Barclays Fraud / GDPR breach

Marchitiello

HiggiHiggins said:

Thanks again for the response born it’s appreciated.
my only query is that they categorically deny ever approaching any of the merchants. They have never spoken with them they say and so they can’t have confirmed anything with them or received any rejection of case, am I right?

thanks

Technically they may note have spoken as it is all done via automatic emailing and web forms nowadays.. the retailer would have received an email with the disputed transaction and a link to a form for them to fill and upload evidence. They would also have been given a timeline, that if not met, it would have caused an automatic chargeback. 

HiggiHiggins

They had previously said they were awaiting confirmation from the merchants however the submission to the ICO specifically stated that they didn’t need to contact any any other organisations and were able to make a decision based on information held on their system. 

Worded quite specific in that they’ve not needed to contact any organisations not specific to spoken to. As I say they wrote to me a while back saying they hadn’t shared any unnecessary personal info during investigations, who would this statement relate to if now if they are now claiming they spoke to no one else?

Marchitiello

If the transactions was done through Chip & Pin or with some other autorizzati on confirmation, they do not need to contact anyone as the retailer would not need to provide evidence of “signature” as it is all held within the bank system. 

phillw

HiggiHiggins said:

Thanks again for the response born it’s appreciated.
my only query is that they categorically deny ever approaching any of the merchants. They have never spoken with them they say and so they can’t have confirmed anything with them or received any rejection of case, am I right?

thanks

They may not have contacted the merchants, as it would be rather pointless "do you remember who came into your shop a year ago?".

They may have done other checks though.

HiggiHiggins

Marchitiello said:

If the transactions was done through Chip & Pin or with some other autorizzati on confirmation, they do not need to contact anyone as the retailer would not need to provide evidence of “signature” as it is all held within the bank system. 

All online debit card payments 

HiggiHiggins

Hi phill. The payments were taken in USD by the companies whom I don’t know. I’d assume the bank would check what was bought from the companies by me for an invoice or receipt 

HiggiHiggins

Evening All

apologies I’ve not been on for an update but just been trying to get the best out of a bad situation..

so the ombudsman ruled (adjudicator) in my favour and upheld in full. This is great news and makes shocking reading on the banks behaviour. 

First off after asking for an extension on a disclosure deadline, this was granted yet they failed to get back to the FO at all after the extension and haven’t disclosed. 

outcome made. Ordered full return of the transactions not refunded, plus interest, 4 figure compensation amount and a reworking of my credit file to reflect the position of the transactions and consequences of them having not taken place. (This only applies to myself as when the complaint went in to the FON it was a single complaint and regarding the fraud element, before the credit scores were impacted, so as per the ruling Barclays have no requirement to adjust the JA holders credit file which is impacted by their actions and a consequence)

It was found no investigation took place and no evidence or rationale could be shown to support any decisions that have been made. 

A file supplied to the FO contains information, references and data of another customers complaint throughout the document. 

Breached their terms by not refunding payments when the customer hasn’t acted negligent at all, consent of payment has not been provided by the bank or the third party at all, and a case which was refunded last year and all payments investigated as fraudulent, they fail to provide any reason to justify this decision and now claim that they decided to just “write off these transactions” 🤔

now the outcome is fair however they were only looking at the investigation into transactions and outcome. The consequences of this are far more damaging and not taken into account in compensation. 

Mine and the joint acc holders credit scores have been damaged beyond belief as a result of the adverse payments and unauthorised overdraft on the account which they caused and has to be put right by them. 4 months of adverse markers have seen my score hit by 200+ in 2 months alone. I was over 700 the middle of last year and now about 250 ☹️.

had the payments been refunded in the summer last year I’d not be in the position I am now. I can’t get a credit card, I can’t remortgage and that sees my fixed rate ending this month just up £400 a month all as a result.

removing the markers with the credit agents won’t see a recovery of the score happen as fast as it went down. Potentially years of recovery as a result of their actions have left me in a dark place. The JA holder had a mortgage declined due to the marker, lost the property and has cost in solicitors fees and still with no house.

seems no way out. Single parent costs increasing debt spiralling future bleak head screwed. Can anyone offer any advice on our position?

MorningcoffeeIV

HiggiHiggins said:

removing the markers with the credit agents won’t see a recovery of the score happen as fast as it went down.

Your credit scores are fictional it doesn't matter in the slightest if they never recover to previous levels.

All that matters is the data in your files.

FOS can't do anything about about the pretend scores - only the real stuff. But as it doesn't matter, it's fine.

HiggiHiggins

Thank you for the note, I understand they are not an official number in that sense so are you saying it’s the actual adverse months reported on the report that need amending? So Nov 1 (adverse) Dec 2 Jan 3 would need changing, is that what you mean in terms of data?

we received a letter last week advising that the account is critical and providing written notice that they may close the account. They also warn that information relating to the conduct of the account may be sent on to credit agencies and therefore our credit scores are at risk.

they are aware that they have already reported this for the last few months and it has impacted our scores already. I presume that institutions should make you aware prior to reporting to credit agencies (as this letter forewarns) to give you chance to resolve any payments etc that could be for any reason. This didn’t happen and seems very irresponsible that someone can miss a payment and a bank reports this as adverse rather than allowing you to resolve this?

MorningcoffeeIV

HiggiHiggins said:

 I presume that institutions should make you aware prior to reporting to credit agencies (as this letter forewarns) to give you chance to resolve any payments etc that could be for any reason.

No. They already told you that they may report to CRAs in your agreement. So monthly bespoke comms aren't necessary.