B&M card transaction fault

born_again

Drakwrig said:

Hi, total newbie here looking for some consumer advice.
I went to my local B&M on Sunday, payed for my goods using my monzo card which immediately indicated that the transaction had gone through. However, the till showed it had been declined.

Because I could clearly see a debit to B&M on my monzo app, I challenged this & asked to speak with a manager.

He was awful 😕 he led me to a pile of boxes right in front of the tills & kept saying (very loudly) "I can't allow you to leave the store, you haven't paid for those items" - which of course, as far as I was concerned, I had. He proceeded to tell me that my bank was at fault & that the money would be refunded within 7 - 10 days. My choices were to either empty my bag & leave the store without goods and with £23 gone from my account or pay again. I only had £10 left in my account so had to empty my bag in front of all the customers queueing at the tills & leave. 

I was mortified. I felt like I'd been accused of shoplifting. The whole incident upset me so much, I broke down in years when I got home.

I complained to B&M who sent me a stock apology & told me that they were having issues with the company they use to process transactions. I was offered a £30 voucher as a goodwill gesture.

I've declined their offer in the basis that if they know it's an issue, they should equip their managers with a protocol to deal with it (& also train them not to be horrible to customers) and also offer a warning to customers so they are able to choose whether to use card or cash. Nor have I had a refund yet, so essentially they're offering me £7 which I find absolutely insulting.

I suppose I'm looking for some validation that I'm right to stick to my guns on this issue? 

Can anyone offer any advice to whether they SHOULD tell customers of known problems with card payments & if it was right that they made me empty my bag & leave empty handed? 

I feel like I've been wronged in so many ways here.

Thanks

A few points.
That £23 was not a debit it was a authorisation. 
Which work like this.
You tap or pin your card. Retailer requests £23 from bank, bank either approves or declines. BUT just because they approve it does not mean that it has gone through. Sometimes there is a break in the link & retailer does not get the approved message, so their system gives a decline message.
Any authorisation such as this can take up to 14 days to drop off. Retailers always blame the bank, as they do not know how the system works.

As far as retailer goes their system said declined & that is the end of it. No point arguing They have the proof they need that they have not got the funds. So retailer is correct. Decline = Not paid.

End of the day so long as you have the decline receipt from retailer you are safe.

Just put it down to one of them things that happen & forget about it. 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

molerat said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

molerat said:

The app did not tell you that you had paid B&M, the app told you that B&M had requested funds.  Until the till shows the transaction as complete then you have not paid, walking out with the goods in that situation would be theft. There can be a thousand reasons why the transaction failed.  If you want to rely on electronic payment methods you need to have a backup for instances like this.  Take the voucher.

Has the transaction actually shown up as cleared ?

The OP wouldn't have had the intention to permanently deprive the owner of the goods so I don't think it would have been theft in this specific case.

So how were they intending to pay for the goods when their offer of paying by Monzo had been rejected ?

If the believed they had paid, rightly or wrongly, there wouldn't have been any intention to deprive. 

MobileSaver

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

If the believed they had paid, rightly or wrongly, there wouldn't have been any intention to deprive.

I agree and that's the same reason why the store manager could have arrested the OP quite legitimately if they reasonably believed, rightly or wrongly, the OP was going to leave the store without making payment.

elsien

Given the OP was upset by having to empty their bags, I hate to think what their mental state would have been if they’d tried to leave with the goods and had a subsequent debate in the store as to whether they were shoplifting or not, 

mr_stripey

 In most cases like this it is usual to process the transaction again and if there is any issue afterwards it can be sorted out. Monzo app even states if there are duplicate transactions close to each other then one will be refunded. Of course if the customer thinks they have paid and doesn't have enough money to "pay again" then perhaps the request to return the goods could have been handled a little more sensitively.

@Drakwrig - just to clarify - did the transaction eventually go through? If so, and assuming you didn't receive the goods (in the end) then you can report the transaction in the app to Monzo who will sort it out.

Aylesbury_Duck

How much are you after?

sheramber

mr_stripey said:

 In most cases like this it is usual to process the transaction again and if there is any issue afterwards it can be sorted out. Monzo app even states if there are duplicate transactions close to each other then one will be refunded. Of course if the customer thinks they have paid and doesn't have enough money to "pay again" then perhaps the request to return the goods could have been handled a little more sensitively.

@Drakwrig - just to clarify - did the transaction eventually go through? If so, and assuming you didn't receive the goods (in the end) then you can report the transaction in the app to Monzo who will sort it out.

just to clarify - did the transaction eventually go through?

Presumably not as the OP states that the £30 voucher only gives them £7 extra.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

MobileSaver said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

If the believed they had paid, rightly or wrongly, there wouldn't have been any intention to deprive.

I agree and that's the same reason why the store manager could have arrested the OP quite legitimately if they reasonably believed, rightly or wrongly, the OP was going to leave the store without making payment.

A member of the public can "arrest" someone for an indictable offence and low value shoplifting is a summary offence. 

I don't think this would be shoplifting or theft so what offence is it that would allow someone to make the "arrest"?

If the transaction has gone through did B&M steal the OPs money? Of course not so that must work both ways.

It sounds like a civil issue over payment and "arresting" someone isn't something that should be done lightly as there are consequences should it not be done correctly.

That's not suggest I think the OP should have walked out with their shopping as this would just be making a rod for their own back.  

Ergates

molerat said:

The app did not tell you that you had paid B&M, the app told you that B&M had requested funds.  Until the till shows the transaction as complete then you have not paid, walking out with the goods in that situation would be theft. There can be a thousand reasons why the transaction failed, there is not a lot anyone in store can do if the system throws up random declines even if "they know about it".  If you want to rely on electronic payment methods you need to have a backup for instances like this.  Take the voucher.

Has the transaction actually shown up as cleared ?

The same is true of any and all debit card transactions.   Do you believe paying by debit card then leaving before the posted transactions is complete (usually the next day) is theft?

DB1904

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

molerat said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

molerat said:

The app did not tell you that you had paid B&M, the app told you that B&M had requested funds.  Until the till shows the transaction as complete then you have not paid, walking out with the goods in that situation would be theft. There can be a thousand reasons why the transaction failed.  If you want to rely on electronic payment methods you need to have a backup for instances like this.  Take the voucher.

Has the transaction actually shown up as cleared ?

The OP wouldn't have had the intention to permanently deprive the owner of the goods so I don't think it would have been theft in this specific case.

So how were they intending to pay for the goods when their offer of paying by Monzo had been rejected ?

If the believed they had paid, rightly or wrongly, there wouldn't have been any intention to deprive. 

The intention is there, the question is over dishonesty.