Natwest vs arthur

[Cyclone 10]

On 12/6/2018 at 11:38 AM, woodmally said:

I dont know if its just me but I still think there is more to this case than meets the eye. I wouldnt normally defend banks but a lot doesnt stack up. 1) How would anyone have £20 thousand lying around in their current account 2) If they did how come they didnt employ a better lawyer. After seeing him on Watchdog I cant imagine him being a highflying lawyer.  3) Banks would try to avoid bad publicity and even though they refunded him still think they did nothing wrong.  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46445299

It's right there in the link you posted

 

The money stolen was part of an inheritance that had been deposited into his NatWest account earlier in 2017.

 

And your objection basically seems to be that he shouldn't have had that amount of money there and so it's somehow his fault?  Your point 2 is completely irrelevant.  And point 3 is saying what, that they refunded the fraud simply to avoid bad press?  Possibly that's true, but most likely they would have lost the case anyway.

 

You could argue in any case of fraud that it's possible that it was a setup.  But without some evidence that this is the case what are the grounds for refusing the refund?  If the bank thinks that they are being defrauded they can report it to the police of course.

 

How on earth do you think that the refund (not compensation) comes from other customers?  What nonsense are you spouting.

[woodview 10]

4 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

 

How on earth do you think that the refund (not compensation) comes from other customers?  What nonsense are you spouting.

Where does the refund money come from?

[spilldig 185]

2 hours ago, ANGELFIRE1 said:

Re the NatWest fraud team, on a few occasions a large withdrawal by my Debit card has been declined, until I spoke in person to them. They simply asked a couple or three security questions, then the card was authorised for the purchase of the item.  Ok it is a few minutes of inconvenience but better safe than sorry when the transaction runs into the thousands. I think what triggers the fraud team is that my card is used for small to medium amounts, then all of a sudden a transaction for a car say, £15k draws their attention. Good on them I say.

 

Angel1.

Santander do the same. I find them good on security though I believe they had some problems a few years ago.

[Cyclone 10]

19 hours ago, woodview said:

Where does the refund money come from?

From reducing the profit that the bank makes, just like the wages come from, and the cost of rent, and heating and thousands of other costs that banks incur running a business.

Were you expecting to find a £0.01 deduction in your account to cover your share?

[woodview 10]

7 hours ago, Cyclone said:

From reducing the profit that the bank makes, just like the wages come from, and the cost of rent, and heating and thousands of other costs that banks incur running a business.

Were you expecting to find a £0.01 deduction in your account to cover your share?

Obviously not. But its a stereotypical comment to make, that the bank can 'just' pay it. It comes from profits made from you, or money otherwise available for employees, company pensions etc. etc.

Presumanly you'd just pay it out from the bottomless money pot.

[Cyclone 10]

Money available to be paid out to shareholders I think is what you mean.  Not available for employees and company pensions, that's not where profit goes.

 

The bank failed to stop the fraud, the customer wasn't responsible for it and there's no evidence that he was defrauding them, so why exactly do you think the bank shouldn't replace the money?  I expect you'd want it replacing if it were your account.