I got a CIFAS for receiving £85 for jackets

Grumpy_chap

This does not make sense.

The OP purchased a jacket for £50 from "A".
The OP never received the jacket or the £50 refund.
The OP opened a dispute with the bank.
"A" stated they had their account closed because of that.
Then "A" arranged for "B" (who had also bought a jacket) to pay the OP £80.
The £80 was received by the OP.
The OP forwarded the full £80 to "A" (not thinking to retain the £50 owed).
The OP got their bank account closed.

I really struggle to understand how the OP did not think it was fair to withhold the £50, or why the OP cannot see after the event how it all looks dodgy.

mintyjelly447

TheBanker said:

So your 'friend' sold you an item, which he did not supply. You raised a dispute - was this through your bank?

You then agreed to receive a payment on behalf of the same 'friend' who'd sold an item to someone else. Presumably that person also raised a dispute through their own bank.

Presumably you were not entirely honest when the bank asked you why you had received £85 into your account. Presumably the bank could see that you had sent it onto the same person who you'd raised a £50 dispute against.

Just think how this looks to a fraud investigator. With the benefit of hindsight there is no wonder you have ended up where you have. Sorry if this sounds harsh but my sympathy is with the person who paid you £85 and still has no jacket. 

I told the bank the honest truth about why I received the money. I, however, do understand where you are coming from though

mintyjelly447

Grumpy_chap said:

This does not make sense.

The OP purchased a jacket for £50 from "A".
The OP never received the jacket or the £50 refund.
The OP opened a dispute with the bank.
"A" stated they had their account closed because of that.
Then "A" arranged for "B" (who had also bought a jacket) to pay the OP £80.
The £80 was received by the OP.
The OP forwarded the full £80 to "A" (not thinking to retain the £50 owed).
The OP got their bank account closed.

I really struggle to understand how the OP did not think it was fair to withhold the £50, or why the OP cannot see after the event how it all looks dodgy.

I ask myself the question why I did not just take the money owed to me, or why I took the money in the first place. I understand how this does look dodgy, I do not understand however why I have a marker implicated on me that will affect me in this cashless society although I did not do anything fraudulent

Hoenir

mintyjelly447 said:

TheBanker said:

So your 'friend' sold you an item, which he did not supply. You raised a dispute - was this through your bank?

You then agreed to receive a payment on behalf of the same 'friend' who'd sold an item to someone else. Presumably that person also raised a dispute through their own bank.

Presumably you were not entirely honest when the bank asked you why you had received £85 into your account. Presumably the bank could see that you had sent it onto the same person who you'd raised a £50 dispute against.

Just think how this looks to a fraud investigator. With the benefit of hindsight there is no wonder you have ended up where you have. Sorry if this sounds harsh but my sympathy is with the person who paid you £85 and still has no jacket. 

I told the bank the honest truth about why I received the money. I, however, do understand where you are coming from though

This is how laundering money works in the real world. Innocent people get caught up in the net. Innocent people are expendable. Innocent people suffer the consequences. In future don't be trusting of "friends" when it comes to money matters. Certainly don't believe or accept at face value what they say. 

mintyjelly447

Hoenir said:

mintyjelly447 said:

TheBanker said:

So your 'friend' sold you an item, which he did not supply. You raised a dispute - was this through your bank?

You then agreed to receive a payment on behalf of the same 'friend' who'd sold an item to someone else. Presumably that person also raised a dispute through their own bank.

Presumably you were not entirely honest when the bank asked you why you had received £85 into your account. Presumably the bank could see that you had sent it onto the same person who you'd raised a £50 dispute against.

Just think how this looks to a fraud investigator. With the benefit of hindsight there is no wonder you have ended up where you have. Sorry if this sounds harsh but my sympathy is with the person who paid you £85 and still has no jacket. 

I told the bank the honest truth about why I received the money. I, however, do understand where you are coming from though

This is how laundering money works in the real world. Innocent people get caught up in the net. Innocent people are expendable. Innocent people suffer the consequences. In future don't be trusting of "friends" when it comes to money matters. Certainly don't believe or accept at face value what they say. 

So do you think that I could possibly appeal it?

TheBanker

mintyjelly447 said:

Hoenir said:

mintyjelly447 said:

TheBanker said:

So your 'friend' sold you an item, which he did not supply. You raised a dispute - was this through your bank?

You then agreed to receive a payment on behalf of the same 'friend' who'd sold an item to someone else. Presumably that person also raised a dispute through their own bank.

Presumably you were not entirely honest when the bank asked you why you had received £85 into your account. Presumably the bank could see that you had sent it onto the same person who you'd raised a £50 dispute against.

Just think how this looks to a fraud investigator. With the benefit of hindsight there is no wonder you have ended up where you have. Sorry if this sounds harsh but my sympathy is with the person who paid you £85 and still has no jacket. 

I told the bank the honest truth about why I received the money. I, however, do understand where you are coming from though

This is how laundering money works in the real world. Innocent people get caught up in the net. Innocent people are expendable. Innocent people suffer the consequences. In future don't be trusting of "friends" when it comes to money matters. Certainly don't believe or accept at face value what they say. 

So do you think that I could possibly appeal it?

I don't know on what grounds you would appeal it.

You said you had made a fraud claim when you paid your friend for a jacket which he did not supply. This means you knew your friend was a con-artist.

Look at it from the bank's point of view - you knew this person is not good because he ripped you off. You then helped him to do exactly the same thing to someone else.

Under regulations the 'receiving bank' can be held liable for half the loss when their customer accepts a scam payment into their account. So you represent a significant risk to any bank that allows you to open an account based on your past behaviour, just like someone with a history of not paying their debts back represents a risk.

Of course you can appeal, but I think doing so would likely be a waste of everyone's time.

Sorry to be blunt but as I said my sympathy is with the person who paid you £85 for a jacket which was not supplied and probably never existed in the first place. 

JadedAngel88

OP

Next time a 'friend' asks you to do them a favour, say these words to yourself out loud.

'No good deed goes unpunished'.

Then say no can't help and walk away.

moneytorques

OP, 
We seem to be coming up with the same answers between replies.

You can appeal to the FOS if you so wish.

You are very unlikely to receive a positive outcome or have your marker overturned.

I get that is disappointing but that is how it is, I'd suggest putting this down to experience and keeping your head down for the next 2 years until the marker lapses.

born_again

mintyjelly447 said:

moneytorques said:

Yeah because I didn't actually do anything fraudulent. He was supposed to be my friend of whom I helped very much along the years so I did not think much of anything and I just trusted him. I see now that this has landed me in a hot mess

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81409709/#Comment_81409709

Then you say people are misunderstanding ?

You contested as you did not get the goods.
Then proceeded to take a payment for him, as his account had been closed due to your actions. & send the money to them. How if their account was closed.

I think you need to step back think about what you are saying. As that hole is getting deeper with each post..

Ayr_Rage

born_again said:

mintyjelly447 said:

moneytorques said:

Yeah because I didn't actually do anything fraudulent. He was supposed to be my friend of whom I helped very much along the years so I did not think much of anything and I just trusted him. I see now that this has landed me in a hot mess

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81409709/#Comment_81409709

Then you say people are misunderstanding ?

You contested as you did not get the goods.
Then proceeded to take a payment for him, as his account had been closed due to your actions. & send the money to them. How if their account was closed.

I think you need to step back think about what you are saying. As that hole is getting deeper with each post..

Th OP stated, somewhere, that his friend opened a new account and then sent the £80/85 to that new account.