If you’re providing details relating to transaction(s) that we’ve advised have been reported , we’ll aim to provide an update on the outcome of our review within approximately 5 working days, in accordance with our original email. We regret that no further information can be provided until the review is complete
** Please note that you will still be able to withdraw wages or benefits via branch with valid ID during this time. **
I have been a client for 50 years with several thousand pounds in my account. I find it unacceptable that they would block my account for a report from a third party for a trifling £8. It is really inconvenient to travel quite a distance to visit a branch to withdraw cash. I am unable to use my Debit Card and it is unclear whether they will continue to pay DD and SO?We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Nat West
Options

missile
Posts: 11,772 Forumite


I am frustrated with Nat West>
On 08th February, I sold an item on market place for £5. Buyer asked me to post. I agreed for additional £3 p+p. He transferred £8 to my account.
He had misread the advert and I refunded his £8.
I have confirmation of payments in and out of my account. Which I sent to him.
He then claimed he did not receive refund and sent me abusive / threatening messages.
Today I receive notification from Nat West that my account has been blocked.
They referenced his £8 payment and asked for a response to a long list of questions within 3 days.
I telephoned NW, but they refused to discuss.
I have answered all their questions and attached details of the transactions.
I received this automated response>
On 08th February, I sold an item on market place for £5. Buyer asked me to post. I agreed for additional £3 p+p. He transferred £8 to my account.
He had misread the advert and I refunded his £8.
I have confirmation of payments in and out of my account. Which I sent to him.
He then claimed he did not receive refund and sent me abusive / threatening messages.
Today I receive notification from Nat West that my account has been blocked.
They referenced his £8 payment and asked for a response to a long list of questions within 3 days.
I telephoned NW, but they refused to discuss.
I have answered all their questions and attached details of the transactions.
I received this automated response>
"A nation's greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members." ~ Mahatma Gandhi
Ride hard or stay home :iloveyou:
Ride hard or stay home :iloveyou:
1
Comments
-
This is a fairly classic scam - buyer sends payment, then ask for you to send a refund. Separately, the buyer also claws back the original payment from their bank - leaving you out of pocket twice. Why they'd bother doing this for £8 is beyond me, but some people can't be reasoned with.
All you can really do is provide NatWest with the info they need to investigate and wait. They won't be allowed to discuss the process due to AML rules. I'd also log a formal complaint and explain that this will cause you hardship if it is not resolved in a timely manner.
4 -
missile said:I sold an item on market place for £510
-
Does the use of PayPal stop this kind of thing happening, or at least keep it away from your main bank account.2
-
flaneurs_lobster said:Does the use of PayPal stop this kind of thing happening, or at least keep it away from your main bank account.
Yes, because the buyer's complaint is with PayPal rather than their bank.
3 -
I think this buyer is mentally deranged.
I have several thousand pounds in my NW account which I cannot access. I shall register a formal complaint.
Fortunately I have another current account which I can use."A nation's greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members." ~ Mahatma Gandhi
Ride hard or stay home :iloveyou:1 -
PRAISETHESUN said:They won't be allowed to discuss the process due to AML rules.
2 -
grumbler said:PRAISETHESUN said:They won't be allowed to discuss the process due to AML rules.
If and when I do get back into my NW account, I am tempted to report the refund I made to his account as "fraud". Don't get mad get even :-)
"A nation's greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members." ~ Mahatma Gandhi
Ride hard or stay home :iloveyou:1 -
I understand that marketplace is a platform facilitated by Facebook/Meta and presumably their Ts&Cs indemnify them against any financial claims. (ie they accept no responsibility for any disputes)
Therefore this scenario has nothing to do with Meta and could have happened with any financial transaction dispute.
Surely NatWest must have substantially more evidence than one party's word that any wrongdoing has occurred. Otherwise this action by NatWest could happen to anyone without any cause. Or alternatively, NatWest have grossly overreacted and could be liable for a substantial compensation claim.
I am not doubting the original post in any way but it does appear as though I am missing something.2 -
RG2015 said:Surely NatWest must have substantially more evidence than one party's word that any wrongdoing has occurred. Otherwise this action by NatWest could happen to anyone without any cause. Or alternatively, NatWest have grossly overreacted and could be liable for a substantial compensation claim.
I am not doubting the original post in any way but it does appear as though I am missing something.
It's obviously highly inconvenient when the payee is innocent, but when banks are on the hook to reimburse authorised push payments scams (thanks to pressure from consumer champions such as you-know-who), they're stuck between a rock and a hard place in terms of who to believe prior to the matter being investigated, and, as with some of the more legislative/regulatory controls, effectively have to side with the accuser initially, even though it's understandable that this seems grossly unfair to the likes of OP.
If you think about it from the perspective of the payer here, if you feel you can make a case (however creative) that you've been defrauded and report it to your bank, wouldn't you expect them to take action? Clearly if the payment was made to some dodgy crypto or mini bond scam company it's only right that assets are temporarily frozen ahead of recovery action, but innocent payees end up suffering collateral damage.
I'm not defending the practice here by the way, and imagine that there could/should be better checks and balances (such as ring-fencing or even temporarily removing OP's £8 rather than the blunt instrument of freezing the entire account, for example), but the above is my understanding of what's currently happening and why....6 -
Thank you @eskbanker,
I haven't come across this scenario before, but neither have I heard of someone who didn't receive a genuine refund having any joy with the getting the bank involved.
Furthermore to get an account frozen within 2 days seems incredible.2
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.6K Spending & Discounts
- 244.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177K Life & Family
- 257.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards