The Guardian - Mother was scammed out of £29,000, but Lloyds showed little empathy

datz

adamp87 said:

Should Lloyds have done more in this case? 

Call me cynical or heartless if you want, but I personally do not agree with financial institutions compensating people for their own negligence or stupidity. Some people really do some silly stuff with their own cash, and then expect the banks to have their backs.

Remember that banks refunding "victims" ultimately feeds back into increased costs and/or reduced benefits for you, me and the wider customer base. So we are all indirectly paying for it. And don't get me started on the increased restrictions and obstacles that the banks put in your way to move your own money around.

Personal responsibility for one's own actions seems to be a thing of the past.

robatwork

datz said:

adamp87 said:

Should Lloyds have done more in this case? 

Call me cynical or heartless if you want, but I personally do not agree with financial institutions compensating people for their own negligence or stupidity. Some people really do some silly stuff with their own cash, and then expect the banks to have their backs.

Remember that banks refunding "victims" ultimately feeds back into increased costs and/or reduced benefits for you, me and the wider customer base. So we are all indirectly paying for it. And don't get me started on the increased restrictions and obstacles that the banks put in your way to move your own money around.

Personal responsibility for one's own actions seems to be a thing of the past.

The word "greed" is pointedly skirted around in all these articles, but what else could propel this lady to borrow money she didn't have to invest? This wasn't a donation to buy a new kidney. OK she was convinced by scammers that this was a sure thing, a great way to make a quick profit. But you have to be willing and able to be convinced. I don't buy the naivety angle or language barrier. 

adamp87

Shakin_Steve said:

If these crypto scams keep on happening, I can see more banks flatly refusing to transfer any funds to cryptocurrency accounts. This whole refund malarkey is completely out of hand, I didn't realise that one could insure against stupidity. Free insurance, too.

The issue here for me is that there’s some responsibility on the victim. They went and got a loan off £20k. I’m pretty sure they didn’t say what it was for..

Band7

Hey, great new money making opportunity for all whose first language isn't English! You put a shedload into some crypto account, then run to the bank, and to the Press, and may be to your MP, to cry "I have been scammed". Then sit back and wait to be reimbursed by the bank.

Honestly, an adult who has not heard of cold caller or crypto scams by now really shouldn't be in charge of a bank account, and banks shouldn't be forced by the Regulator to reimburse such people. Ridiculous to expect banks to judge whether a person's command of English is good enough to let them operate their accounts as the adults that they are. Whatever next - do we now have to prove our language levels to our banks? Or can we get away with claiming our English is so bad that banks need to reimburse money we have spent?

Also, as a woman and mother I am offended by the implication in this article that mothers should somehow need extra help from banks. Why on earth is it relevant that this customer was a mother??

kaMelo

Whilst I wholeheartedly agree with your comments about people who try to drum up extra sympathy and support for their plight by playing the "woman" card I don't think that is what has happened here. The person who wrote to The Guardian is talking about their mother and that, from my reading at least, is the only reason mother/woman is mentioned.
Not to give them a free pass on the matter though, rather than the "woman" card they played the "race" card instead. (Of course they did, it's The Guardian)

There is an awful lot more to this story than what is mentioned in the article, the language problem being a case in point. The person who wrote into the newspaper points out clearly that English is not their mothers first language but makes no mention at all of the fact they have lived here and banked with Lloyds for thirty years.

Ultimately there are only around five or six types of scam and despite claims to the contrary, none of them are very complex in how they work.  Each and every one of them has a point at which there should be bells ringing and red flags waving to the potential victim enabling them to stop the scam in it's tracks. 

I do genuinely have sympathy with anyone who has fallen for a scam, it must be devastating and a real knock to their confidence but I have to ask where have they been for the last 25 years not to have noticed all the warnings about scams? (Probably in the same cave as the WASPI women I suspect)  Along with banks doing their bit people need to take some personal responsibility to protect themselves too.

phillw

But it seems to think she should have been able to protect herself from scammers.

Yes. A financial lasting power of attorney would seem appropriate.

Manipulating people by putting mother in the headline is a bit insulting.

phillw

sheramber said:

I have had that message that the bank could not verify the account. It was a Clydesdale account and  Clydesdale were not part of COP.

I knew it was genuine account.

And they would have told you that you should only continue if you trusted the recipient

jimjames

Shakin_Steve said:

If these crypto scams keep on happening, I can see more banks flatly refusing to transfer any funds to cryptocurrency accounts. 

There is no crypto involved. It would be the same as offering to invest in shares that don't exist.

Xenon

The bank/loan company should not have refunded a penny as far as i am concerned

hoc

We not only fund the mistakes of these people we have to put up ever superfluous questions, warning messages and confirmation prompts when setting up and making payments.

"English is not her first language". She's been a customer for 30 years, presumably living in the UK during this time. Many of my friends are from "ethnic minority backgrounds", some have parents who don't speak any English despite being here for decades, especially the mothers prefer to be in their own community. In these cases, for practical and often cultural reasons, the family's children handle communication with authorities and companies. It's an understood expectation. It's unrealistic to expect somebody help her in her language at the bank branch. She may have that benefit in a local ethnic food shop but wouldn't expect it at a major supermarket.

This isn't a case of a vulnerable person with diminished mental capabilities being deceived. It isn't an elaborate con or using some advanced technology. How much of a language does one need to speak to understand they are making bank payments, etc.?

I don't like banks but they are put in an impossible situation with these irresponsible articles with sensationalist headlines and "journalists" who minimise personal responsibility. If the bank had closed her account it would have been framed as some sort of discrimination.