The Lemon Fool

Heard about this on the radio whilst driving into work this morning -

TSB has become the first UK bank to pledge to refund customers who fall victim to any type of fraud.

The "fraud refund guarantee" will cover cases where customers are tricked into authorising payments to fraudsters, as well as unauthorised transactions.

The move comes as the bank tries to rebuild its image after an IT meltdown last April left 1.9 million customers unable to access their own money.

Banks have been under pressure to help tackle the rise in sophisticated fraud.

Richard Meddings, acting chief executive of TSB, told Radio 5 live's Wake Up To Money that the move was "about giving piece of mind to our customers and doing the right thing".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47928773

Whilst TSB are perhaps trying to gain an improved image after last year's IT fiasco, it seems to me that they may actually be introducing a new method of fraud by taking this approach to the issue....

But no, surely organised criminals won't ever think about perhaps taking advantage of such a generous offer by the TSB bank......

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

Itsallaguess wrote:But no, surely organised criminals won't ever think about perhaps taking advantage of such a generous offer by the TSB bank......

They are experts in such matters.....

Itsallaguess wrote:But no, surely organised criminals won't ever think about perhaps taking advantage of such a generous offer by the TSB bank......

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

From later in the linked article:

The bank, which has 5.2 million customers, warned it would not reimburse customers who tried to abuse the guarantee by committing fraud on their own account or by repeatedly ignoring safety advice.

chas49 wrote:

Itsallaguess wrote:But no, surely organised criminals won't ever think about perhaps taking advantage of such a generous offer by the TSB bank......

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

From later in the linked article:

The bank, which has 5.2 million customers, warned it would not reimburse customers who tried to abuse the guarantee by committing fraud on their own account or by repeatedly ignoring safety advice.

So basically they're going to ask you twice if you are really sure the account you are transferring to is genuine...

Far too easy for the scammers to open and use bank accounts for the fraudulent transfers.

How about making any bank that allowed an unidentifiable fraudster to open a receiving account being made to repay the fraud?

supremetwo wrote:How about making any bank that allowed an unidentifiable fraudster to open a receiving account being made to repay the fraud?

That is a good point. For all the annoyance and aggravation created by Money Laundering Procedures, they don't seem effective in preventing the banking system containing valid and operational codes used by fraudsters.

After all, if someone raises a complaint that Sort Code X, Bank Account Y has been used to receive money by fraud, why isn't the code blocked or at the very least has a warning attached to it?

chas49 wrote:From later in the linked article:

The bank, which has 5.2 million customers, warned it would not reimburse customers who tried to abuse the guarantee by committing fraud on their own account or by repeatedly ignoring safety advice.

... thus setting themselves up as arbiter of whether someone is themselves a fraudster vs merely a mug. Refusal to reimburse becomes an accusation of criminality rather than gullibility.

The press will have a field day when they find an instance of calling that wrong!

Not a bad attempt to atone for their IT cockup.
It may be a good thing if it pushes other banks into being more careful about where they send one's money. Otoh, the costs will of course be paid by all customers in terms of lower interest and I have mixed feelings about subsidising the careless.
Mind you, we're all doing that due to the bleating about 'unfair' charges for unauthorised overdrafts.

V8