We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
My dad has been scammed out of £19,000
Comments
-
OK, so can you please link to the "about 10 or more pages" of me that are wrong, and explain what's wrong on those "pages". I am happy to correct genuine mistakes. Although I should add that I don't consider a difference in opinion a mistake.lopsyfa said:
I am sure you can apply your discretion but most people will know when to stop the back and forth - about 10 or more pages of you are wrong, I am not back and forth is not normal.colsten said:
What is the max permitted number of come backs, please? Is it the same number for all posters?lopsyfa said:
...... it is about the number of come backs ......
Could you also explain what "I am not back and forth is not normal" means, please?0 -
Still no news from Natwest...
0 -
Very valid point.lopsyfa said:
Yes but at what point will you stop with the finger pointing.
We are verging on a 20 page thread. Most of which was various posters arguing the point on changing payee name & device needed & text msg.
Sadly this is far too common here, where several posters almost start a sub thread on what their opinion is. Rather than simply wait for the OP to come back, answer the questions posed.
Yes, we see a lot of dubious posts. But if you feel that is the case, post your point and move on. Do not keep harping on & on.
In the end this was a very moot point as no payee details were changed. Op then came back with a positive outcome
Life in the slow lane4 -
No one is interested now, they're having their own argument 😁AWOL84 said:Still no news from Natwest...I came into this world with nothing and I've got most of it left.3 -
Maybe read the phrase before that, it will help you understand. But whatever, if it helps you start a new sub-topic to start another argument, I am sure you are happy. This is a forum not a peer reviewed website. Get over your desire for posts, grammar etc to be perfect.colsten said:
OK, so can you please link to the "about 10 or more pages" of me that are wrong, and explain what's wrong on those "pages". I am happy to correct genuine mistakes. Although I should add that I don't consider a difference in opinion a mistake.lopsyfa said:
I am sure you can apply your discretion but most people will know when to stop the back and forth - about 10 or more pages of you are wrong, I am not back and forth is not normal.colsten said:
What is the max permitted number of come backs, please? Is it the same number for all posters?lopsyfa said:
...... it is about the number of come backs ......
Could you also explain what "I am not back and forth is not normal" means, please?0 -
That doesn't seem relevant to his statement that he needs an LPA.elsien said:
May I just point out that you cannot "get" power of attorney if someone has capacity to grant it.
Everyone needs an LPA.
You can only make an LPA if you have capacity & you can only act as an attorney for health and welfare if they have lost capacity but it's possible to be an attorney for financial purposes as soon as it's active.
The donor can choose whether to activate it before they lose capacity. Personally it makes no sense to have an LPA and then not activate it as soon as someone is involved in your care. Activating a financial LPA requires contacting all the financial institutions they have dealings with and it's far easier to sort that out when they are on the same planet as you.
2 -
I note that you have not provided links to those "about 10 or more pages" that you consider wrong. I am not continuing this discussion with you, as you are obviously not able or willing to substantiate your argument. Just one last thing: please do not speculate about my desire, as that is approaching the ad hominem level and I only discuss on way higher levels.lopsyfa said:
Maybe read the phrase before that, it will help you understand. But whatever, if it helps you start a new sub-topic to start another argument, I am sure you are happy. This is a forum not a peer reviewed website. Get over your desire for posts, grammar etc to be perfect.colsten said:
OK, so can you please link to the "about 10 or more pages" of me that are wrong, and explain what's wrong on those "pages". I am happy to correct genuine mistakes. Although I should add that I don't consider a difference in opinion a mistake.lopsyfa said:
I am sure you can apply your discretion but most people will know when to stop the back and forth - about 10 or more pages of you are wrong, I am not back and forth is not normal.colsten said:
What is the max permitted number of come backs, please? Is it the same number for all posters?lopsyfa said:
...... it is about the number of come backs ......
Could you also explain what "I am not back and forth is not normal" means, please?2 -
You should probably read my post regarding this, instead of making accusations based on the general tone of responses.lopsyfa said:
Yes but at what point will you stop with the finger pointing. You won't do that in real life, will you? Imagine that is your family member that told you that story, and you said but this maybe doesn't add up and they insisted that is the way it appears to them. Will you keep on calling them out for it (school close early, your stories has many holes in it etc) like has happened in this thread.Yahoo_Mail said:
Where's the value in blindly accepting what a poster says?lopsyfa said:Good Lord, what has this forum turned to. People come here for help and you lot turn detective, nitpicking over every small details. It will be better if people ignore thread that they think has holes in it - maybe point it out once but if they poster insists, let it be to avoid derailing the thread.
Similar happened to me when Lloyds tried to close my account and I made the comment that I have had my account for 10 years, one of the posters in this thread then tried to accuse me of being dishonest because I couldn't possibly have had that account for 10 years. Because Lloyds changed the account name from Vantage to Club Lloyds. Now I have a new account and I should go hunting for when the account name was changed and quote that in my complaints to Lloyds as the date I have had my account from. Problem is, it is the same account, sort code and account number and even my credit reports showed the open date as 10 years ago.
Back to the OP, I really feel for your family and I am glad you have managed to resolve it. I also think, the service level by NatWest is not up to standard.
Garbage in > Garbage out.
If people don't know exactly what's gone on, how can they in any way give sensible, accurate advice?
Remember the post is from the point of view of the poster not his dad so he may not be able to capture everything as it happened. And in the real life, stories rarely appears perfect. So if this forum is to be helpful and not push the non-veteran posters away, some allowance need to be allowed for the stories that may not appear fully vetted to you.
If a post appears spammy to you, won't it be better to ignore that post rather than just derail the topic with baseless allegations or detective work.
Aside from a back and forth between some regulars over what is and isn't possible, my first post (and possibly the only one) directed at the OP was that they needed to get their story straight before arguing this with Natwest as it could not have happened the way it did. This was eventually proven to be correct, however, the OP insisted over several pages that the payee was changed (not the reference, the payee) despite everyone agreeing that simply was not possible. An insistence, I might add, from someone who was not even present when the transaction occurred, nor had access to the account to see where it went as access had been blocked by Natwest.
If the OP had, perhaps, been willing to accept this, I suspect this thread wouldn't have dragged on as long as it has. Alas, here we are and you seem to be throwing your 2p in with what I can only assume is an attempt to fan the flames. Bravo!6 -
I am not sure any of this is helpful to the OP. Can we keep the thread on topic?I’m a Forum Ambassador and I support the Forum Team on the Debt free Wannabe, Budgeting and Banking and Savings and Investment boards. If you need any help on these boards, do let me know. Please note that Ambassadors are not moderators. Any posts you spot in breach of the Forum Rules should be reported via the report button, or by emailing forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com. All views are my own and not the official line of MoneySavingExpert.
Save £12k in 2026 Challenge £12000/£6000
365 day 1p Challenge 2026 £667.95/£220
Click on this link for a Statement of Accounts that can be posted on the DebtFree Wannabe board: https://lemonfool.co.uk/financecalculators/soa.php1 -
In that case given the OP posted that it is resolved (several pages ago) then no further posts requiredenthusiasticsaver said:I am not sure any of this is helpful to the OP. Can we keep the thread on topic? Life in the slow lane1
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.4K Spending & Discounts
- 247.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.4K Life & Family
- 261.5K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards