UK DD clawbacks and Simon Goldberg

[littleFred]

It might be interesting if the BACS people posted these facts on GOODF. But this might drive fraud underground, making it harder to track. And they'd probably get banned.

The text of the Guarantee also reads ‘IF an error’ – the bank will establish whether an error has been made before providing any refund to a customer and they are entitled to ask for evidence to back up such a claim.

This is the weakness of the guarantee scheme that is exploited by fraudsters. If a bank has a choice between investigating an error and potentially annoying a genuine complainant, or passing the problem back to the originating organisation, what's it going to do? When it takes the obvious commercial decision, the money is then in the claimant's pocket, and the originator needs to take positive action to retrieve it.

I suspect this will develop in two directions. First: originators will prosecute fraudsters. Second: the guarantee procedures will change so the bank has greater difficulty in passing the buck to the originator.

[notorial dissent]

Lousy user agreements. Here the merchant has full right to charge it back it they have proof that the charge is valid, and the entity that reversed first gets to eat it if their client is a deadbeat, gives them a real incentive to investigate, and they should have a reasonable amount of time to investigate if a large charge.

[littleFred]

Susie123 thought of a neat idea: borrow money, default on the repayments, get a court order to repay, repay by direct debit, then claw back the direct debits. But the company is threatening another court action, and perhaps they won't accept DD this time.

She first thought about doing this to QQ. (I suppose "QQ" is QuickQuid, the trading name of a company incorporated in the USA that lends at an eye-watering 1999% APR. Well, they need to pay for those moronic TV ads somehow.) She wrote on November 19 2014:

Hi, I have got a question.
I took out a QQ loan ages ago, and was basically borrowing £500 and paying back £600 on a monthly basis.
This was for about 7 months. I was wondering if I can clawback all the direct debits, which in total are around £5000.
I defaulted with QQ and am waiting for them to sell my debt to DCA.
can someone advise if it's a bad idea to clawback all those payments?
thanks

Hmm, let's think. Borrow money, pay it back, then claw back the repayments? This doesn't seem wise or honest. But clawbacks have worked for her. For example, also November 19:

I seemed to get loads of problems from Lloyds before but after making 3 claims, the fourth was so easy I couldn't believe it. and they did refund within few hours, so I know now that every bank does refund the same day or the next day at the latest. They do seem to try and stop you making claims.

back to my QQ question.
I am thinking of just saying wrong amount taken and see what they say lol
I don't really believe they will refund me anyway because I am sure £5000 is quite a lot.
I am more worried about what QQ would do if I did get the refund??

After receiving her clawbacks, life seemed rosy. December 6:

I very much doubt the bank will take the money back. The gym will chase her for the money but the bank cant take the money back. I have done few clawbacks and was told the same by bank. But it never happened. Well not yet anyway and its been 2 months. Tell her to take the money out and not worry about it.

Well, the bank may not have clawed back the claw-backs, but susie123 isn't out of the woods yet. She tried the trick with Zopa. This isn't a bank or eye-watering payday lender but a peer-to-peer facilitator. They explain the lenders' risks, and Zopa's default procedure, which they do seem to follow. She apparently tried the trick before she even finished paying the CCJ.

December 16:

I think I made a mistake and clawed back direct debits for a loan I owed to Zopa. I had CCJ on this and didn't actually realized what I was doing until today. I have paid the debt off and they found out that I clawed back. I have P2PS on my back now asking for the money back. They sent me a letter today saying

l P2PS have been notified of a Direct Debit Indemnity claim you have made against Zopa Limited on ... October 2014 for £...... in relation to the loan contract(s) made on .... ...... 2009 between yourself under Zopa username ........ through Zopa for the loan over 36 months.

These loan contracts were assigned to P2PS Limited on .... July 2011, and you have been making payments towards clearing a County Court Judgment (CCJ) P2PS obtained in relation to this debt. P2PS are concerned as to why you made this claim, when you have acknowledged the debt is owed.

I hereby serve notice on behalf of P2PS limited (P2PS) that if P2PS do not receive payment for the entire outstanding sum of £........ in relation to this Direct Debit Indemnity Claim, within 7 days from the date of this letter we will be obliged to commence County Court proceedings against you, seeking a County Court Judgment (CCJ). Once we obtain a CCJ this can be enforced through the use of County Court Bailiffs.

Please arrange for the outstanding debt balance to be paid to the following account:


Now I never acknowledged the debt but I didn't have a choice as I had to pay it because they obtained CCJ without me knowing.
What do I do, shall I just pay it back to them??

Yes, susie123, I think that's exactly what you should do. The GOOFers don't agree with me, naturally.

[PeanutGallery]

It's worth pointing out that as soon as Susie123 started to realise their might be consequences to her direct debit reclamation frenzy and posted asking for help or advice on what to do. She was rather helpfully told:

you kinda need to figure it out for yourself. it will be better trust me.

look into your legal strawman and anrrts also www.losethename.com

Which always strikes me as GOOFs way of washing their hands of the problem. IfWhen it fails, then they can explain away the failure by claiming that Susie didn't figure it out (which would be quite the achievement considering that 'it' is the nonsensical ramblings of Kate of Gaia/Keith Thompson) or did something wrong either way it's not Jimmy's fault.

[littleFred]

Most factual statements on GOODF are wrong. Most advice will, if followed, create more trouble and more debt, not less. A few people there do understand the real world and how it works but many live in a fantasy where the Crown prohibits us from using our own names, and similar junk.

Letissier14 is Stepping down and away from goodf. One reason:

Lately I have received a fair amount of criticism via email because people have not got the desired results they wanted to achieve and instead of accepting that they may have followed the procedure wrong (which in virtually every case they have) they find it easier to blame someone else, ie me.

One response was:

there are always going to be a few who just f.ck it up for everyone else. Not our fault because newbies cant follow a simple ABC, and then blame someone else for there FUCKUP.

[PeanutGallery]

Unfortunately the ones who do understand how the real world works and how you should approach dealing with debt, generally get shouted down by the "BABYLON HAZ FALLEN AND CARNT GET UP" following mouthbreathers.

[wanglepin]

Letissier14 is Stepping down and away from goodf. One reason:

Lately I have received a fair amount of criticism via email because people have not got the desired results they wanted to achieve and instead of accepting that they may have followed the procedure wrong (which in virtually every case they have) they find it easier to blame someone else, ie me.

I find it impossible to believe that any of these goofers/freemen sov’s leave or “step down”. The crap they have spouted for years becomes true to them or they reach a point of no return and simply have to keep living the lie They would miss being centre of attention, they miss the sycophantic appraise and they miss the power they believe they have over others. I have found that when people such as letissier14 say they are “stepping down” they usually come back as another entity, usually as troll- finder generals. They will then post such utter rubbish, cause controversy and then ban anyone that they deem to be - thinking too much for themselves,telling the truth,asking sticky questions and exposing others to be blatant barefaced liars, trolling.
John Harris and his sidekick Ben Hudson, made more comebacks than an Abo’s boomerang. Harris had more names than a Chinese phone directory on his own site.
No, they just can't seem to turn the corner in my experience.They just miss it.

[notorial dissent]

I love it, the old "My sure fire, absolute, positively guaranteed can't fail method", unless you don't do everything exactly right. The exact same grand litany of lies and excuse our own TP's, sovruns, and ppps wannabes have relied on for years when their cunning schemes fail absolutely. Originality would not seem to count.

[PeanutGallery]

It's why they say you've got to figure it out for yourself.

Because that way, when it fails, you only have yourself to blame.

[Dr. Caligari]

It's why they say you've got to figure it out for yourself.

Because that way, when it fails, you only have yourself to blame.

...except that, before you "figure it out for yourself," you've got to pay big bucks to the guru.

[PeanutGallery]

It's why they say you've got to figure it out for yourself.

Because that way, when it fails, you only have yourself to blame.

...except that, before you "figure it out for yourself," you've got to pay big bucks to the guru.

I thought paying the money to the guru was part of figuring it out...now I have to start from square one all over again...which colour pen means I'm a boy?

[littleFred]

Over on GOODF, deadbeatdad says: "I know people who have been CONVICTED of fraud for doing this [DD clawbacks] and another who narrowly missed a prison term (for same)".

