I got a CIFAS for receiving £85 for jackets

Kim_13

mintyjelly447 said:

MrFrugalFever said:

An interesting read here, with many comments that seemingly change the facts as you read on through the thread.

TheBanker has literally got it spot on and summarised exactly what has happened here (extrapolating the information supplied by the OP).

Sorry OP but you only have yourself to blame, the first and only red flag was the 'not received my jacket that I paid £50 for'.

The thing is it was not a random guy that I received the money from, it was literally someone that I had been friends with and had helped so much so I just thought that taking the £85 and sending it to him would be fine. But yeah I was naive an it's landed me in trouble, I, however don't think I should have got a CIFAS marker

If he was a friend he would have refunded you if he could not give you what you had paid for, or told you that he was short of cash right now but could pay you on X, not gone silent on you and caused you to raise a dispute with your bank. As far as any bank will be concerned, he ceased being a friend when that dispute went in and that dispute should have taken its course.

He had demonstrated to you that he could not be trusted via not delivering the jacket or refunding. If you accept a payment into your bank that isn't for you, you essentially vouch for it being legitimate. Given he did not deliver your jacket, it should have been obvious that he would not deliver anyone else's and therefore he was not entitled to the money you accepted into your account any more than he was entitled to the money you paid him - you obviously agree with that, having opened the dispute. No one is going to agree that it is acceptable to facilitate ripping someone else off in order to recover your own money which is essentially what it boils down to. Your conduct was characteristic of money laundering and money mules receive CIFAS markers for misuse of facility.

TheBanker

mintyjelly447 said:

MrFrugalFever said:

An interesting read here, with many comments that seemingly change the facts as you read on through the thread.

TheBanker has literally got it spot on and summarised exactly what has happened here (extrapolating the information supplied by the OP).

Sorry OP but you only have yourself to blame, the first and only red flag was the 'not received my jacket that I paid £50 for'.

The thing is it was not a random guy that I received the money from, it was literally someone that I had been friends with and had helped so much so I just thought that taking the £85 and sending it to him would be fine. But yeah I was naive an it's landed me in trouble, I, however don't think I should have got a CIFAS marker

If he was such a good friend, why did you report to your bank that he had defrauded you out of £50? Why not just ask him for the money back, or for the jacket, or even let him off if he's such a good friend? 

You may be naive and I suspect you are young, but you have to take responsibility for your actions. Having been defrauded yourself by this friend, you decided to help him defraud someone else. Can't you see this is wrong? I love my best friend as though he is my brother, but if he asked me to help him commit a crime I would say no.

The CIFAS marker is not some kind of punishment. It is a matter of fact recording that you allowed your bank account to be used for criminal activity. Its intention is to warn other banks that you pose a high risk if they open accounts for you. 

eskbanker

TheBanker said:

The CIFAS marker is not some kind of punishment. It is a matter of fact recording that you allowed your bank account to be used for criminal activity. Its intention is to warn other banks that you pose a high risk if they open accounts for you. 

While you're technically correct, the effective result is to prevent those with markers from accessing mainstream financial services for six years!

TheBanker

eskbanker said:

TheBanker said:

The CIFAS marker is not some kind of punishment. It is a matter of fact recording that you allowed your bank account to be used for criminal activity. Its intention is to warn other banks that you pose a high risk if they open accounts for you. 

While you're technically correct, the effective result is to prevent those with markers from accessing mainstream financial services for six years!

Yes, I know in practice this is what happens. But I was trying to educate the OP into why banks apply these markers. 

teaselMay

You've said a few times OP that you've helped this friend a lot, does that include financially? Are your finances more entangled than just this one fraudulent transaction that you've told us about?

MrFrugalFever

mintyjelly447 said:

MrFrugalFever said:

An interesting read here, with many comments that seemingly change the facts as you read on through the thread.

TheBanker has literally got it spot on and summarised exactly what has happened here (extrapolating the information supplied by the OP).

Sorry OP but you only have yourself to blame, the first and only red flag was the 'not received my jacket that I paid £50 for'.

