Barclays Wins Court Case Over Fraud Payment

Barclays Wins Court Case Over Fraud Payment

Author
Discussion

Al Gorithum

Original Poster:

4,207 posts

215 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
As per Reuters, seems to be a game-changer?

https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/barclays-...

bitchstewie

55,283 posts

217 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
A quick Google turned up this.

Barclays not liable for couple defrauded of £700,000

The banks really are in a no-win sometimes.

Rufus Stone

8,299 posts

63 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
Never understood why the banks should be responsible for stupid people anyway.

M1AGM

2,815 posts

39 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
Rufus Stone said:
Never understood why the banks should be responsible for stupid people anyway.
Completely agree.

Good news.

Kwackersaki

1,452 posts

235 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
Rufus Stone said:
Never understood why the banks should be responsible for stupid people anyway.
Me neither, some of the sob stories you read about are laughable.

Even when the banks have advised customers not to proceed and they’ve done so anyway, afterwards they’ve had the neck to try and blame the bank?

JagLover

43,834 posts

242 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
M1AGM said:
Rufus Stone said:
Never understood why the banks should be responsible for stupid people anyway.
Completely agree.

Good news.
Well clearly each case has to be assessed on its own merits but often you can't see why the bank is supposed to be responsible when it is the customer at fault.

Ian Geary

4,740 posts

199 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
There's a line to be drawn I suppose.

I work for a council and it is impressed upon is that we have a safeguarding duty to looked after children, no matter our role.

Whilst a bank can't cure "stupid", should they allow a customer to carry out a course of action that is plainly stupid?

Having the conman listen into a conversation between a bank and its clients is a red flag surely.

But on balance I agree that if a bank customer knowingly breaches their contract with the bank after being advised of the risks: yes, it's on them.

pquinn

7,167 posts

53 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
Not sure what else banks are supposed to do, they already do plenty to stop transactions going through & it should be idiot proof yet you can apparently always manage to find a better idiot.

If someone really wants to throw their money away you can't stop them, most of these frauds aren't new or clever but they obviously still work.

Sounds like a lucrative game to get into, a bit like lots of the stuff that appeared on Watchdog used to look like handy hints for gettings piles of cash by milking stupid people.

a311

6,049 posts

184 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
I was moving some money about recently and needed some bash too. Talking 10s of thousands not hundreds like this example.

It was a pain in the backside, a couple of them got stopped and had to phone up to confirm it was me. Getting cash out was also in comparison to say 5 years ago much more stringent, lots of question on what the money was for.

A shame for these people, but this day and age you'd expect people to know better. I guess the fraudsters can be convincing but would expect either to hang up or call someone at head office to check it out.

M1AGM

2,815 posts

39 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
a311 said:
I was moving some money about recently and needed some bash too. Talking 10s of thousands not hundreds like this example.

It was a pain in the backside, a couple of them got stopped and had to phone up to confirm it was me. Getting cash out was also in comparison to say 5 years ago much more stringent, lots of question on what the money was for.

A shame for these people, but this day and age you'd expect people to know better. I guess the fraudsters can be convincing but would expect either to hang up or call someone at head office to check it out.
I withdrew £20k cash last summer from Barclays. It was for a builder (of sorts but that’s a different story).

I was asked by the surly late middle aged female cashier what I wanted the money for. I was not keen to answer the question but was told by her that it was part of their fraud check process. I said I wanted the money for coke and hookers but don’t tell my wife. She was unimpressed.

a311

6,049 posts

184 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
M1AGM said:
a311 said:
I was moving some money about recently and needed some bash too. Talking 10s of thousands not hundreds like this example.

It was a pain in the backside, a couple of them got stopped and had to phone up to confirm it was me. Getting cash out was also in comparison to say 5 years ago much more stringent, lots of question on what the money was for.

A shame for these people, but this day and age you'd expect people to know better. I guess the fraudsters can be convincing but would expect either to hang up or call someone at head office to check it out.
I withdrew £20k cash last summer from Barclays. It was for a builder (of sorts but that’s a different story).

