Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have got an  independent expert report which clearly states it is a manufacturing fault, which DFS have been made aware of. My point is that as a huge retailer of leather sofas with leather peeling  being a common complaint to me it seems evident they are aware it is a manufacturing fault on their side. Yet they play games with customers and worse of all try their level best to get the customer to believe that it is their fault due to oils or creams they are using. Even if one is to believe that every day creams etc can cause this damage then in any event the sofas are not fit for purpose. Surely they are merely playing a numbers game banking on the fact that most complainants will not follow through with legal action. Yet what about the anguish and distress they cause to customers in the process. To me this shows alot of contempt towards consumers and is clearly unethical.
    • I would if I could tobyjugg  Did the same run today over an hour quicker than yesterday, thats what happens when you know where to go and not just try finding places with the postcode as I was yesterday
    • Thank you, @lookinforinfo. I have updated the VCS v Ward case as below:   VCS v Ward     1.       This case is often quoted by the claimant as assisting their case. However, in this instance it actually assists mine. It is contended that the act of stopping a vehicle does not amount to parking. This predatory operation pays no regard to the byelaws at all. It is likely that this Claimant may try to rely upon two 'trophy case' wins, namely VCS v Crutchley and/or VCS v Ward, neither of which were at an Airport location, which is not 'relevant land'. The airport land is subject to the Airport Byelaws as specified in 'Section 63' of the Airports Act 1986 [EXHIBIT A]. Both cases involve flawed reasoning, and the Courts were wrongly steered by this Claimant's representative; there are worrying errors in law within those cases, such as an irrelevant reliance upon the completely different Supreme Court case. These are certainly not the persuasive decisions that this Claimant may suggest.   63 Airport byelaws. (2) Any such byelaws may, in particular, include byelaws— (d) for regulating vehicular traffic anywhere within the airport, except on roads within the airport to which the road traffic enactments apply, and in particular (with that exception) for imposing speed limits on vehicles within the airport and for restricting or regulating the parking of vehicles or their use for any purpose or in any manner specified in the byelaws;
    • Savers opening its Digital Regular Saver this month and adding between £1 and £50 in April, May and June will qualify. There will be ten prizes of £1,000 each. You can earn 3 per cent on the first £1,000. View the full article
    • Would you want your bank to know how many steps you've walked today or whether you got around to going for your weekly jog? But what if it was promising you vouchers or cash as a reward. View the full article
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Help! Change to internet banking login


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2173 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

Hi I hope it's OK to post this here but i really need to make contact with current Santander customers.

 

My story starts a couple of weeks ago when I logged onto Santander online banking.

They were changing the login process and asked me to choose an image and a word,

which I assume was to overcome people loggin into a fake site.

I now see the image and the word to prove the site is legit.

 

Prior to this change I would login to Santander internet banking by inputting my:

Customer Id

Passcode

Registration number

 

I would then have to choose one from three images

Click a drop down list (the arrow) and choose from a range of options.

I can't remember them all except the one I would choose which was Travel & Leisure.

I believe these two things linked to each other.

I would then be logged in.

 

 

This part of the process wasn't about ensuring the site was legitimate

I would say it was about me proving I was legitimate.

 

 

And my guess would be that the drop down list had the same purpose of the images

but was there for people with visual impairments.

 

So I made the changes and on we merrily go

 

 

a couple of weeks later, when I try to login and the website tells me it doesn't recognise the computer I'm login in from

- which i found decidedly 'Big Brother'

 

Next it asked me a question, which was:

 

Q What is your fathers middle name?

 

This threw me a bit because my dad didn't have a middle name

 

After login back in a couple of times the question it asked had changed to:

 

Q What is your mothers middle name?

 

Again completely confused because my mother didn't have a middle name.

So I had no option but to ring Santander and I got through to the most arrogant, rude

and obnoxious person I've ever had the misfortune to have to speak to!

 

He told me I had given my parents middle, which is ridiculous because neither of them had one.

He said I had given them the details when I first joined internet banking

- well that was some years ago as I've been using a computer since the early 90's

and would have taken advantage of online banking

from Abbey National as soon as it became available.

 

I asked was providing my parents middle names part of some process where I wasn't allowed to move on

without providing one so had to put something. The man was just so rude.

 

Then I can't remember how but we got on to the change of the login process,

he told me I was wrong that choosing an image and an option from the drop down list had never been part of the banks loggin system.

That this system had been in place for a long time and it must have been years since I logged in

- is he insane I use my online banking almost every day.

 

I made a complaint to Santander and the letter they sent me back agreed with him that I was wrong chosing the image and the phrase from the drop down list has never been a part of their login process.

 

I'm feeling really offended now, they are treating me like I must be a daft person who can't remember what happened a couple of weeks ago. Please someone tell me that you agree with me, and fingers crossed someone remembers the date that the new login system changed. I really am outraged that they are telling me what I know to be correct is wrong and I don't know what I'm talking about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi,

i am concerned that your bank do not recognise the way in which you login.

 

is it possible you are logging into the correct website and not some malicious / fake website setup in an attempt to obtain further information from you so your bank account can be compromised?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you receive an email stating they were changing their log in process ? it could be one of the fake emails sent out to trap you into giving your details

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

I am confused. I use the Santander login regularly and once I have put my log in reference number in, I get the image and the phrase I use and then the input the 5 digit passcode.

 

The only time I get 'computer not recognised' is when I have done a PC clean and it wipes out all my cookies and then it only ever asks me for my place of birth. Once that is done, I'm in.

 

The only way I think a drop down box would appear is if there is two (or more) separate named accounts but I find that difficult as I have 3 accounts with Santander and they are all linked.

 

As bad as it sounds, I think the only way to get to the bottom of this is to visit the branch nearest to you and stay until they can give some clarity.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say the same as silverfox. I've been with Santander since well before they were Santander and the image and phrase combination has been in place for a very long time.

 

I would add that if I input my customer reference number slightly wrong (I don't leave even my own computer set to recognise me, but I am paranoid about hacking!) it will say it doesn't recognise my computer, which is my clue that I've put the number in wrong. When another customer wrongly put my reference number into their computer and didn't work out their error and tried to continue logging in, it caused absolute havoc for both of us.

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...