Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 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
      • 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

This may help someone who is dispute with Bank over poss card cloning


Madamfluff
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5370 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

Me and Hubby bank with the co-op and they have already alerted us to a cheque transaction for 9,000 which was from a stolen cheque book.

 

Today my husband got an automated phone call saying there might have been unlawful use of his card, the call asked him to listen to recent card transactions and to press to speak to someone if any transaction didnt match up with known purchases .

 

In fact there were 4 1 for £3.01 for a computer shop - 2 1p transactions for a well known mobile phone shop ( am I allowed to say who they are) and the biggy £600 for a catalogue shop.

 

When my husband spoke to the Bank it seems that their suspicions were aroused by the 2 1p purchases obviously from the cloner ( with help from a staff member) checking the pin worked

 

This may help someone who is in dispute with their banks , if they find the same very small amounts taken out before a large amount it may be the same type of thing and I am assuming if the co-op get suspicious then other banks should also have the same type of security checks

 

As it was all the transactions happened today and my husbands card was blocked so we have not lost anything, but I know some people are not as lucky so hope I have helped

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Useful they trapped this - however interesting they didn't rely on the usual stance that there had been a PIN disclosure and you were on your own. Unfortunately, under the T&C's chip and PIN operates under, consumers are always disadvantaged.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

I was just reading this post.

 

The type of transactions look to be whats classed as CNP (mail order) card holder not present fraud and most probably done over the internet.

 

A website will normally do a check on the card for a small amount to make sure its a valid card number and everything matches up. Usually a fraudster will do this to check the card works and try to guess the CVV number. Once a small transaction is made a bigger transaction is then tried.

 

All backs use the same fraud systems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When my husband spoke to the Bank it seems that their suspicions were aroused by the 2 1p purchases obviously from the cloner ( with help from a staff member) checking the pin worked

 

Be careful here! Staff members don't know your pin numbers only you do so unless you have proof I'd reconsider that statement.

 

Its nice to see that banks do look after our interests sometimes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Buzby the pin number is not used in mail order transactions. Which is the type of fraud that was committed.

 

As for the bank checking on the fraud yeah they are looking after you all but also in away they are covering there backs too.

 

I spent a few years when I still lived in England working in the fraud department for a bank and I know how every works and how the banks find fraud.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course they are looking after their own interests as well, why shouldn't they.

 

I think the point that buzby was making was that banks usually hide behind the "you must have disclosed you PIN as our systems are foolproof" defence. It's very refreshing to hear that they didn't do this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...