First Direct fraud block abroad, is this really a reasonable process?

Nebulous2

There has been a lot of useful advice already but just to add.

Part of this is the fraud protection responsibility moving to the banks. They will block more transactions knowing customers can be refunded and the bank will be the one to pay.

Cards can be blocked for multiple reasons. If they suspect you of laundering they are not allowed to tell you. An automatic process to tell you your card is blocked would put them at risk of 'tipping off' I can understand the bank wanting a human to look at it before notifying you.

Finally as someone who has played the bank switching game, I not only have a back-up, I have multiple back-ups. I've had at least 3 fee-free foreign exchange cards with me on foreign holidays for years, and at least another two I can use but will be charged fees for. Once I get abroad a priority is finding an ATM and withdrawing cash, so I have that as well.

Tommaso46

Does this "fraud protection" procedure apply only to cards when you use them outside the UK?

Nebulous2

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82102655#Comment_82102655

Not at all. We get upset people on here all the time saying their card / accounts have been blocked both at home and abroad. It is a computer says no scenario.

The results can be worse abroad though. Different time zones, international calls, need to spend more than usual, limited access to support networks, etc can all make it more fraught to deal with if abroad.

Maegi

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82101723#Comment_82101723

That's factually incorrect - first direct is a division of HSBC UK Bank plc (i.e. it's just a brand name) whilst Halifax is a division of Bank of Scotland plc not Lloyds Bank plc.

First Direct has a veneer of their own systems/identity but the underlying systems and processes are HSBC.

Tragen

I'm considering taking it to the Financial Ombudsman Service, not because I dispute their right to block a suspicious transaction, but because of what happened afterwards.

What do people think? Is this a reasonable process for a bank? Would you consider £50 reasonable in these circumstances, and would you take it to FOS?

I think you should perhaps suggest an amount that you would be happy with. What is that amount?

If they dont agree and you decline their offer, I'd be interested to know -

if you travel abroad again, will you still rely on one single card? would you do things differently? Do you believe a different bank might have a better solution?

My own experience is that no, no other bank is problem free and as someone that has been mostly abroad using cards for the last 10 years, that your expererience is normal and expected. Their fraud systems often seem frustrating - especially when they claim your own transactions are fraudulent and yet somehow, actual real fraudulent transactions slip through their fingers and I have to notice them myself.

born_again

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82099674#Comment_82099674

Yet would be up in arms if they had card stolen or lost it that no checks were made.

born_again

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82102629#Comment_82102629

Part of this is the fraud protection responsibility moving to the banks. They will block more transactions knowing customers can be refunded and the bank will be the one to pay.

Banks are only allowed to block a certain % of genuine transaction (single figure). To high % & FSA is on their back with fines.

eskbanker

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82102629#Comment_82102629

Which change in fraud protection responsibility affects card payments?

Nebulous2

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82104573#Comment_82104573

I'm not sure what you mean?

The thread was about banks blocking cards / payments abroad - when they regarded it as a suspicious transaction.

I was thinking of the payment services regulations putting more liability on the banks.

People who have been defrauded, their families, MPs and personal finance figures such as Martin Lewis have campaigned, with some success, for people to be reimbursed. That has been at the expense of the banks - so I'm not surprised that they are becoming more cautious.

Although I'm sure you have a much better grasp of this than I have - so you now have me doubting myself!

eskbanker

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82104590#Comment_82104590

The only significant change that I'm aware of in recent times is the introduction of authorised push payment (APP) scam reimbursement, which did indeed increase banks' liabilities to refund qualifying transactions, but this only applies to bank transfers, so my point was that their responsibility for card payments (e.g. reimbursing when cards are lost or stolen) remains the same as it's always been?