Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I don't think there'll be any problem if and when it gets in front of a judge. However I think that there is a big possibility that enforcement is going to be a nightmare. I hope not
    • Keep the sarcasm for when you are sat in front of a Judge. See how far you get with that.   H
    • 1 post   #5   17 hours ago, Peterbard said:   Well. l He didn't just use the video for evidence, if he had, it wouldn't be on u-tube. Not that I object to that but just to correct your point. If he would have come here and I would have seen it , I would undoubtedly recommend an action in tort. But I get the feeling that such a low key remedy was not what you were after.
    • You say "the judge did not mention relevant premises," well all i can say is that we are both locking at different judgments, because mine says that the agent had no proof to form a reasonable belief etc.   Also why have you cut and pasted content of an offsite blog. You dont know it was even written by me?   In any case it is out of context because it referred to a bailiff acting within his general powers.    
    • "Far be it from me to draw any conclusions about my input not being welcome here, I figured Peterbard and some of the key members here would use their creative skills at providing a blanket immunity from civil liability for all EAs by misinterpreting key legislation in their behalf. "   Sorry but my magic wand is out of commission right now. The next best thing would be to provide an accurate reading of the law as it stands.   If you are going to discuss the video, then there are sensible matters which could be discussed. Sadly any reasonable debate is impossible, as you always start with the personal abuse, which inevitably leads to thread closure, we have learned that over and over again.
  • Our picks

    • @curryspcworld @TeamKnowhowUK - Samsung 75 8K TV - completely broken by Currys. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426151-samsung-75-8k-tv-completely-broken-by-currys/&do=findComment&comment=5069075
      • 6 replies
    • @skinnyfoodco Skinny Foods. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426130-skinny-foods/&do=findComment&comment=5068996
      • 8 replies
    • I’m in desperate need of help
       
      I bought some clothes online in may through Evans and paid through PayPal
      returned them all seven days later
       
      I waited the 14days for my refund and no refund came
      I put in a dispute through PayPal but I didn’t get any emails to escalate the case - PayPal closed it. 
      evans said they couldn’t refund the money because PayPal have cancelled the refund because of the open dispute
       
      I contacted PayPal
      they said the dispute had been closed but Evans at no point had attempted a refund.
      fast forward to today
       
      I’ve got copies of numerous messages sent to and from twitter messages as it’s the only way I can contact them
      I’ve also contacted their customer service too
      all I get is PayPal have cancelled refund because dispute is still open.
       
      I have proved that the dispute is closed
      I have got an email saying that if Evans sent the refund they would accept it
      but up until the date I got the email they have not once attempted a refund .
       
       I have sent them a letter before court email
      I have even offered to have the full refund as a gift card just to get this sorted !
       
      I’m literally at the end of my tether and don’t know where to turn next !
       
      i suffer with mental health issues and this is affecting my health and I’d saved the money for a year to buy these clothes as I’m on a low income .
    • In desperate need of help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/425244-in-desperate-need-of-help/&do=findComment&comment=5067040
      • 29 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3698 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I was going through my bank statement on-line to day and spotted Direct Debit (DD) had been taken a few days ago for the amount of £20.00! Now this was my company account and I only have 3 DD on this and I know them well and none should have been for £20.00.

 

The info shown was LV LIFE with a reference number next to it. I called the bank to find out what it was! I was told that it was a DD that had been set up with out the need for a signature and had been set up to take £20.00 every month for Life Insurance. I asked how this was possible as I had not instructed this DD. I was told that as the set up had been made by the Insurance company using a method that did not require a signature the bank could do nothing to stop it being set up!

 

I told my bank that we had no dealings with LV LIFE ( Liverpool Victoria Insurance) and had never instructed them or provided them with our account details and instructed them to cancel the DD and reclaim the payment. I'm happy to report that the bank did this immediately.

 

However what is concerning is that this was ever allowed in the first place! Also the bank stated that other than cancelling the DD they could not investigate any further. They said I would need to contact the company to find out why the DD had been set up.

I explained that we had no dealings with LV LIFE and would not know who to contact but the bank was insistent that we would need to contact them!

 

I was not happy with this and asked for the complaint to be raised with the banks fraud section which they said they would and I'm waiting to be contacted by them.

 

Just thought that this might be useful as a warning to others to check there bank statements as apparently any company can set up a direct debit on your account without having to tell you and the banks just accept this and payout! If you don't spot it and cancel it you lose your money so be careful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been the case for the last 10 years. No signature is required, and the merchant simply asserts they have a valid request from their customer and will indemnify the bank (under the DD scheme) if there is an error. As you discovered, the money was taken by a 'reputable' company, but just as it is possible to enter into binding contracts without signing them, this situation should not surprise you.

 

The way round it is to tell your bank that the account CANNOT be used for DDs, and a block put in place that prevents this happening, however your 3 existing DDs would have to be cancelled and an alternative payment method found. It is also not commonly known, but even after 'cancellation' the originating merchant can reestablish the mandate automatically up to 367 days from the last debit taken - therefore you need to ensure that the electronic mandate is not simply cancelled but removed from your account profile.

