Large sum stolen - Barclays aided the theft and won't help; what do I do?

Manxman_in_exile

binao said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

born_again said:

I can't believe that Barclays have passed so much information to the OP. As OP should not be chasing this. It is down to who sent the cheque & why send a cheque. Banking payment is more secure.

Barclays are on seriously dangerous ground for all that information they gave to the OP about someone else's account (even if fraudulent) that they had no right to do. Someone should be getting the sack & facing a massive fine or even jail over that.. 👀🤦‍♂️Clear breach of Data protection.
If it goes to FOS. Barclays are well shafted here.

Yes.  I can't believe Barclays have passed on so much information about the fraudster.  The OP even claims to have been shown a photo of them(?!?).

I'm not sure this isn't some wind-up.

As I said  in  a previous  post, "a very strange case"????

Mr @Manxman_in_exile With your 7.4k posts experience would you like to present your evidence that leads you to say, "I'm not sure this isn’t some kind of a wind-up." 

Because like @born_again I find it hard to believe that an employee of Barclays would have told or shown the OP as much as the OP says they have (eg that the fraudster had changed their name by deed poll).   And I find it equally difficult to believe that an employee of Barclays would have shown the OP a photograph of the alleged perpetrator.  (I don't see how else the OP could have seen such a photograph or how they would have know it was of the perpetrator otherwise).

So unless and until the OP comes back with some clarification, I'm not sure this isn't a wind-up.  It seems unlikely to me that any bank employee who knew what they were doing would have given the OP all that information.

[Edit:  To quote from @born_again:  "I can't believe that Barclays have passed so much information to the OP. As OP should not be chasing this. It is down to who sent the cheque & why send a cheque. Banking payment is more secure.

Barclays are on seriously dangerous ground for all that information they gave to the OP about someone else's account (even if fraudulent) that they had no right to do. Someone should be getting the sack & facing a massive fine or even jail over that..." ]

soolin

Is this story now being covered by Tony Hetherington in the Daily Mail?

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/experts/article-11245671/TONY-HETHERINGTON-Cheque-41-627-stolen-change.html

Manxman_in_exile

If it is the same story and isn't a wind-up then (1) my apologies to the OP, but (2) why didn't they say here that their bank was First Direct which would have explained why they had to post the cheque rather than pay it in personally?

I'm also more than a little surprised that a bank would accept a name change by deed poll.  Isn't it just a meaningless piece of paper that doesn't prove anything? 

I'm still very surprised that Barclays staff told the OP as much as they did and showed them a photo of the account holder.  I wouldn't be happy if my bank showed a photo of me to someone I didn't know who just walked in off the street.

But maybe Barclays are just super incompetent...

Good luck to the OP and my apologies again for doubting them.

born_again

Manxman_in_exile said:

If it is the same story and isn't a wind-up then (1) my apologies to the OP, but (2) why didn't they say here that their bank was First Direct which would have explained why they had to post the cheque rather than pay it in personally?

I'm also more than a little surprised that a bank would accept a name change by deed poll.  Isn't it just a meaningless piece of paper that doesn't prove anything? 

I'm still very surprised that Barclays staff told the OP as much as they did and showed them a photo of the account holder.  I wouldn't be happy if my bank showed a photo of me to someone I didn't know who just walked in off the street.

But maybe Barclays are just super incompetent...

Good luck to the OP and my apologies again for doubting them.

except you don't.
You can pay in at any HSBC or Post Office. You scan on app by pretty sure give the OP that it will be way over the limit.

>Barclays would release all its information to the police, but that is little use when Action Fraud has already refused to take action. <

Except Acton Fraud have been a investigation unit, they pass info onto local police for that area. You then make the decision to investigate or not. 

It is really time that Action Fraud was closed down & it went back to reporting to local police. But that will not happen as all AF is, is a means to massage the crime figures. As local police can say X reported & Y solved. Rather than X being a far larger number 😢

eskbanker

born_again said:
>Barclays would release all its information to the police, but that is little use when Action Fraud has already refused to take action. <

Except Acton Fraud have been a investigation unit, they pass info onto local police for that area. You then make the decision to investigate or not. 

It is really time that Action Fraud was closed down & it went back to reporting to local police. But that will not happen as all AF is, is a means to massage the crime figures. As local police can say X reported & Y solved. Rather than X being a far larger number 😢

We still don't know whether it's the same story, despite the many similarities, but perhaps worth noting that OP did say that the local police were on the case, in terms of assigning an officer, but was unimpressed with the lack of seniority and training, so it's not as if the trail goes cold with (In-)Action Fraud's lack of any sort of useful response:

starkiegraham said:

We have been to the police, but they have assigned a constable not a detective and they admit they aren't trained for this sort of thing. We have tried Action Fraud (completely useless - don't bother!).

robatwork

born_again said:

It is really time that Action Fraud was closed down & it went back to reporting to local police. But that will not happen as all AF is, is a means to massage the crime figures. As local police can say X reported & Y solved. Rather than X being a far larger number 😢

With you on this one. It's really an ultimate irony that Action Fraud are little more than a fraud perpetrated on the entire country.  Little more than a regulatory black hole in which to throw your little frauds. 

Ectophile

The purpose of Action Fraud isn't to solve fraud cases.  It's to keep fraud victims away from the polics, as the police wouldn't have the resources to solve the vast majority of the cases anyway.

Essentially, small scale fraud has been de-criminalised.  It's now a civil matter.