- Thread starter
- #81
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Help] New bank fraud - advice sought
- Thread starter Harry Wilson's tackle
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #82
The bank claim that although the transactions say 'pending' on my son's online account, the transactions have 'gone through'.
Super Steve Earle
Well-known member
I believe 'pending' means the payment has been authorised and the funds allocated to meet it.
Stumpy Tim
Well-known member
Given HWT has confirmed this was the case, it's a very clever way of doing it because the fraudster on the phone says "We will send you a text" and immediately the actual bank DOES send a text.
As I say, I had similar recently in terms of my card details used to try to make transactions, but the bank's anti-fraud systems intervened. I wonder what I'd have done had I received a call "from the bank" and then the anti-fraud text arrived whilst I was speaking to them.
You've got to wonder where the bad guys got card details, including CCV, and mobile number from.
- May 8, 2018
- 10,612
Quite often no chain retail / takeaways and petrol garages, they use pin hole cameras or make an excuse to take the card (machine isn’t working)
I don’t think the old Lebanese loop is that popular these days with a reduction in cash machine transactions
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Indeed - but to also have the (correct and matching) mobile number...
Sirnormangall
Well-known member
- Sep 21, 2017
- 3,178
Yep, hold your nerve and go to the Financial Ombudsman if you need to.
My wife is paranoid about bank fraud and brings my attention to every mention of these. Always I have said that situation wouldnt catch me out. This one on HWT is very clever and do have sympathy However still dont think I would have fallen for it. After receiving call from bank ( bad guys ) I would definitely have said I would ring them back. Banks fraud departments are always easy to contact You always have to be 100% certain you are talking to bank
Hasnt happened for some time but remember once when I had unusual expense bank text me saying had concerns and gave me fraud no to ring. I checked on line this was correct and dealt with in minutes
As I said great sympathy but lesson learned.
- Thread starter
- #90
Me too, mate. But I'm a cynical old bugger who picks holes in everything. My lad is not like that.
Cheshire Cat
The most curious thing..
Have you tried ringing a bank recently? Nobody there, on hold for 45 minutes, automated messages saying how they value my call but can't answer it due to covid, shit music, passed around when someone eventually answers so another 30 minutes hold, automatically disconnected. Nightmare....
-the admin involved in dealing with SARs and complaints is horrendous
-the FCA continually ping the banks (formally and informally) for poor complaint handling processes so the banks are desperate to avoid them, particularly those that escalate
-if a complaint eventually goes to the Ombudsman the costs and time, plus the added reputational damage are even worse, so the bank will avoid this if at all possible
Super Steve Earle
Well-known member
Not all banks are the same. Mrs Earle had to phone her bank last week due to a concern over her card details and a payment by debit card to a charity. They answered promptly and could not have been more reassuring and helpful. New card on the way and explained how to block a card online if need be. The banks aren't always the bad guys.
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 18,194
Advice to contact the ombudsman is good advice. They will let you know where you stand and even advocate on your/his behalf.
Sent from my Redmi Note 7 using Tapatalk
They won’t usually get involved until the bank’s own complaint procedure has been exhausted.......
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 18,194
Really? I'm in Australia and contacting them gets you immediate access to the institution's elevated customer service area.
As soon as I start to feel frustrated with with. 'computer says no' or other nonsense I'm straight on to the ombudsman.
Got them on speed dial [emoji23]
Sent from my Redmi Note 7 using Tapatalk
As many have said, this is a pretty smart scam. Given the ingenuity applied, it’s quite understandable that your son was taken in by it. With the perseverance encouraged by others, I am certain the bank will have to back down. And beware of a ‘gesture’! Once someone sensible in the bank looks at this they will know they are on a loser. They might offer going 50:50 and your son may be tempted. The only right solution here is full refund.
My brother-in-law was scammed out of a few thousand quid using the more traditional “make your funds safe by transferring into this safe account” fraud. In hindsight, he was rather foolish, but he did what many of us would do – panic. His bank’s response was basically, “you made the transfer so it was your fault”. But the original call arrived on his mobile showing the bank’s caller ID. So that made it quite easy for me to get him his money back. I just took the line that there must have been a security breach on the bank’s system that allowed the crooks to gain access to it and make calls through it. I knew that was nonsense, but it prompted them to making "an exception" with a full refund.
I think the line your son should take with the bank is that it was the bank’s security systems and their processes which were used in this fraud. It is their responsibility to ensure their systems are robust and that customers have all the necessary information to protect themselves. In practice banks are delegating the financial losses of their negligence onto their customers. There are no warnings about a scam like this on Lloyds website, so how would your son be aware of it? Indeed, the fact that, over 24 hours after this fraud, they haven’t updated their website accordingly proves that they don’t take such matters seriously. Why should they, given they insist the customer has to take the hit? The information and advice on Lloyds’ website is woefully inadequate and out of date. Someone on here earlier said that Lloyds regularly tell their customers “We will never call you about your account”. I have a Lloyds account and have never been told that, nor have I seen it on their website. They do say they will never ask you to transfer money, etc.
Lloyds refund policy states that they “will not give a refund if you do something dishonest or careless that helps a fraud take place”. I think the word dishonest here is important, as they have suffered a lot from customers being involved in frauds. I would imagine that, these days, their first response is always to fob the customer off, just to test the response. Unless your son has posted his bank details on Facebook or similar, his actions can hardly be described as careless. It is not for your son to prove he has kept his bank account details secure, it is up to the bank to prove that he didn’t. Someone in the bank could have provided the crook with details of his account, let them prove that didn’t happen. Naturally your son’s bank account number will be with other organisations, any of those could have leaked the information. Your son only gave those organisations his account number because he had to as part of the bank’s payment systems.
As I see it, the fundamental issue here is the same as it was with my brother-in-law (albeit for slightly different reasons) – your son thought he was talking to his bank and it was the bank’s established systems and procedures that enabled the fraud to take place.
My brother-in-law was scammed out of a few thousand quid using the more traditional “make your funds safe by transferring into this safe account” fraud. In hindsight, he was rather foolish, but he did what many of us would do – panic. His bank’s response was basically, “you made the transfer so it was your fault”. But the original call arrived on his mobile showing the bank’s caller ID. So that made it quite easy for me to get him his money back. I just took the line that there must have been a security breach on the bank’s system that allowed the crooks to gain access to it and make calls through it. I knew that was nonsense, but it prompted them to making "an exception" with a full refund.
I think the line your son should take with the bank is that it was the bank’s security systems and their processes which were used in this fraud. It is their responsibility to ensure their systems are robust and that customers have all the necessary information to protect themselves. In practice banks are delegating the financial losses of their negligence onto their customers. There are no warnings about a scam like this on Lloyds website, so how would your son be aware of it? Indeed, the fact that, over 24 hours after this fraud, they haven’t updated their website accordingly proves that they don’t take such matters seriously. Why should they, given they insist the customer has to take the hit? The information and advice on Lloyds’ website is woefully inadequate and out of date. Someone on here earlier said that Lloyds regularly tell their customers “We will never call you about your account”. I have a Lloyds account and have never been told that, nor have I seen it on their website. They do say they will never ask you to transfer money, etc.
Lloyds refund policy states that they “will not give a refund if you do something dishonest or careless that helps a fraud take place”. I think the word dishonest here is important, as they have suffered a lot from customers being involved in frauds. I would imagine that, these days, their first response is always to fob the customer off, just to test the response. Unless your son has posted his bank details on Facebook or similar, his actions can hardly be described as careless. It is not for your son to prove he has kept his bank account details secure, it is up to the bank to prove that he didn’t. Someone in the bank could have provided the crook with details of his account, let them prove that didn’t happen. Naturally your son’s bank account number will be with other organisations, any of those could have leaked the information. Your son only gave those organisations his account number because he had to as part of the bank’s payment systems.
As I see it, the fundamental issue here is the same as it was with my brother-in-law (albeit for slightly different reasons) – your son thought he was talking to his bank and it was the bank’s established systems and procedures that enabled the fraud to take place.
AlastairWatts
Active member
You say that your son has no idea how they got his card details and phone number. He ain't gonna admit it to you, but most young men I know spend their time sening edach other video clips taken from most anywhere. There might be a clue there, as they are usually sent onto a mobile 'phone .
I use a prepaid debit card for online personal transactions, and simply transfer the money into it for the exact amount required. Anyone is welcome to clone that.
Having said that, I had a call from BT about an old account for BT Sport TV for the pub I run. It wasn't until near the end of the call, when I'd paid with my business debit card that I discovered that BT do a lot their accounting in Mumbai, India, and that's where the call had come from. So now some Indian person has my card details, although to be fair the charge went through the bank in the usual way the same day. But 'customer not present' may mean something else on the sub-continent. I've stopped the card and asked for a fresh one.
I use a prepaid debit card for online personal transactions, and simply transfer the money into it for the exact amount required. Anyone is welcome to clone that.
Having said that, I had a call from BT about an old account for BT Sport TV for the pub I run. It wasn't until near the end of the call, when I'd paid with my business debit card that I discovered that BT do a lot their accounting in Mumbai, India, and that's where the call had come from. So now some Indian person has my card details, although to be fair the charge went through the bank in the usual way the same day. But 'customer not present' may mean something else on the sub-continent. I've stopped the card and asked for a fresh one.
UK FS Ombudsman expects you to give the institution the chance to deal with the problem.......of course if they don’t, or they ignore you, or don’t get back quickly enough then you can go to the Ombudsman. The bank have 8 weeks from receipt of your initial compliant to deliver their final answer.
Threatening to involve the Ombudsman does sometimes speed the process up of course [emoji6]
- May 8, 2018
- 10,612
Correct, full and final complaint response from firm is needed before FOS get involved
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk