Barclays slashed my credit limit for non payment of unauthorized transactions

eskbanker

cheekykid said:

eskbanker said:

cheekykid said:

Barclays said "the impact on the account might not be reversed because the payments were missed and it has been more than 14 days during which we could have requested the credit reference agency to rectify the issue as an exception"

So basically, credit file screwed and card limit slashed for something I didn't do. I wonder why accept the dispute of those transactions anyway if they aren't going to reverse their impact? I am not too fussed about the credit limit. It's my credit score that got tarnished with 2 non payments that bothers me and all this for £8!. I will escalate my complaint though to a more senior level. The chat agents don't seem to be able to do much other than parroting information.

By disputing the transactions, they've been reversed, i.e. you no longer owe Barclaycard that money.

The consequential impact on your credit file and limit are effectively considered to be your responsibility, in that you could, and should (as far as they're concerned), have avoided these by reading your statements and taking the necessary action promptly.

You are wrong.

I am not under any obligation to be checking my account a certain amount of times each month etc. I went ahead and raised a formal complaint with Barclays. They cannot grant me that fraud was committed but then be hands off when it comes to the impact of said fraud. If they had rejected my dispute then it would have been a different story.

After a few weeks they came back to me yesterday and told me that they have upheld my dissatisfaction and will restore my credit limit and remove the late payment markers from my credit file. Happy days.

No, the fact that Barclays have relented on this occasion doesn't actually contradict anything I said - I was simply clarifying their position in answer to your question, but it was always their prerogative to take a more sympathetic stance on review....

Chrysalis

I think they did the right action if they had auto removed his DD for inactivity without informing him.
So both points of view are right in my opinion, it is the customers responsibility to keep an eye on things, but the bank should also apply some common sense in these type of situations.

MattMattMattUK

cheekykid said:

eskbanker said:

cheekykid said:

Barclays said "the impact on the account might not be reversed because the payments were missed and it has been more than 14 days during which we could have requested the credit reference agency to rectify the issue as an exception"

So basically, credit file screwed and card limit slashed for something I didn't do. I wonder why accept the dispute of those transactions anyway if they aren't going to reverse their impact? I am not too fussed about the credit limit. It's my credit score that got tarnished with 2 non payments that bothers me and all this for £8!. I will escalate my complaint though to a more senior level. The chat agents don't seem to be able to do much other than parroting information.

By disputing the transactions, they've been reversed, i.e. you no longer owe Barclaycard that money.

The consequential impact on your credit file and limit are effectively considered to be your responsibility, in that you could, and should (as far as they're concerned), have avoided these by reading your statements and taking the necessary action promptly.

You are wrong.

I am not under any obligation to be checking my account a certain amount of times each month etc.

I am pretty sure you are under the terms and conditions required to check your statement in full every month. On a second point actions have consequences, you chose inaction and that has had a consequence. 

cheekykid said:
I went ahead and raised a formal complaint with Barclays. They cannot grant me that fraud was committed but then be hands off when it comes to the impact of said fraud. If they had rejected my dispute then it would have been a different story.

You seem to be using some really odd language, trying to frame things in a certain way, "grant me that fraud" is incredibly odd wording and you are not sticking to facts, but trying to cloud everything with emotion. 

They cannot hold you directly responsible for the fraud, however your failure to report your card missing in a reasonable time frame is going to factor into this, three months to report it missing is on any level irresponsible, not knowing where a card is for three months is irresponsible. 

They can hold you responsible for your refusal to check the statements, statements which they are required to send you every month precisely to stop issues like this occurring. You chose to ignore the safeguard in the process, that has consequences.  

cheekykid said:

After a few weeks they came back to me yesterday and told me that they have upheld my dissatisfaction and will restore my credit limit and remove the late payment markers from my credit file. Happy days.

Again with the odd language, "upheld my dissatisfaction". You have had a lucy escape, time to learn from it and be financially responsible, check your statements at a minimum every month, know where your credit cards are, take some personal responsibility for your actions.

MattMattMattUK

Chrysalis said:

I think they did the right action if they had auto removed his DD for inactivity without informing him.

Every Direct Debit gets removed if not used for twelve months, for a credit card they will tell the customer on their statement, but if the customer refuses to check said statements...

Chrysalis said:

So both points of view are right in my opinion, it is the customers responsibility to keep an eye on things, but the bank should also apply some common sense in these type of situations.

I disagree, actions have consequences, consequences have costs. The OP chose to not know where their bank card was for three months, they chose to ignore their credit card statements for three months, that action allowed fraudsters to obtain money and had wider financial implications as the cost is now being carried by Barclaycard rather than the customer, that means that the cost has been passed onto every other Barclaycard customer. So everyone else has to carry the cost of the OPs actions/inaction.

We need more personal responsibility in life, not less.

Chrysalis

The credit file system is there as a means of reporting how customers reliably deal with credit, not noticing fraud and not being the one to cancel DD on a zero balance doesnt fall into that category in my opinion.  I also did say if, I dont know the full story of what went on in the OP's case.

So we agree to disagree.

Personally I have been almost caught out by this nonsensical 12 month timeout of DD before.  Luckily I check everything rigidly whenever I use a service.

Nasqueron

Chrysalis said:

The credit file system is there as a means of reporting how customers reliably deal with credit, not noticing fraud and not being the one to cancel DD on a zero balance doesnt fall into that category in my opinion.  I also did say if, I dont know the full story of what went on in the OP's case.

So we agree to disagree.

Personally I have been almost caught out by this nonsensical 12 month timeout of DD before.  Luckily I check everything rigidly whenever I use a service.

The 12 month limit was changed during covid, it was up to about 36 months or something like that, I don't think they have brought it back down so you should be ok in the future