The thing is it was not a random guy that I received the money from, it was literally someone that I had been friends with and had helped so much so I just thought that taking the £85 and sending it to him would be fine. But yeah I was naive an it's landed me in trouble, I, however don't think I should have got a CIFAS marker

Ok so now the plot thickens as previously you had explained that you had paid £50 to your 'friend' to purchase a jacket that you never received and then, you suspect, due to you disputing the fact that you never received the jacket from your 'friend' it meant he couldn't receive some money (initially £85 but then turned in to £80 later in the story) which is where you duly stepped in and said you'd receive it on his behalf and when he was all set up with another account would transfer it on.

So to clarify, you are now saying that the person paying you the £85/£80 you also knew and wasn't just a 'random guy'?

In order for people to assist you as best as possible you really do need to get facts correct, this thread is littered with irregularities in information provided by yourself.

TheBanker

MrFrugalFever said:

mintyjelly447 said:

MrFrugalFever said:

An interesting read here, with many comments that seemingly change the facts as you read on through the thread.

TheBanker has literally got it spot on and summarised exactly what has happened here (extrapolating the information supplied by the OP).

Sorry OP but you only have yourself to blame, the first and only red flag was the 'not received my jacket that I paid £50 for'.

The thing is it was not a random guy that I received the money from, it was literally someone that I had been friends with and had helped so much so I just thought that taking the £85 and sending it to him would be fine. But yeah I was naive an it's landed me in trouble, I, however don't think I should have got a CIFAS marker

Ok so now the plot thickens as previously you had explained that you had paid £50 to your 'friend' to purchase a jacket that you never received and then, you suspect, due to you disputing the fact that you never received the jacket from your 'friend' it meant he couldn't receive some money (initially £85 but then turned in to £80 later in the story) which is where you duly stepped in and said you'd receive it on his behalf and when he was all set up with another account would transfer it on.

So to clarify, you are now saying that the person paying you the £85/£80 you also knew and wasn't just a 'random guy'?

In order for people to assist you as best as possible you really do need to get facts correct, this thread is littered with irregularities in information provided by yourself.

I'm afraid to say, having dealt with complaints about CIFAS markers over the years, this is a common theme. Often, our fraud team would ask the customer to explain something on their account, and would receive an explanation that they felt was not plausable or contradicted the activity they could see on the account. The customer would complain about their account being closed, and would give the complaint investigator a different version of events.  The customer would then complain to FOS and put a different version of events on their FOS complaint form. When the FOS investigator asked them to explain something the facts would change again.

The best one I remember was someone who told the FOS investigator he didn't recognise the mobile number that the One Time Passcodes had been sent to, that his account must have been hacked, and someone must have changed the contact details. This left the FOS investigator perplexed, because the number the OTPs had been sent to was exactly the same number that the customer had put on his FOS complaint form, which the FOS investigator has dialed to speak to the customer about the OTPs...

MrFrugalFever

A guilty conscience breeds lies.

Whilst I sympathise with the OP that it is quite an extreme consequence of such a minor amount, the events that have taken place leading up to the CIFAS marker being placed seem to be anything but minor.

ian1246

OP, having read this thread i think you probably need to accept the CIFAS marker is justified and unlikely to be removed.

That now means effectively your locked out of 99% of the financial market for the next 6 years moving forward.

You need to start planning - how are you going to recieve wages moving forward? Do you want to rent a house / flat? You need to look into the potential impact a CIFAS marker will have on that (I'm not sure if the finance checks estate agent perform will flag it up? You'll need a bank account regardless). A mortgage is not an option either. Your also going to have no credible access to credit or finance- meaning no loan facilities for things like buying a car (or financing any repairs required etc...).

You really do need to sit down and identify all the potential area's this is going to effect you & how to mitigate it as best as possible, since it's no point waiting for the problem to crop up (I.e. car needing work and you not having funds to pay it, with no loan capability to cover the shortfall).

You also need to consider what job or career your in and if it will effect it i.e. a CIFAS marker will block you from doing certain jobs (police, justice system, banking sector etc....) 

This is going to have a very serious impact on your life.

Grumpy_chap

mintyjelly447 said:

I thought money mules from what I've seen and heard have £1000s of pounds put into their account. I was sent £85 with the reference referring to the jacket 'uniqlo'

Why would a High Street retail brand be selling via random individuals over non-corporate social media channels?

Quite possibly, had the £85 transaction processed without a hitch, the subsequent transactions would have been ever increasing amounts.  In that regard maybe you got off lightly.