• Welcome to DOSBODS

    Please consider creating a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

Sign in to follow this  
Band

Be careful when transferring money

Recommended Posts

A few days ago my elderly mother loaned my brother £30,000. Sadly days previously she received an email from what she thought was my brothers email account whilst she was on holiday asking for it to be sent to a difference account.

He had been hacked.

It was a CHAPS transfer, my mother was in the bank for 45 minutes getting it arranged, the staff at the bank got her to call my brother to get his address to put on the CHAPS form.

It would seem this is her best chance of getting the money back as explained in this article or the fact the bank it was sent to seemingly havent vetted the fraudster properly.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/oct/21/couple-lose-120000-email-hacking-fraud-legal-sector

Anyway this is the sort of thing that happens to other people, its utterly surreal to have happened to my mother, she is in bits.

So if sending money in future, i recommend sending £1 first then the rest.

Got a fight on to get this money back as seemingly the fact the name and address of my brother are different to what the scammer used to set up the account is an irrelevance, only thing that matters on the CHAPS form is the sort/account number and my mothers signature authorising the transfer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to hear that..  have to feel sorry for the elderly,  banking has changed so much since they were growing up.  Too bad she didn’t write him a cheque! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

CHAPS is a completely inappropriate way for 'normal' people to send money.  I even send £1 first with new employees as there is too much scope for error, let alone fraud.  

The banks could do so much to avoid 'simple' problems -- like take a hash of the 'account number plus account surname / company name' then add to the account number -- this would avoid simple digit errors and the sort of 'name not aligned with account number problem above.  But no, they can't do that.  Despite vast amounts of technology all they can do is 'account number and sort code' which has very little in the way of any checks.

[They could even do the CHAPS behind the scenes with only the account number, just agree amongst the big few banks to do the hash a certain way just on the websites and get people to quote 12 digit account numbers when telling people where to send money.  But they don't.]

Oh, and they seem to be so ready for money to 'just disappear' -- I can't open a bank account without vast quantities of evidence as to my identity, but fraudsters seem very capable of sending money to 'black holes'.  I've no idea why they can't say 'these accounts are in the UK and are linked to genuine employers, etc -- they should be okay to send.  We'll check for anything else'.  

All this seems pretty trivial to me.  I've no idea why they can't/don't do it.

Edited by dgul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which have made what is called a supercomplaint to the Payment Systems Regulator and the Financial Conduct Authority.
 Read more: https://www.which.co.uk/news/2016/09/which-makes-scams-super-complaint-453196/ 

They are bringing in new directives but not until the end of 2018, and possibly not to cover this.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/consumer-affairs/watchdog-eyes-compensation-bank-transfer-fraud-20000-victims/

Quite simply the name and address on the CHAPS form are an irrelevance, which is truly mazing in this day and age or any day in age to be truthful, something so simple would stop pretty much all this fraud.

We've to see how the scammers opened an account at unnamed bank, if the bank didnt follow the directives this is another way of getting the money back. But surely the fact the scammers have opened an account under presumably a false name and address it must show the bank has not checked them properly.

Shows that all this anti money laundering and anti terrorism rules is not aimed at the terrorists or fraudsters and is just a way of keeping an eye on the little people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.