I was asked by the surly late middle aged female cashier what I wanted the money for. I was not keen to answer the question but was told by her that it was part of their fraud check process. I said I wanted the money for coke and hookers but don’t tell my wife. She was unimpressed.
biglaugh

I lied.

Greshamst

2,207 posts

127 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
a311 said:
I was moving some money about recently and needed some bash too. Talking 10s of thousands not hundreds like this example.

It was a pain in the backside, a couple of them got stopped and had to phone up to confirm it was me. Getting cash out was also in comparison to say 5 years ago much more stringent, lots of question on what the money was for.

A shame for these people, but this day and age you'd expect people to know better. I guess the fraudsters can be convincing but would expect either to hang up or call someone at head office to check it out.
And this is where people complain whatever the banks do.

If the bank asks too many questions and puts hurdles in the way of withdrawing they get slated.

But if they let people make payments and it ends up being a scam, they get told they should have done more to stop the payment.

wombleh

1,920 posts

129 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
"Where the customer has authorised and instructed the bank to make a payment, the bank must carry out the instruction promptly," he said. "It is not for the bank to concern itself with the wisdom or risks of its customer's payment decisions."

Would seem contrary to their obligations under the AML regulations.

Sounds like transfers were done in bank, so the staff must have asked what the transfer was for. Be interesting to know what the customer said, presumably not “I’m sending it to the FCA”, but some line fed to them by the scammer that the bank accepted as valid.

Interesting, scammers knew they had the money and knew how to bypass their banks AML checks.

Rivenink

3,936 posts

113 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
I highly recommend Jim Browning on youtube.

Many videos that show how the call center scammers work. How they target older people, and the tactics they use to exploit any vulnerability.

Generally, people who do not have sympathy for those who are scammed are simply deluding themselves into a false sense of security that they would never be so stupid.

That said, there is only so far a bank can go to protect a person. At what point would you be comfortable with the bank telling you what you can or cannot do with your own money.

grumbledoak

31,858 posts

240 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
It took 3 visits by the police to persuade this couple to stop transferring more money!

I don't see what more the banks could do without preventing massive numbers of legitimate transactions.

pquinn

7,167 posts

53 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
M1AGM said:
I withdrew £20k cash last summer from Barclays. It was for a builder (of sorts but that’s a different story).

I was asked by the surly late middle aged female cashier what I wanted the money for. I was not keen to answer the question but was told by her that it was part of their fraud check process. I said I wanted the money for coke and hookers but don’t tell my wife. She was unimpressed.
Of course drawing out a fat wedge of cash to pay a 'builder' is often the pattern of people getting taken advantage of by someone dodgy, usually a bit of crappy work by someone with wheels on their house.

People get upset by the checks, but they get even more upset when they start shouting 'why didn't they stop me' after handing over all their money to a scammer.

Gareth79

8,048 posts

253 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
wombleh said:
Interesting, scammers knew they had the money and knew how to bypass their banks AML checks.
The scammers may not have known, although possibly they were on a hitlist of people likely to have money. They may well have just told them outright in the initial phone call, which triggered the scammer to put maximum resources in.

Here's the text of the judgment

http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2023/25.html

Here's the High Court appeal:

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2022/318.h...

Here's the original High Court judgment which has the most detail of the case:

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2021/10.h...

edit: I think he was a victim of the scam where the fraudster was able to keep a line open, and intercept the customer calling their bank, and fake the customer service line. The "bank" customer service then passed them onto the scammer who introduced themselves as a fraud investigator. At the time this was a simple scam technically, but very powerful way of instantly gaining a lot of trust.



Edited by Gareth79 on Wednesday 12th July 21:40

Mojooo

13,027 posts

187 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
The Judgement states on page 7 or so that there is a new 2023 law that will change the picture anyway so this is 'old law'.


Gareth79

8,048 posts

253 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
Mojooo said:
The Judgement states on page 7 or so that there is a new 2023 law that will change the picture anyway so this is 'old law'.
Only for Faster Payments.

Terminator X

16,373 posts

211 months

Wednesday 12th July 2023
quotequote all
Al Gorithum said:
As per Reuters, seems to be a game-changer?

https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/barclays-...
Surprised that anyone would think it should be the banks that pay.

TX.