Google has taken £500 & I can't speak to anyone about it

naedanger

Deleted_User said:

That's correct. They were given the money. The money was received by them. A third party handed them the money.

They didn't take it.

You need to address the proper cause, not the retailer.

That is not how I read it. The fraudster placed adverts from the original posters account. Google charged the op for those adverts so the money was taken by Google - no third party handed it to them.

That said, I am not commenting one way or the other on whether Google are legally obliged to return the money. 

[Deleted User]

The fraudster booking advertising and it was charged to the OP's card.  Exactly the same as if they had gone into Debenhams and bought a marked down pair of boxer shorts in a closing down sale.

It's simply a payment in exchange for goods or services.  The issue lies in the fraudster not having permission to use either the account or payment method to buy tht service.

Voyager2002

Deleted_User said:

The fraudster booking advertising and it was charged to the OP's card.  Exactly the same as if they had gone into Debenhams and bought a marked down pair of boxer shorts in a closing down sale.

It's simply a payment in exchange for goods or services.  The issue lies in the fraudster not having permission to use either the account or payment method to buy tht service.

And had the thief physically stolen the OP's card and used it in Debenhams (other shops are available), the credit card provider would lose teh bulk of the money rather than the owner of the card. Debenhams would still get paid.

naedanger

Deleted_User said:

The fraudster booking advertising and it was charged to the OP's card.  Exactly the same as if they had gone into Debenhams and bought a marked down pair of boxer shorts in a closing down sale.

It's simply a payment in exchange for goods or services.  The issue lies in the fraudster not having permission to use either the account or payment method to buy tht service.

I don't see it as the exact same.

Google are saying they have closed the account because it was used to advertise a destination website that was a phising scam. Is that really an advert Google feel they should still be paid for? My own view is Google have done two morally wrong things: (1) advertise a phising website and (2) keep the money that paid for those adverts when, if they bothered to do even a cursory investigation, they would, most likely, find out that money was obtained fraudulently.

I don't see why the credit card company (or the op) should be paying for something that should never been sold.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if Google have no legal responsibility and no concern about any loss of goodwill.

[Deleted User]

Voyager2002 said:

Deleted_User said:

The fraudster booking advertising and it was charged to the OP's card.  Exactly the same as if they had gone into Debenhams and bought a marked down pair of boxer shorts in a closing down sale.

It's simply a payment in exchange for goods or services.  The issue lies in the fraudster not having permission to use either the account or payment method to buy tht service.

And had the thief physically stolen the OP's card and used it in Debenhams (other shops are available), the credit card provider would lose teh bulk of the money rather than the owner of the card. Debenhams would still get paid.

That's right. It's exactly the same scenario. 

That's why I've encouraged the OP to report the fraud to their card, rather than asking Google to repay them.

SnapperUK

I spent an hour on the phone with the CC company today. They really don't want to know. The process for reporting fraud is over the phone but they wouldn't start a start enquiry. I will write them a letter outline the case and then if they do not proceed with it I can move on the the Financial Services Ombudsmen.