Letter from Very.co.uk saying I have been impersonated, should I complain?

NibblyPig

Okell said:

NibblyPig said:

... What they could have done was require a copy of my ID, e.g. driving license, which they verify with the DVLA... 

How would the DVLA verify your identity?  Wouldn't that be a breach of GDPR?

(I know private parking companies can get identity info from DVLA, but my understanding is that this is a statutory exception - is it POFA?)

When I signed up to Natwest etc they requested a copy of my ID document, and I gave them my driving license.

I'm sure they verified the details, or the number. Or at the very least, the ID verification provider looked to see if it was fake. Presumably you can't open a bank account in my name so easily or they'd just do that with an overdraft and pull a grand out of an ATM.

Okell

NibblyPig said:

Okell said:

NibblyPig said:

... What they could have done was require a copy of my ID, e.g. driving license, which they verify with the DVLA... 

How would the DVLA verify your identity?  Wouldn't that be a breach of GDPR?

(I know private parking companies can get identity info from DVLA, but my understanding is that this is a statutory exception - is it POFA?)

When I signed up to Natwest etc they requested a copy of my ID document, and I gave them my driving license.

I'm sure they verified the details, or the number. Or at the very least, the ID verification provider looked to see if it was fake. Presumably you can't open a bank account in my name so easily or they'd just do that with an overdraft and pull a grand out of an ATM.

I suspect banks are held to stricter and more rigorous precautions than are online retailers when it comes to opening accounts

Presumably you attended the bank in person and somebody physically inspected your driving licence?  I'm not as sure as you are that the bank verified your DL other than to look at it and decide if it was genuine.  I don't know if they have the power to verify a DL with the DVLA, but if they do I suspect that power comes to them under money laundering legislation or similar.  Perhaps @born_again can confirm?

timjim

NibblyPig said:

As I mentioned above, I don't feel that I am protected. Very should have done further checks. I feel the fraud register should be if there was a massive data breach and my NI number and other private information was leaked which would necessitate additional protection. Not to make up for the company playing fast and loose with the protection.

Now I have concerns that other lenders will see me as a fraud risk and it will impact my lending, because Very have not done an adequate job of verifying my identity.

May I ask why you are so aggressively defending a company that has permitted me to be defrauded?

You haven't been defrauded they tried to defraud Very

born_again

TBA, many banks will not ask for ID if the online checks come back clear. Just the same as very have done here.

Asking for ID is a sign that something is not spot on the the online checks & they want to double check. So DL or Passport will confirm address, name etc. Not aware of any checks with DVLA, which TBH would only confirm what is on DL. If they want to go further & do a full ID check them they will have to be presented in person, or a photo of both person & card in same shot.

FCA will do nothing other than confirm Very have followed correct procedure.

Fully agree that delivery should not have been redirected, but that would have made no difference. As account was open & further checks were being made. 

Trouble is people want everything now. So companies in order to keep them happy, open & run extra (if needed) checks afterwards. To keep people happy.

NibblyPig

I suspect banks are held to stricter and more rigorous precautions than are online retailers when it comes to opening accounts

Presumably you attended the bank in person and somebody physically inspected your driving licence?  I'm not as sure as you are that the bank verified your DL other than to look at it and decide if it was genuine.  I don't know if they have the power to verify a DL with the DVLA, but if they do I suspect that power comes to them under money laundering legislation or similar.  Perhaps @born_again can confirm?

For sure, but Very are not just an online retailer they're also a credit lender and thus a financial institution.

You can sign up to most banks with your phone, snap a photo of your ID document and upload it.

It takes only a few minutes to sign up with a bank, so it seems unclear why a financial institution like Very (or the part of Very that does credit) would not do the same thing.

I don't think it's an excuse to say that people want everything now. It sounds to me like Very want to maximise the people that sign up, and thus reduce any barriers to the point where it's unsafe.

Anyway I'm going to file a complaint anyway. They can close it if they think they've behaved appropriately.

electriccactus

NibblyPig said:

I suspect banks are held to stricter and more rigorous precautions than are online retailers when it comes to opening accounts

Presumably you attended the bank in person and somebody physically inspected your driving licence?  I'm not as sure as you are that the bank verified your DL other than to look at it and decide if it was genuine.  I don't know if they have the power to verify a DL with the DVLA, but if they do I suspect that power comes to them under money laundering legislation or similar.  Perhaps @born_again can confirm?

