Sort code and AC number mix up

Ergates

Gasman_81 said:

I see your point but it was not quite what I did. I kept the account number the same and used a few different sort codes to test whether it arrived at an active account. Hopefully no police knocking on my doorIt

It's the same principle - you're essentially using the system to look for active accounts.  It wasn't meant for this purpose, and banks put in systems to prevent them from being used this way - usually along the lines of limiting the number of checks that can be performed per day.  If you trigger the threshold, you may also trigger some additional checks.  This might not happen, it might happen, but nothing comes of it, or something more serious might happen.  A visit from the police is unlikely, but the bank closing your account isn't beyond the realms of possiblity.

flo22

Because 09-03-31does not accept Bacs payments then Bacs would have rejected it back to the originator, it would never be sent to the sort code.  The rejection would appear in their Bacs reports on Payment Services Website (PSW).

colsten

flo22 said:

Because 09-03-31does not accept Bacs payments then Bacs would have rejected it back to the originator, it would never be sent to the sort code.  The rejection would appear in their Bacs reports on Payment Services Website (PSW).

BACS seems to be a red herring as withdrawals from Premium Bonds are sent by Faster Payment. Although 09-03-31 doesn't seem to accept Faster Payments, either.

Here is what Faster Payments say about misdirected payments: https://www.fasterpayments.org.uk/consumers/what-happens-if-i-have-sent-payment-wrong-place. 

whitesmith

I mentioned in my previous post that if it was sent by FP then it would have immediately been bounced back to NS&I, but the OP was adamant it was sent by BACS.

mab3000

colsten said:

BACS seems to be a red herring as withdrawals from Premium Bonds are sent by Faster Payment. Although 09-03-31 doesn't seem to accept Faster Payments, either.

I withdrew a thousand from premium bonds last week and the payment was not made by faster payment, it was BACS 

Gasman_81

Update: the money has been returned in full but it turns out that they have had the money since the start of the saga (6 weeks ago). NS&I said they could not view the money in their system and it was only 4 weeks later that they have discovered this. This is still 2 weeks earlier than when the money was transferred back to me. On the one hand, I am obviously pleased that this is now over and a costly mistake has not been made. On the other, I feel like they have put me through 6 weeks of anxiety unnecessarily. 

robatwork

Gasman_81 said:

Update: the money has been returned in full but it turns out that they have had the money since the start of the saga (6 weeks ago). NS&I said they could not view the money in their system and it was only 4 weeks later that they have discovered this. This is still 2 weeks earlier than when the money was transferred back to me. On the one hand, I am obviously pleased that this is now over and a costly mistake has not been made. On the other, I feel like they have put me through 6 weeks of anxiety unnecessarily. 

Let's be honest it was your almost "costly mistake". Your other hand seems to be angling for some compo due to anxiety. I would say it was self-generated and you should accept it and move on, happy the process worked, albeit slowly.

Did they ever clarify if it went via BACS or FP?

Gasman_81

I am not angling for anything. The case is closed. I can state how I feel in the last 6 weeks without an ulterior motive, unusual on a forum I know, but it can happen.
The one thing I have asked them to do is to review their online account set up. The mistake was made and I have acknowledged that it was my fault.  However, if you look at their setup, there is no way to check the sort code or account number after the initial sign up process. All it displays is "Santander UK plc ****1234" with the first 4 account numbers hidden and no sort code shown for the nominated account. You cannot review this detail unless you add another account. Yes, I should have been more careful when I set this up months ago, but given that most banks have some process to minimise these mistakes when transfers are made, usually by confirming payee details, why have they chosen to anonymise this on a secure platform?

The premium bonds transfer was by BACS and always have been as I mentioned before. 

born_again

From my experience NS&i are terrible at dealing with missing payments. Their systems must be really old. The front line staff do not have access to the back end accounts where misdirected payments go. 

But the point that @Gasman_81 makes on the account details # out is a basic security procedure. No online 3rd party system should be showing your full account details used to make a payment.

Gasman_81

Thanks. 
Yes, it was a silly error. However, if you add an additional account, sort codes for subsequent accounts then become visible. I don't see why they have decided to have different degree of visibility when you add subsequent accounts. That is baffling.