrote: »

Hi the historic issues doesn’t concern clysdale, it’s a different bank I had used asterisks to avoid showing the full name, then I’m not blamed for bad mouthing them.

The solicitor I need to get back to is the banks solciitor, however for him to progress with it, I am to quote the relevant regulations that I was protected by.

So by return he expects,

Example - *B* failed to comply with the banking code section 12, FSA payment handbook section 1 etc, then he will consider the fraud

ah my mistake, Im still a little confused why you are conversing with the banks solicitor and not your own,

Hopefully the link provided by eskbanker will help you

Westie983

Flobberchops

I'm a bit confused why you waited over a decade to follow up on this fraud, and also why your solicitor can't find the relevant legal/regulatory bumpf themselves?

msmithukk

Westie983 -Sorry for the delay. In between judgement and now I have tried getting the bank to investigate, they would often put my complaint on hold and then never reply for several months. In 2009 they commenced litigation against my wife for the account we shared, during proceedings I filed a witness statement for her and complained to RBS. They replied telling me they wont investigate however as far as my wife's case went, she got a letter saying upon reading your husbands statement out client has agreed to lower their settlement terms by 4k, we declined it and the next two offers and then they wrote saying they would discontinue proceedings against her. FOS said they could potentially look in to matters as the courts hadn't ruled as such, they needed RBS to agree and after waiting months RBS claimed jurisdiction and the FOS couldn't progress.

I've kept trying to get redress in the past via RBS and their agents, who would put complaint on hold for months and then refuse to uphold it. I kept trying to get redress and they wouldn't play ball. I contacted RBS's agents via social media and set the situation out that we can resolve informally and I wont expose the countless breaches or I will proceed to the courts. After waiting a few months tI got a call from someone senior saying if I can demonstrate the points to him, he could look to resolve the matter for me.

To successfully defend the claim with a decent solicitor at trial, I've been quoted thousands with the lowest quote being 15K, I don't have this money available to me to pay a solicitor while the case progresses through the courts, in the hope of reclaiming legal fees back.

I was looking to get as much details about regulations as possible, it can mean the difference between going to court or not.

ThreadDefender

It's quite difficult to work out what happened based on your original post. Also, I should add a disclaimer to say that I don't have specific knowledge of county court claims and procedures, but am just applying what I know about civil claims.

msmithukk wrote: »

*B* took action against me and obtained judgement without the case going to trial, a piece of evidence I relied on was no longer available and therefore the banks solicitors argued my case couldn't succeed if I no longer had this evidence. The evidence in question was a voicemail recording, however they completely disregarded about 25 letters from various department acknowledging the matter but not handling it. I couldn't attend the hearing and subsequently they obtained judgment and then they secured it with a charging order.

So, essentially this issue is firmly in the past. A default judgment was issued because you didn't attend the hearing and presumably didn't engage with the process to file a defence.

I understand you are aggrieved but the other details you have given are irrelevant in this forum; the time to raise those issues would have been at the hearing.

msmithukk wrote: »

A year later they started a case against my wife

Why? For the same debt or a different issue? If the former, why did they wait a year?

msmithukk wrote: »

I defended the claim and the matter began proceeding through the courts. The solicitor handling the matter engaged with me and during proceedings she accepted the fraud and therefore *B* offered settlement with £0 payable and withdrew proceedings.

Excellent. This should be the end of the matter.

msmithukk wrote: »

I contacted the solicitor I had with my case and she told me they had judgement and if I mad e deal about it, then she would seek an order for sale.

I can't make sense of this. Do you mean you got back in touch with the solicitor regarding your case (i.e. the default judgment)?

What you needed to do was make an application to the court that issued the default judgment to request that it be set aside (I believe there is also a fee for making the application). However, the Civil Procedure Rules state that this application should be made "promptly". In your case, it's over a year later, which is far from prompt.

Cases where the court may set aside or vary judgment entered under Part 12

13.3
(1) In any other case, the court may set aside(GL) or vary a judgment entered under Part 12 if !!!8211;
(a) the defendant has a real prospect of successfully defending the claim; or
(b) it appears to the court that there is some other good reason why !!!8211;
(i) the judgment should be set aside or varied; or
(ii) the defendant should be allowed to defend the claim.

(2) In considering whether to set aside(GL) or vary a judgment entered under Part 12, the matters to which the court must have regard include whether the person seeking to set aside the judgment made an application to do so promptly.

This isn't even a case of fresh evidence only becoming available now, because you could have obtained the same concession from your bank had you litigated your case in the same fashion that you litigated your wife's case.

msmithukk wrote: »

A few weeks ago I wrote to the solicitors and queried my case with them, I advised that I was taking the matter back through the courts, unless it could be resolved informally. A few days later the operations manager called me and asked for details of the issue, I gave him details and advised that they handled my wife!!!8217;s case and withdrew proceedings. I was advised that for them to investigate and potentially resolve the matter, he needed details of regulations which governed the fraud demonstrating *B* failures. If I could supply the regulations with proof he would gladly take matters forward without going to court.


I need details of regulations which were in force between 2003 - 2006 concerning debit card and bank account fraud. My identity theft was reported to the police and *B* was aware and ignored it.

It doesn't sound to me like the bank are serious about resolving your issue. It sounds more like they don't believe you will be able to supply them with the requested information (specifically the "proof"). Also, given their conduct to date, do you think they would be requesting this information in order to help you or to help themselves formulate a defence in readiness for your legal action?

If you handed over evidence, do you think they would concede they were in the wrong, or do you think they will challenge your view and say something along the lines of "we don't believe this evidence proves your assertion that...". Evidence is a matter of interpretation. Evidence can be misinterpreted by a judge in court. If the other party assert that the misinterpretation is the correct interpretation, a judge may side with them.

Why were you content to let things go (after your default judgment) but are now trying to reopen this issue? Presumably, you had come to terms with and decided you could deal with the losses you incurred at that time. What's changed? Why throw good money after bad?

Taking a case to court is not a trivial undertaking especially when you're the little guy challenging a bank. Bringing a case is completely different to defending one, for example, you might face costs being awarded against you. Not to mention the stress and trauma of litigation (noting that you previously settled, and the bank may be unlikely to do so when it can potentially recover the costs of defending the claim from you).

Rather than furnishing them with information, you should be asking them for information in the form of a Subject Access Request. But for heaven's sake, don't just go and ask their solicitor or whoever you've been talking to (as they might just fail to pass on any contentious documents that come to light). Just make a request via the ordinary channels for making such requests.

Once you have all the information, you might find something which helps you negotiate with them, or even give you some clues regarding the person / people who committed the fraud (which you can pass on to action fraud or the police to help catch the criminals).

ThreadDefender

msmithukk wrote: »

To successfully defend the claim with a decent solicitor at trial, I've been quoted thousands with the lowest quote being 15K.

You should stay away from any solicitor promising "success" at trial. With some judges you might as well toss a coin. It's inherently risky. Even if you're in the right, with all the evidence supporting your version of the story, it could still go against you if the judge takes issue with you for some reason (real or imagined). As I said before evidence can be misinterpreted.

My advice - think long and hard about whether this is worth. I don't know how much you lost as a result of the fraud, but that's £15K that you don't need to spend. Don't pin your hopes on recovering costs either.