Natwest bank sent an unauthorised duplicate payment & refuse to refund

colsten

phillw said:

Standing orders should really be banned.

Why is that?

BrownTrout

As usual the full story is never told.
Its like this on the parking ticket board.
Hard work

jonesMUFCforever

I have a theory - bear with me and see what you think.
OP sets up a standing order for x amount of payments.
At some stage maybe within the last month or so a payment is missed from OP's account.
I know some banks will try for up to 28 days to make a payment.
So my theory is - payment missed in say November/December, January payment made together with the missed payment then the standing order is finished and cancelled.

There is one other reason of course but let's be nice and give the OP the benefit of the doubt.

SuperAllyB

Do NatWest standing orders allow user to set a different final payment from the regular payments? Is it possible that the OP has set it for x payments and stipulated a final payment that's already included in the X?  In which case both payments would actually have been authorised. I don't have a NatWest account so might be completely wrong.

Either way, both the bank and the payee seem particularly unhelpful. Something certainly doesn't add up.

kaMelo

SuperAllyB said:

Do NatWest standing orders allow user to set a different final payment from the regular payments? Is it possible that the OP has set it for x payments and stipulated a final payment that's already included in the X?  In which case both payments would actually have been authorised. I don't have a NatWest account so might be completely wrong.

Either way, both the bank and the payee seem particularly unhelpful. Something certainly doesn't add up.

That may be a good shout as yes they do have that option.
There are three options when setting up Standing Orders.



If you choose the last one there is an option to have a final payment which is different to all the regular payments, even down to the date if you so choose.

brianposter

If the OP is going to claim from a recalcitrant payee they need a letter from Natwest explaining what has happened so, whatever the next few steps may be, the ball is currently in Natwest"s court - or at least, should be. 

jonesMUFCforever

brianposter said:

If the OP is going to claim from a recalcitrant payee they need a letter from Natwest explaining what has happened so, whatever the next few steps may be, the ball is currently in Natwest"s court - or at least, should be. 

I disagree with you. IF what is as described then Nat West have done nothing wrong here.
The OP does not want to come back to comment by the look of things.

brianposter

jonesMUFCforever said:

I disagree with you. IF what is as described then Nat West have done nothing wrong here.
The OP does not want to come back to comment by the look of things.

Para 2 of this thread "Natwest ...........admit to the error.."

so either Natwest need to explain to the OP that there was no error, or supply a letter to assist the OP to resolve the problem.

jonesMUFCforever

brianposter said:

jonesMUFCforever said:

I disagree with you. IF what is as described then Nat West have done nothing wrong here.
The OP does not want to come back to comment by the look of things.

Para 2 of this thread "Natwest ...........admit to the error.."

so either Natwest need to explain to the OP that there was no error, or supply a letter to assist the OP to resolve the problem.

My thinking is that whoever answered the phone at NW customer services saw that 2 payments had been made and automatically assumed that one had been sent in error. Why do I say this? Staff employed in contact centres have no real idea of what working in a bank entails and work from a script. They would not have the knowledge that posters above have.

I will repeat until the OP returns with answers this thread is going nowhere.
That is my thinking.

SevenOfNine

A formal complaint done on line to Nat West retrieved a fraudulently set up S/O for almost £1000 + £50 compensation.

The second one done the same way was because they were utterly useless dealing with 'freezing' my deceased mother's account. £250 + a lovely hamper.

Taking OPs explanation at face value they should take the advice given twice already, follow the formal complaints process, stop chasing retrieval from the recipient.