Bank Fraud Help Needed

[happypig]

It's not fraud, it's a dispute. Goods and services not received to be precise

It's fraud if the person who claimed to be selling didn't have the tickets in the first place and/or had no intention of selling them. If they had paid for them, then sold them on before receiving them (some festivals send tickets/wristbands out quite late) but then not received them themselves for whatever reason, then it is a dispute and the seller is liable to refund.

 

[mistahclarke]

Hold on. There's enough evidence in the original post to demonstrate that something dodgy is going on. Money has been transferred to a given name and account and emails are bouncing. This is fraud, not a dispute about how goods and services are being supplied. A bit of support from the bank is needed, not a retreat into "terms and conditions" that are irrelevant to what has happened.

Nots saying it's right LB, just saying that's how it may be viewed. Dodgy companies have been doing this for years and getting away with it. I hope the OP gets his money back but it's up to his bank if they want to take a loss.

 

[mistahclarke]

It's fraud if the person who claimed to be selling didn't have the tickets in the first place and/or had no intention of selling them. If they had paid for them, then sold them on before receiving them (some festivals send tickets/wristbands out quite late) but then not received them themselves for whatever reason, then it is a dispute and the seller is liable to refund.

circumstantial - you can't prove that. Either they provide the tickets or they don't, if they had them in the first place is not provable.

 

[happypig]

circumstantial - you can't prove that. Either they provide the tickets or they don't, if they had them in the first place is not provable.

It's entirely provable. The "seller" will have had to pay for them. If they can't show that they bought(or won etc) them then they didn't have them to sell and therefore set out to defraud.

 

[mistahclarke]

It's entirely provable. The "seller" will have had to pay for them. If they can't show that they bought(or won etc) them then they didn't have them to sell and therefore set out to defraud.

They could argue they had suppliers lined up to purchase based on demand. It's irrelevant anyway, as the consumer and bank won't/can't investigate, and the Police won't consider it worthy. There was a company years ago called reading festival tickets registered out of Hungary. Every year they did it, and just set themselves up each year as a new company, and screwed people every year.

Anyway, this was facebook so could be a unique seller and individual trying to sell one ticket.

 

[Mowgli]

This is all I do all day long at Amex

 

[Westdene Wonder]

As a Debit card was used dont think much of their chances,if the bank payed up there will be thousands of others who would claim

 

[mrhairy]

Thank you for all your help. If she has spoken to her bank already and said she thought it was fraud could she still invoke a chargeback or is it to late now she has already called them? Thank you.

 

[mistahclarke]

Thank you for all your help. If she has spoken to her bank already and said she thought it was fraud could she still invoke a chargeback or is it to late now she has already called them? Thank you.

chargebacks can happen months after the charge appears on your bill or the event has passed.

Can you give more details on where it was purchased and what the event was?

You can call your bank as many times as you want, and they'll likely try and fob you off a few times.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

I would invoke it anyway - I can't see that you would loose out any further. If the bank refuse, then keep challenging them up to the ombudsman if necessary. You have already lost the cash (fraudulently or otherwise), and the chargeback system is merely a possible way of getting it back. It won't cost you any more.

 

[mrhairy]

Thank you. It was for the Secret Garden Festival in July. What I meant earlier was my daughter sent the money to them voluntarily although we now know it was a fraud account. Does chargeback mean it has to be taken from your account.

 

[mistahclarke]

a chargeback is a technical term. It means that the bank/credit card company credit your account and charge back the company for an infringement in their T+c's with the company.

In your case, you don't have to worry about that. You just need to state you want to claim under the sales of goods act that the company are not fulfilling their part of the contract and providing the goods - goods and services not received.

The problem may be that they may want to wait until the event has passed to ensure no tickets are provided, which isn't until July. They'll likely correctly state that often in these cases tickets are not produced until nearer the time.

I would advise your daughter looks elsewhere for tickets.

Can you share the name of the company? You can PM it to me?

As I said earlier, I worked in both the Disputes and Fraud part of Amex for 4 years, so I can have a quick look at the merchant.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

You can call your bank as many times as you want, and they'll likely try and fob you off a few times.

Why?

Surely it is in the interests of the bank to try to help a customer? Or am I naively expecting ethical banking from institutions other than the Co-op Bank?

 

[Vegas Seagull]

a chargeback is a technical term. It means that the bank/credit card company credit your account and charge back the company for an infringement in their T+c's with the company.

In your case, you don't have to worry about that. You just need to state you want to claim under the sales of goods act that the company are not fulfilling their part of the contract and providing the goods - goods and services not received.

The problem may be that they may want to wait until the event has passed to ensure no tickets are provided, which isn't until July. They'll likely correctly state that often in these cases tickets are not produced until nearer the time.

I would advise your daughter looks elsewhere for tickets.

Can you share the name of the company? You can PM it to me?

As I said earlier, I worked in both the Disputes and Fraud part of Amex for 4 years, so I can have a quick look at the merchant.

Chargebacks are applicable with legitimate companies, however this has yet to be established & is likely with instant bouncing of emails to be illegitimate not a 'standard' (t&c's etc) chargeback situation that you are quoting (authorised cards are not involved simply a direct online bank transfer it appears) & the 'merchant' your looking for may not be there when you look

 

[mistahclarke]

Why?

Surely it is in the interests of the bank to try to help a customer? Or am I naively expecting ethical banking from institutions other than the Co-op Bank?

Business priorities:
1) profit
2) goals including call service levels
3) share-holders
4) customers

In my experience banks and credit card companies will do the bare minimum as directed by the FSA. Often you have to point out their legal obligation to get past the "computer says no" reps who just try to get you off the phone by passing you around or fobbing you off.

 

[mistahclarke]

Got a PM, thread closed.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Business priorities:
1) profit
2) goals including call service levels
3) share-holders
4) customers

In my experience banks and credit card companies will do the bare minimum as directed by the FSA. Often you have to point out their legal obligation to get past the "computer says no" reps who just try to get you off the phone by passing you around or fobbing you off.

Banking with the Co-op Bank, I guess I'm not used to dealing with an organisation that distinguishes between the interests of customers and shareholders.

 

[Vegas Seagull]

Got a PM, thread closed.

Hardly, funds are not back in the account are they...why try to dominate a thread with misleading information again?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Business priorities:
1) profit
2) goals including call service levels
3) share-holders
4) customers

In my experience banks and credit card companies will do the bare minimum as directed by the FSA. Often you have to point out their legal obligation to get past the "computer says no" reps who just try to get you off the phone by passing you around or fobbing you off.

I bank with Barclays and have had no issues at all and they are always super helpful. A year ago I was the victim of indentity fraud and they were perfect, I cannot think of one area where they can improve upon. Ditto last week when I needed evidence that an invoice from 18 months ago has been fully paid up via a bank transfer. They put a trace on it and will provide full signed and stamped evidence for me this week. They also pro-actively monitor my various accounts and make suggestions on how to run them more efficiently.

 

[mistahclarke]

Hardly, funds are not back in the account are they...why try to dominate a thread with misleading information again?

sorry, let me explain, I got a message with the details and without sharing them I do not believe further help is needed. The debate about ethics of the Banking world continues, but I was only in it to help the OP.

Carry on if you want to with your unique expert opinion on UK Banking law, Section 75 of the credit card consumer act, and banking charge-back procedures, as I'd be interested to know what miss-information I was giving. I stated nothing but facts that I know from experience within the credit card industry, including high level knowledge of the CCA and fraud. I never wanted a debate, just to try and help in a situation where I felt I had inside information.