 

Of course, they could set it up again (or a new company could simply provide your trading name, sort code and account number and the money leeches from your account once more. And all perfectly legal under the Banking Codes, so it is vitally important the you check each and EVERY statement for these mandates. You will not get far with the fraud section, as this will be classed as (a) an error or (b) incompetence. As there was no intention to defraud, there's nothing for them to investigate.

 

If money is taken in this way, the best you can hope for is a refund (only) no consequential loss. If it takes you more than 6 months to spot it, be prepared for only the last 6 months to be credited, as the banks will hold you jointly liable to check the statements they send.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Following fraud on my account, my bank was instructed to accept only one of two types of DD - signed and authorised (the other being electronic and requiring no signature) - but I think this might vary from bank to bank - considering this bank refunded the fraudulant debits around 2 hours after discovering them. I know I was extremely lucky, but it might be worth speaking to the bank to ask how to prevent this from happening - they may have a process.

Lived through bankruptcy to tell the tale! Worked in various industries and studied law at university. All advice is given in good faith only :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

make them refund it under the dd guarantee....

you received NO written notice of the amount, therefore it breaks the dd guarantee.

 

totally unlawful.

 

done this 3 times in the last 5 or so years.

 

dx

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

Your bank is fooling you. There is NO mechanism to permit one type of DD over another. You cannot have overlooked that the DD sysatem originally required a specified date and amount for all debits, until in the mid 90's this changed to 'unspecified amounts on unspecified dates'. This major change meant the death of customer control, and there was no publicity as the changeover happened at the same time as the switch to electronic authorisation. Everyone is now on the latter type, irrespective of what was originally agreed.

 

You either have DD's active on your account, or you do not. There is no mid-way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
make them refund it under the dd guarantee....

you received NO written notice of the amount, therefore it breaks the dd guarantee.

 

totally unlawful.

 

done this 3 times in the last 5 or so years.

 

dx

 

You'll find this has been watered down - there is bo requirement for 'written notice' in the conventional sense - You can be told you'll pay a variable amount on or after X date each month, and that complies. If you are expecting a letter each time a debit is taken. this is not insisted on. Telcos that offer paper-free billing, that require the user to log in and view their bill is a case in point, as was the reduction in the notice period of 10-12 days to just 7.

 

They really do make this up as they go along.

 

PS: Did you stick that advert in?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Your bank is fooling you. There is NO mechanism to permit one type of DD over another. You cannot have overlooked that the DD sysatem originally required a specified date and amount for all debits, until in the mid 90's this changed to 'unspecified amounts on unspecified dates'. This major change meant the death of customer control, and there was no publicity as the changeover happened at the same time as the switch to electronic authorisation. Everyone is now on the latter type, irrespective of what was originally agreed.

 

You either have DD's active on your account, or you do not. There is no mid-way.

 

There are two - paper and paperless, my bank were instructed not to receive paperless direct debits and only paper ones which require my signature which can be verified....to this day, they will not accept any direct debit instruction which does not carry my signature - which is a pain. For example, I cannot use a "verified" method of payment through DD on Paypal - my bank rejected the DD setup. Each organisation is obliged to use paper DD if requested by the customer, which is what I have to do otherwise I pay by either standing order or manual payments. This is only one of my account, which I do not use for my mainstream bits, but as a deposit account so it's not a huge inconvenience.

 

But I was simply pointing out that by enquiring with the bank how to prevent fraudulant activity, this was an option given to me and I took it. And it has worked.

Lived through bankruptcy to tell the tale! Worked in various industries and studied law at university. All advice is given in good faith only :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm told that no paper DD's are being accepted by banks (still awaiting for the date this happened), but they confirm it may be a certain bank 'initiative' but it is not possible to block electronic DD's whilst allowing 'paper' ones to process normally. They also added that the ability to set price limits and transfer dates has also been lost (irrespective of the set up used), meanig SOs are the only way to do this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Buzby is correct. If you receive a paper dd from a company and you fill it in and sign it and send it back to the company - A few years ago they used to send a copy to the bank to confirm the dd - this has not happened in the last few years. Whoever told you this is wrong and you need to go back and make a complaint. They only have an electronic service now.

Please contact a member of the site team if you are offered help off the forum for a a paid or no win no fee service.

 

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

Click here to donate through PayPal (opens in a new window)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong, I am saying that I have two bank accounts due to the fact that my original bank account (Citi) will NOT accept DD instructions without my signature, therefore I cannot have a DD on the vast majority of bills and payments etc - and whilst a pain, it has protected me from fraud for the past 5 years. This is not to say this is how each bank operate, so I only use my Citi account as a savings account and have a debit card for easy access. I wanted to show an example of what happened when I asked the bank how to prevent fraud from occuring on my account again, and this is what they did - my account is enhanced so that me and only me can set up payments with a signature. The amount of letters I received from companies saying my DD instruction had been refused by my bank, purely because I had not filled in an auth form showed that this was one way they were combatting fraud. As I said, I was refunded in a matter of hours and not days, which pays credit to the way some banks will treat their customers and deal with things such as fraud.

 

I'm not saying that other banks do this, and most will not, but it was highlighting an example.

Lived through bankruptcy to tell the tale! Worked in various industries and studied law at university. All advice is given in good faith only :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...