Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
    • Unless I've got an incorrect copy of the relevant regulation: The PCN is only deemed to have arrived two days after dispatch "unless the contrary is proved" in which case date of delivery does matter (not just date of posting) and I would like clarification of the required standard of proof. It seems perhaps this hasn't been tested. Since post is now barcoded for the Post Office's own tracking purposes perhaps there is some way I can get that evidence from the Post Office...
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Hsbc allowing a significant unauthorized overdraft


gem77
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2294 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

Hoping someone might know where I stand on this but I have a feeling I won't have a leg to stand on.

 

Here goes my situation,

 

Discovered today my account was over its overdraft by £471.

In a complete panic I rushed to the bank to get a statement

only to discover over 100 transactions from Amazon in the last 2 days.

 

Turned out my 13 year old son had used my card and proceeded to use it for in app purchases. :mad2:

 

I have phoned hsbc to see how I stand on this

they state that unless I get the police involved there is nothing they can do

(which obviously I don't want to do as he has never done anything like this before and I really don't think he realised how much he had spent)

 

that is fair enough

I asked how they allowed my account to go so far over my overdraft,

which is £1000,

and continue to allow more and more transactions to go out.

The reply I got you have to involve the police if you want it sorted.

 

What annoys me most is that a few months ago I tried to make a transaction which would have taken me over my overdraft by about £15 (unwittingly) but was declined

 

how or why on earth did they allow it to reach that limit and sting me with charges which they refuse to withdraw.

 

I have a pretty poor credit rating so it would be considered irresponsible lending surely.

 

Any ideas where to turn next ?

 

TIA

Gem77

 

P.s. Yes my son has had a very stern talking to and being punished accordingly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

in app purchases on what and who is the amazon device and its account registered under ..you?

could be your fault as much as his

 

no I cant see a way out.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi dx,

 

App was Roblox, his device and his account.

His internet privileges have now been revoked.

 

I accept I am partially to blame and know that money is now lost its just the fact that hsbc allowed my account to go nearly £500 over its overdraft. Allowing purchase after purchase. ( each transaction was for £6.03) and they will now charge me unauthorized overdraft fees for continuing to make purchases when in an unauthorized overdraft.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what is very interesting here and which maybe gives you some leverage is the fact that they refused to allow you and an authorised overdraft for £15 and it later on have allowed a substantial number of payments to go out.

 

This makes it rather interesting because it suggests very strongly that they have protected your authorised overdraft and I think that there might be an argument to say that you relied on this and that by being inconsistent in their approach, they have treated you unfairly and they have not considered your interests when arriving at their decision.

 

When they refused to allow you to have the £15 overdraft, did they charge you a penalty?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi bankfodder,

 

No they didn't. It was for an online purchase and just said declined please use another method of payment. Nothing ever showed on my bank statements.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that's a shame because it means that it is more deniable by them.

 

Of course, it's up to you as to the amount of effort and trouble you want to make about this. I think that I would implement our customer services guide and then call them and ask them about the incident on such and such a date when they declined a payment and asked them why. They will have a record of this and they will tell you why it was declined. If they confirm on your telephone recording that they declined it because there were insufficient funds then I think that this is enough to make a very good complaint.

 

My approach is quite aggressive about this kind of thing and so my suggestion would be to threaten and to begin an action for unfair treatment under BCOBS. If you are able to produce evidence that they had declined an earlier transaction and then gone ahead to authorise several others – to your detriment then I think you would have a very high chance of winning – and I expect that they would probably put their hands up rather than face you in court.

 

There have been very few cases brought in respect of statutory breaches under BCOBS – but where they have been brought, the results have been spectacular and the banks seem to be extremely anxious to avoid a BCOBS judgement.

 

Of course, you may decide that it's not worth it – but if you fancy sorting it out and you fancy making a bit of trouble and having a bit of sport then that's what I would suggest. In any event I would begin by installing a call recorder and then having the conversation about the declined payment and seeing what they said about it.

 

If they confirmed it on a recording I would then follow up with an SAR. That would be really funny if you had them on a call recording telling you that they had declined the payment for insufficient funds and yet an SAR failed to disclose any reference to this. This would be a highly possible scenario and of course that would amount to a second breach – this time a breach of their Data Protection obligations.

 

It's really up to you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so much bankfodder. On a better note I have spoke to Amazon and they were really helpful and in the process of refunding all the transactions.

 

I will wait and see how much hsbc charge me and take it from there as that was all I was really asking from them was to waiver the charges as it was their fault they allowed a hundred or so transactions to go out from an unauthorized overdraft .

Thank you once again and I shall keep you posted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sound like CC Co has an ind transaction limit for unauthorised overdrafts and each of son's transactions were only fo £6.50.

Personally, I would ask Police to read the Riot Act to son over fraudulent use of CC or get son to pay your overdraft fee. Your choice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so much bankfodder. On a better note I have spoke to Amazon and they were really helpful and in the process of refunding all the transactions.

 

I will wait and see how much hsbc charge me and take it from there as that was all I was really asking from them was to waiver the charges as it was their fault they allowed a hundred or so transactions to go out from an unauthorized overdraft .

Thank you once again and I shall keep you posted.

 

in that case – and as a more gentle option – I would still have the recorded call and then if they start imposing penalties, we will help you draft a letter to them which will explain how unfair they have been and how they have breached their statutory duties. I can imagine that it would very possibly prompt them to make a so-called gesture of goodwill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so much bankfodder. On a better note I have spoke to Amazon and they were really helpful and in the process of refunding all the transactions.

 

I will wait and see how much hsbc charge me and take it from there as that was all I was really asking from them was to waiver the charges as it was their fault they allowed a hundred or so transactions to go out from an unauthorized overdraft .

Thank you once again and I shall keep you posted.

 

None of this appears to be the fault of HSBC. As the transactions were each for small amounts I doubt Amazon checked your available balance with HSBC before processing each of them - so HSBC never had the opportunity to decline any of the transactions.

 

Before threatening court action and even complaining about being treated unfairly, you may wish to contact HSBC again to explain the situation and politely ask if any charges can be waived.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course it would be worth trying to contact HSBC to ask for a waiver – but to say that it is not their fault is completely wrong. They are completely responsible for their computer systems and they are absolutely able to configure them in anyway they want. If they are out of control of their computer systems then that simply adds to their general culpability in the matter.

 

I'm always very sorry to find people so forgiving of the banks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly bankfodder, it is quite unsettling to think that they would let so many transactions go so far over my overdraft.

 

One of my credit cards contacted me once because they thought they had spotted some suspicious activity and sure enough someone had indeed stolen my cc details and made a few transactions

 

although I couldn't see why or how the cc company picked it up as they just appeared to be normal transactions to me and didn't take me over my credit limit (thank goodness they did though)

 

yet hsbc just let over 100 transactions go out

which surely would look very suspicious

as I have never made such transactions

and never gone or tried to go even remotely that far over my overdraft and not bat an eyelid.

 

Not exactly a very good advertisement for their fraud prevention.

Link to post
Share on other sites

HSBC never had the opportunity to stop any of the transactions though and the same would've occurred at any other bank or credit card provider.

 

This is down to how Amazon process their transactions. If Amazon had sought authorisation and checked the transaction with HSBC there would have been an opportunity to decline them.

 

It's not a flaw with HSBC systems either. All card payments work in the same way so it's down to the rules and processes that underpin that as defined by the likes of Visa, MasterCard, American Express etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't kid yourself. If HSBC didn't want to pay they wouldn't. It's got nothing to do with Amazon and how they process the transactions. It's not for Amazon to seek authorisation from the bank

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a good working knowledge of card payments and what you're saying simply isn't true.

 

The OP even states that a couple of months ago a transaction that would've taken them into an unarranged overdraft of £15 was declined by HSBC. On that occasion the retailer checked and sought authorisation from HSBC, who decided to decline the transaction.

 

On this more recent incident, Amazon didn't check with HSBC and therefore there was no opportunity to decline the transactions.

 

At best the OP can hope that HSBC will waive the overdraft charges as a gesture of goodwill and perhaps a small compensation payment for not properly addressing her questions of how the payments could be made and instead simply repeating the suggestion to refer to the Police.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you have a good chance if you just ring them up and ask for a waiver. I picked up around £50 worth of charges for being overdrawn by £5 or so for a week without realising it. A quick phonecall, no anger, no shouting, just an immediate refund. That was Nat West.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a good working knowledge of card payments and what you're saying simply isn't true.

 

The OP even states that a couple of months ago a transaction that would've taken them into an unarranged overdraft of £15 was declined by HSBC. On that occasion the retailer checked and sought authorisation from HSBC, who decided to decline the transaction.

 

On this more recent incident, Amazon didn't check with HSBC and therefore there was no opportunity to decline the transactions.

 

At best the OP can hope that HSBC will waive the overdraft charges as a gesture of goodwill and perhaps a small compensation payment for not properly addressing her questions of how the payments could be made and instead simply repeating the suggestion to refer to the Police.

 

 

I hear what you say but I'm afraid that I am completely unable to believe that simply because Amazon decides to put a payment through without checking with HSBC first, that HSBC will then approve anything that comes through.

 

I'm completely certain that the final word rest with HSBC and if they think that there is no money in the account then they will block the payment – but if they think that the payment is small enough not to trouble them that they could be a charge/penalty to be earned at the same time then they will allow it through.

 

HSBC will never surrender control to Amazon or any other company. It's difficult enough for HSBC's own customers to retain control

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...