Advice needed - Barclays took money from my accounts and froze them
plewis00
Posts: 19 Forumite
Hi all, I am in a difficult position and before I take legal action (or try to) wanted some advice from people here, any is welcome and I'll answer any questions where I haven't been clear.
Back in January 2018, someone contacted my business to buy some products, as people frequently do - we are limited and VAT registered company. They stated a few products totalling approximately £1500 and offered to pay by bank transfer, everything checked out fine, the payment was made, checked and confirmed with Barclays and products sent and received.
A couple of weeks later, I couldn't access the company or my personal accounts. I thought it was something else so went into my local branch and they wouldn't tell me anything, obviously I was pretty distraught as it hampered trading and had a negative impact as I couldn't believe this is normal protocol.
After some Googling (which led me here) and digging around it seemed as though it was likely linked to Money Laundering Act 2002, when I challenged Barclays with this they conceeded it 'probably was but I'd have to be patient'.
I regained access to my accounts (personal and business) but they took the £1500 - initially I thought they were going to fight on my behalf with the sending bank as it should have been picked up by them, but no, they said it's my fault (even though I checked the payment had cleared with them and sent the products in good faith).
Long arguments ensued with Barclays largely rude and unhelpful including some fresh customer service staff who had literally just left university. I decided to follow protocol and not take them to the Small Claims Court immediately but referred it to Ombudsman. It took the Ombudsman a staggering 13 months to decide that this is normal if they suspect something (which seems very vague as an excuse for nearly ruining someone's livelihood) and they said (to their own surprise) 'there is little to safeguard personal or small business accounts against this', which makes me realise that BACS is not safe at all, in fact cash or PayPal is safer because cash is final and PayPal will actually fight your corner, whereas big banks will bully and wash their hands of you - and dare I say it, I think the Ombudsman knows this too.
So my concern is this - what do I do? I think Barclays handled it poorly and are complicit for accepting the funds into my account and should cover me as a gesture of goodwill, or at least provide information on the sending bank who should be the liable party because obviously their safely countermeasures failed.
Thanks in advance.
Back in January 2018, someone contacted my business to buy some products, as people frequently do - we are limited and VAT registered company. They stated a few products totalling approximately £1500 and offered to pay by bank transfer, everything checked out fine, the payment was made, checked and confirmed with Barclays and products sent and received.
A couple of weeks later, I couldn't access the company or my personal accounts. I thought it was something else so went into my local branch and they wouldn't tell me anything, obviously I was pretty distraught as it hampered trading and had a negative impact as I couldn't believe this is normal protocol.
After some Googling (which led me here) and digging around it seemed as though it was likely linked to Money Laundering Act 2002, when I challenged Barclays with this they conceeded it 'probably was but I'd have to be patient'.
I regained access to my accounts (personal and business) but they took the £1500 - initially I thought they were going to fight on my behalf with the sending bank as it should have been picked up by them, but no, they said it's my fault (even though I checked the payment had cleared with them and sent the products in good faith).
Long arguments ensued with Barclays largely rude and unhelpful including some fresh customer service staff who had literally just left university. I decided to follow protocol and not take them to the Small Claims Court immediately but referred it to Ombudsman. It took the Ombudsman a staggering 13 months to decide that this is normal if they suspect something (which seems very vague as an excuse for nearly ruining someone's livelihood) and they said (to their own surprise) 'there is little to safeguard personal or small business accounts against this', which makes me realise that BACS is not safe at all, in fact cash or PayPal is safer because cash is final and PayPal will actually fight your corner, whereas big banks will bully and wash their hands of you - and dare I say it, I think the Ombudsman knows this too.
So my concern is this - what do I do? I think Barclays handled it poorly and are complicit for accepting the funds into my account and should cover me as a gesture of goodwill, or at least provide information on the sending bank who should be the liable party because obviously their safely countermeasures failed.
Thanks in advance.
0
Comments
-
It seems to be word against word, and the "buyer's" word appears to have been more convincing than yours. You'd probably have to sue the buyer if you wanted any hope of seeing your money again. IANL, mind.0
-
It seems to be word against word, and the "buyer's" word appears to have been more convincing than yours. You'd probably have to sue the buyer if you wanted any hope of seeing your money again. IANL, mind.
The 'buyer's payment' came from a 'compromised account' according to Barclays. I have never seen a reversed BACS payment, the majority of people will tell you it's one-way and you can't take it back. As the banks are a third-party that facilitated the transfer, I am working off the assumption that they have joint liability, even though I don't know who the sending bank is.0 -
Have you reported this to the police? You at least know the address the goods were delivered, but it may be a long shot after 13 months.0
-
londoninvestor wrote: »Have you reported this to the police? You at least know the address the goods were delivered, but it may be a long shot after 13 months.
Yes, but the local police constabulary said it's technically a civil dispute between me and Barclays not a criminal one, so it got referred to Action Fraud instead (who didn't do anything, though I did file reports) and I recorded all the items as stolen on Immobilise too. Any ideas?0 -
Yes, but the local police constabulary said it's technically a civil dispute between me and Barclays not a criminal one, so it got referred to Action Fraud instead (who didn't do anything, though I did file reports) and I recorded all the items as stolen on Immobilise too. Any ideas?
The police are right inasfar as the dispute between you and Barclays is a civil matter. But the "buyer" I'd think has committed criminal fraud with you as the victim.
As a loose analogy, suppose the buyer had paid in physical cash, you took it to the bank to pay in and they rejected it because it was counterfeit. The buyer clearly has a criminal case to answer there.
You could stress that again to the police, and largely leave your beef with the banks out of it, though I have to say I wouldn't be that optimistic the police will spend time on it.0 -
You are looking at it wrong - your conflict is not with Barclays, who have followed some rules around fraud. I don't think you will get anywhere pursuing this angle.Yes, but the local police constabulary said it's technically a civil dispute between me and Barclays not a criminal one, so it got referred to Action Fraud instead (who didn't do anything, though I did file reports) and I recorded all the items as stolen on Immobilise too. Any ideas?
Your conflict is with the buyer, who effectively has not paid you for the goods provided. You should chase him for the money, although by the sound of it he was a crim who compromised someone else's account and paid you from it, when the account holder realised he must have alerted his bank who in turn alerted Barclays, who refunded the compromised account. I wouldn't hold much hope of reclaiming the funds from such a person.0 -
I am pushing Barclays because of their handling of it and lack of protection - which I find kind of shocking really. I would expect both end parties (legit account holder and myself/business) who transacted in good faith to be offered protection as I would believe it’s between Barclays and whichever bank sent the money by allowing an account they control to be compromised and not picked up on for weeks.
As to the person who said, if they paid with cash, you can check for this at the time - you can’t verify the bank account is genuine without asking some rather intrusive questions or demanding proof of some sort.
I need to work out the best approach, as I don’t think we should take the loss on the chin like that and Barclays aren’t revealing anything further so I can’t approach the bank who sent it.0 -
I think Barclays handled it poorly and are complicit for accepting the funds into my account and should cover me as a gesture of goodwill, or at least provide information on the sending bank who should be the liable party because obviously their safely countermeasures failed.The 'buyer's payment' came from a 'compromised account' according to Barclays. I have never seen a reversed BACS payment, the majority of people will tell you it's one-way and you can't take it back. As the banks are a third-party that facilitated the transfer, I am working off the assumption that they have joint liability, even though I don't know who the sending bank is.
While this is obviously frustrating, I can't see that Barclays are guilty of anything other than perhaps some grumpy customer service.I am pushing Barclays because of their handling of it and lack of protection - which I find kind of shocking really. I would expect both end parties (legit account holder and myself/business) who transacted in good faith to be offered protection as I would believe it’s between Barclays and whichever bank sent the money by allowing an account they control to be compromised and not picked up on for weeks.
If the majority of people see bank transfers as one-way and irrevocable, then frankly they're wrong - if the sending bank has reason to believe that the transaction was fraudulent then they can, and do, liaise with the receiving bank to get the money back.
You may feel that the 'compromised account' signifies a fault by the sending bank but as far as I can see don't actually have any evidence for this. However, even if this was the case, that doesn't mean that Barclays have any responsibility to compensate you - their receipt (and subsequent return) of the payment doesn't in any way make them 'complicit'.
I do understand why you're miffed (we all would be) but if you're expecting protection from Barclays then you should make a case based on relevant laws, regulations and evidence, rather than simply expecting them to reimburse you out of sympathy when they haven't done anything wrong. Obviously you'd need to construct something that would hold water if taking this to court anyway, and courts are inevitably more interested in facts than unsupported grievances - the fact that you didn't get a successful result at FOS would also count against you, as they already consider woollier matters of 'fairness' and so on, as well as the letter of the law.
As above, it would seem more constructive to pursue the buyer for non-payment, rather than trying to pin it on one or other of the banks who simply did what they were supposed to both during and after the dodgy transaction....0 -
While this is obviously frustrating, I can't see that Barclays are guilty of anything other than perhaps some grumpy customer service.
If the majority of people see bank transfers as one-way and irrevocable, then frankly they're wrong - if the sending bank has reason to believe that the transaction was fraudulent then they can, and do, liaise with the receiving bank to get the money back.
You may feel that the 'compromised account' signifies a fault by the sending bank but as far as I can see don't actually have any evidence for this. However, even if this was the case, that doesn't mean that Barclays have any responsibility to compensate you - their receipt (and subsequent return) of the payment doesn't in any way make them 'complicit'.
I do understand why you're miffed (we all would be) but if you're expecting protection from Barclays then you should make a case based on relevant laws, regulations and evidence, rather than simply expecting them to reimburse you out of sympathy when they haven't done anything wrong. Obviously you'd need to construct something that would hold water if taking this to court anyway, and courts are inevitably more interested in facts than unsupported grievances - the fact that you didn't get a successful result at FOS would also count against you, as they already consider woollier matters of 'fairness' and so on, as well as the letter of the law.
As above, it would seem more constructive to pursue the buyer for non-payment, rather than trying to pin it on one or other of the banks who simply did what they were supposed to both during and after the dodgy transaction....
The end points are me/us and the buyer, but there is a breakdown in the middle and this is an obvious loophole that people can exploit.
What you say about bank transfer is true but actually then, it's a flawed method and the banks telling you it is one-way and irreversible (which they do) is totally false. Cash or a payment processor (e.g. PayPal) would have been the best option.
I'm not expecting Barclays to compensate me and accept blame - I'm expecting them to do all they can to get a fair resolution and by helping rather than impeding me and if that includes a gesture of goodwill along the way, then let's face it - they can afford to. Had this been PayPal they would fight my side, Barclays get away with doing nothing and allowing this to happen by the looks of it.
The buyer is a criminal - there is no recourse there, especially not now as Barclays and the Ombudsman have let that drag on for 18+ months.
The bit I cannot comprehend is when you hear that someone's account has been compromised and hacked, they usually get the money back (you know, in the papers or on Watchdog) - but you don't hear about the companies and businesses who were paid having the funds seized back having provided products or services in good faith, so how is this different? Or is it not different, just that we never hear about it?0 -
The end points are me/us and the buyer, but there is a breakdown in the middle and this is an obvious loophole that people can exploit.
What you say about bank transfer is true but actually then, it's a flawed method and the banks telling you it is one-way and irreversible (which they do) is totally false. Cash or a payment processor (e.g. PayPal) would have been the best option.
I'm not expecting Barclays to compensate me and accept blame - I'm expecting them to do all they can to get a fair resolution and by helping rather than impeding me and if that includes a gesture of goodwill along the way, then let's face it - they can afford to. Had this been PayPal they would fight my side, Barclays get away with doing nothing and allowing this to happen by the looks of it.
The buyer is a criminal - there is no recourse there, especially not now as Barclays and the Ombudsman have let that drag on for 18+ months.
The bit I cannot comprehend is when you hear that someone's account has been compromised and hacked, they usually get the money back (you know, in the papers or on Watchdog) - but you don't hear about the companies and businesses who were paid having the funds seized back having provided products or services in good faith, so how is this different? Or is it not different, just that we never hear about it?
I've never heard of a bank transfer being reversed outside of administrative error or very obvious fraud. And I don't mean "someone scammed me" as eskbanker suggests, but someone getting access to an account and transferring money out.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 607.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards