Bank refusing refund for patio works not carried out

Okell

I think the title of this thread is misleading as I don't believe that this is an example of what I understand to be an "aurhorised push payment" fraud, and is likely to mislead anyone searching for APP fraud and finds this thread.

This thread is about a trader who has been paid in advance to do agreed work but hasn't done it.  There's no evidence of fraud (let alone "APP" fraud) here, and little if any evidence of theft either.

Yes, the trader has done wrong here, but there is no evidence that it's a criminal matter rather than a civil one

gilbo47

Okell said:

I think the title of this thread is misleading as I don't believe that this is an example of what I understand to be an "aurhorised push payment" fraud, and is likely to mislead anyone searching for APP fraud and finds this thread.

This thread is about a trader who has been paid in advance to do agreed work but hasn't done it.  There's no evidence of fraud (let alone "APP" fraud) here, and little if any evidence of theft either.

Yes, the trader has done wrong here, but there is no evidence that it's a criminal matter rather than a civil one

Yep as discussed at length in considerable detail across the previous 7 pages. It obviously all started with me thinking it qualified as APP fraud.

gilbo47

Okell said:

I think the title of this thread is misleading as I don't believe that this is an example of what I understand to be an "aurhorised push payment" fraud, and is likely to mislead anyone searching for APP fraud and finds this thread.

This thread is about a trader who has been paid in advance to do agreed work but hasn't done it.  There's no evidence of fraud (let alone "APP" fraud) here, and little if any evidence of theft either.

Yes, the trader has done wrong here, but there is no evidence that it's a criminal matter rather than a civil one

...and so it describes why the bank won't pay up...so I suppose it does very comprehensively answer the initial problem statement in the title!!

born_again

Okell said:

I think the title of this thread is misleading as I don't believe that this is an example of what I understand to be an "aurhorised push payment" fraud, and is likely to mislead anyone searching for APP fraud and finds this thread.

This thread is about a trader who has been paid in advance to do agreed work but hasn't done it.  There's no evidence of fraud (let alone "APP" fraud) here, and little if any evidence of theft either.

Yes, the trader has done wrong here, but there is no evidence that it's a criminal matter rather than a civil one

Even more confusing now. 

As paid via bank transfer. There is no refund process for non receipt of goods/services.

saajan_12

gilbo47 said:

Hoenir said:

visidigi said:

user1977 said:

visidigi said:

eskbanker said:

visidigi said:

Have they stopped responding to you? (the builder?) I would be tempted to get a PAYG sim for a phone and send them a message from a new number and ask them for a quote - see if they take up the offer...then go to the police with the evidence.

No harm in doing that to establish contactability but surely it would need to be significantly further along before it would cross the threshold from civil dispute into criminal fraud, enough to get the police interested?

So my thinking was it shows intent to defraud

Not sure why you think that would that assist any of his debtors? Fraud is a criminal offence, not something which helps anybody get their money back.

So maybe fraud is the wrong word to use here  - Intentionally taking money for work you have no intention of completing is theft - I don't see why we would just be advising the OP to chalk it up and move on - would you?

The contractor previously did an ok job for a friend. There's no reason to suggest he intentionally set out to steal or defraud. Though ultimately he failed to start the work he was paid for. These things happen in life. Unfortunately doesn't mean that an unrelated third party picks up the bill either. Has happened to me in the past. By someone who previously done a number of jobs well. For personal reasons rapidly upped sticks and moved away. 

And that's exactly what I'm having a very hard time getting around..you and others have implied "oh because he never meant to defraud you, it's not fraud"...another poster even said "this doesn't come close to theft"...but the guy's made off with my cash and is uncontactable and hasn't finished the job I gave him cash for.

Oh but...eerr...sorry... but..nah...definitely not a crime...move along now...nothing you can do.

(More toungue in cheek paraphrasing but you get the jist of my bewilderment with all of this!)

People commonly equate "crime" with "breach of contract", and maybe that's what's happening here. Breaching a contract is certainly wrong and they are civilly liable -> ie courts. That doesn't make it criminal -> ie police. It also doesn't make it the bank's fault because they were involved at the point that he payment was made, before there was any indication anything was wrong (not dealing with a fraudlent person, no intent to defraud at the outset). 

Similar to if the tradesman did all the work and you found yourself unable to afford the final payment, or if a tenant failed to pay rent. Certainly claimable, but the appropriate venue is via small claims court. 

You still have this option, and it may well be worth it to have it on record so they have ot pay it if they want to get credit etc in the next 6 years. There's a fee and a time/effort element involved, plus the risk that even wiht a judgement in your favour, the tradesman won't actually have the funds to pay. That's why people are saying it might not be worth it, but its still absolutely your right. 

gilbo47

I have just received a letter from my bank clearly stating and confirming I have been a victim of APP fraud...but they are not refunding me (and they dont go into reasons why not).  Picture below with amount and bank specific Web links redacted.

So I'm confused...if they confirm I've been a victim of APP fraud (even though here it's pretty much confirmed I'm not) how can they refuse to refund me?

Do I just give this up as a just a badly worded letter...or...has my argument that "Hang on, bank...if you've confirmed I'm victim of APP fraud then surely you need to act accordingly and demonstrate how I've been grossly negligent before refusing to refund" got some weight and worth pursuing?

Aylesbury_Duck

I don't see there's anything to lose by going to the bank with precisely that argument.

eskbanker

gilbo47 said:

So I'm confused...if they confirm I've been a victim of APP fraud (even though here it's pretty much confirmed I'm not) how can they refuse to refund me?

Not an unreasonable question, and one they should have answered after saying that "we want to explain our decision", when they've done nothing of the kind!  They've simply restated the rules of engagement about the voluntary APP code and the subsequent mandatory equivalent but, unless they've done so on another page, fail to actually clarify the basis on which they've reached a conclusion that your claim doesn't satisfy the criteria.

I still don't see it as a valid APP claim, but when they've said that they're treating it as such and then fail to explain why they're rejecting it, it would seem appropriate to reply to them and ask them to clarify....

gilbo47

eskbanker said:

gilbo47 said:

So I'm confused...if they confirm I've been a victim of APP fraud (even though here it's pretty much confirmed I'm not) how can they refuse to refund me?

Not an unreasonable question, and one they should have answered after saying that "we want to explain our decision", when they've done nothing of the kind!  They've simply restated the rules of engagement about the voluntary APP code and the subsequent mandatory equivalent but, unless they've done so on another page, fail to actually clarify the basis on which they've reached a conclusion that your claim doesn't satisfy the criteria.

I still don't see it as a valid APP claim, but when they've said that they're treating it as such and then fail to explain why they're rejecting it, it would seem appropriate to reply to them and ask them to clarify....

Thanks for the replies. They absolutely do not clarify further on the next page...it is more generic wording about how I can keep myself safe online and how they, in their app, have introduced security checks to try to prevent fraud.

I'll definitely go back to them.

[Deleted User]

I haven't read the bulk of the thread as I recently I decided to keep out of them. You can speculate as to why. But. What I will say is it is almost inconceivable that what you describe is not fraud. I wouldn't speculate on the type of fraud, and maybe granted it doesn't sound like the APP flavour, but it is fraud, and I would eat my hat if it was not judged to be in a civil court.

You paid 20% deposit and four months later the guy turns up, spends four hours mucking about, then takes another 30% off you. After that, he never turns up again. Now we can

a) Believe he turned up knowing full well he wasn't going to continue with the job, and took the 30% with that in mind.

b) Leave our brains at the door and postulate that the very day after he'd taken your money, and four months after you'd paid him the initial deposit, something so terrible happens to him that not only is he unable to complete the job, ever, but he's unable to even speak about it.

I see previous posters have speculated that it's unlikely to be fraud because the guy was recommend, or because he'd done a decent job for someone else. All these factors are entirely irrelevant. If some saintly builder with 40 years of satisfied customers behind him one day finds himself in dire need of cash and runs off with the deposit from a customer, that's no less fraud than if it was Fred West.

In fact, as you describe it, it's not just fraud, it's classic fraud, almost cliched in its adherence to the template,