For sure, but Very are not just an online retailer they're also a credit lender and thus a financial institution.

You can sign up to most banks with your phone, snap a photo of your ID document and upload it.

It takes only a few minutes to sign up with a bank, so it seems unclear why a financial institution like Very (or the part of Very that does credit) would not do the same thing.

I don't think it's an excuse to say that people want everything now. It sounds to me like Very want to maximise the people that sign up, and thus reduce any barriers to the point where it's unsafe.

Anyway I'm going to file a complaint anyway. They can close it if they think they've behaved appropriately.

Financial institutions come in different shapes and sizes and the risks involved vary.

Banks verify ID for current accounts more as a KYC check than specifically anti-fraud as many CAs will be open with no credit facilities and it's typically quite hard to go into an unauthorised overdraft anyway. The KYC checks will be done as banks are a prime target for money laundering, something which is possible through a catalogue company, but highly inefficient I imagine so their checks will be more about the fact that they might be lending money to a fraudster. But it is their money that they're putting on the line here so it's only hurting them to be less stringent.

I've opened a number of current accounts with nothing more than entering my info, the checks were done electronically in the background without any need for ID so not even all banks need ID.

There is also an argument that making showing ID commonplace will just result in people lowering their guard, making it easier for fraudsters to get their hands on it.

35har1old

NibblyPig said:

> So what checks could they have done to show it wasn't you if the impersonator had all your details correct at the time of application?

Good question. What are they going to do now that I'm on the fraud database? I'm worried that being flagged as a fraud risk is going to make life harder.

What they could have done was require a copy of my ID, e.g. driving license, which they verify with the DVLA. They could also have prevented the shipping company from being permitted to redirect post until after the first delivery was made. 

You have to ask, why is this the only company to which I have been defrauded? The answer must be that they're not being rigorous enough with their checks or processes.

> This is exactly why Very have done what they have. As a credit provider they follow the FCA regulations. 

That's fine then, if this has been reported to the FCA that's all I really wanted. Although I don't know if they just said 'shrug, it happens' and the FCA is like 'well ok what a tragic tale of events' when really Very have not really put any effort into making sure I don't get defrauded. From what I can see they have no obligation to report it to the FCA provided they follow their own internal processes.

According to the very person, someone ordered £200 of goods to my house, and then just before delivery got the shipping company to redirect it elsewhere.

I haven't posted any details online that could have allowed this. When I go to very to register an account I can see that it just appears to ask for name, address, and DOB, which is the same details they asked for when I phoned them. All of these details are publicly available on the companies house director search. There's no way they could get my personal ID documents though like passport or driving license, but it doesn't look like they care about these.

At present it's the only one you know about
Could you have used a correspondence address?
email address and mobile number required to register 

username

Very are at fault to allow the package to be diverted, it should be enforced that the courier can only deliver to the address on the label. Not sure what courier that Very use but I know in a previous job we shipped using DPD and we could enable/disable the diversion options at will.

Okell

username said:

Very are at fault to allow the package to be diverted, it should be enforced that the courier can only deliver to the address on the label. Not sure what courier that Very use but I know in a previous job we shipped using DPD and we could enable/disable the diversion options at will.

That depends, doesn't it?

What are the T&Cs of the courier?

What changes from those T&Cs can Very negotiate?

If a negotiated change in the courier's standard business T&Cs increases the cost, will Very (and their customers) be happy to pay it, or will they be happy to run the risk of a few dissatisfied people like the OP for cheaper prices?

It seems to me that the majority of online customers prefer a cheap service - even one that doesn't strictly comply with the requirements of consumer law - if a "proper" service would mean paying more.

Even if Very are commercially powerful enough to dictate terms to the courier - and I doubt they are - I bet you Very will only want to pay for a cheapo non-consumer legislation compliant courier rather than pay more for a decent service

sheramber

If Very paid for a dearer service from the courier that cost would be passed on to the buyer, who probably would prefer to  keep the cheaper service to keep the costs down.