A net search found a 14 July 2014 report of a shopkeeper who paid his newspaper supplier by direct debit from 2009. In March (2012, I think) he clawed back £20,880.72. The supplier tried to chase him, and failed, not realising the shopkeeper had changed his name three times between 2010 and 2012.

He was also convicted of another £7000 fraud, and jailed for 23 months.

[PeanutGallery]

I also get a mention in that same thread. Of course I should clarify for any GOOFs reading, that I have only said it should be reported to the authorities not that I actually have, I'm really very lazy.

[Hercule Parrot]

The first Ombudsman complaint on this, went down like the Titanic...

"Ms U claimed back from her own bank the amounts taken from her bank account by direct debit. She did so under the technical provisions of the Direct Debit Guarantee. However, that Guarantee is limited to the mechanism of making payments by direct debit. The refunding of direct debit payments does not alter her basic obligation under the agreements she signed to pay the instalments and other amounts set out in the agreements."

http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.uk/v ... leID=73396

[Hyrion]

The refunding of direct debit payments does not alter her basic obligation under the agreements she signed to pay the instalments and other amounts set out in the agreements.

Now that's something Ms U might want to consider very carefully:

• other amounts set out in the agreements

For example: any interest calculations due missed payments. Interest calculations and other penalties on missed payments from Nov 2007 to present - 8 years later - may end up being pretty significant.

She may discover that her decision to claw back the original amounts may result in owing twice as much (or more) as she clawed back.

Another successful application of the OPCA code which appears to only have one real rule:

• You must escalate any debt owed into a much more serious situation for yourself

Wonder if that means she'll - at some point - attempt to finagle this potentially increasing debt into jail time.

[Hercule Parrot]

Wonder if that means she'll - at some point - attempt to finagle this potentially increasing debt into jail time.

Very difficult to do that with a civil debt in the UK. But devastated credit ratings and swarms of bailiffs seem likely. What financial institution will ever lend money to a customer who has previously pulled this stunt?

[ArthurWankspittle]

Wonder if that means she'll - at some point - attempt to finagle this potentially increasing debt into jail time.

Pretty sure you can't end up in jail for just not paying your debts. Fraud is another matter. At best she now owes, like you said, about twice what she just claimed back. Plus the bank? card company? can be nasty and file 96 missed monthly payments on her credit record. No lender will now touch her. No letting agent should pass her as an OK tenant. She'll be lucky to get a car at astronomic interest rates, with a black box "have you paid this month's payment" code system. She will find she can't even buy insurance monthly. Winning!

[littleFred]

Ms U sounds like GOOFer jordi100 who clawed back £6000 of DD for car finance.

It seems to me that interest would be due only on the time between the clawback and when (if ever) Ms U eventually pays. I don't know if a court would agree with me.

The DD clawback fever on GOODF has cooled off. But I expect court action is ramping up.

I don't know the technical definitions of theft, fraud or undue enrichment. To me, this is the white-collar version of nicking cars. Not a clever thing to do.

[Hercule Parrot]

I don't know the technical definitions of theft, fraud or undue enrichment. To me, this is the white-collar version of nicking cars. Not a clever thing to do.

I think the car would be incidental. This is simply obtaining money by false representation. If a prosecution was brought it would likely be under the Fraud Act 2007, either Section 2 (fraud by false representation) or perhaps Section15A (obtaining a money transfer by deception).

I don't suppose the Police would be keen to spend a lot of time and money on this, but it would be an option in UK for a financial institution to bring a private prosecution in the criminal courts. If they asked my advice, I would say it would be sensible to select 5 or 10 especially greedy claimants / ringleaders and pursue criminal proceedings against them. The sound of ratcheting handcuffs will draw a line under this nonsense quickly enough.

[littleFred]

The DD clawback fever on GOODF has cooled off. But I expect court action is ramping up.

As if to prove my point, a GOOFer encounters a problem:

Hi all,

I successfully had returned direct debits for payments i made to Northern rock in October 2014, it took about 3 weeks as it got escalated to the special investigation dept.

Last month i received a letter from UKAR NRAM Claiming for breach of contract and/or unjust enrichment in respect of direct debit indemnity claims.

They are now asking for me to pay them this money back.

My understanding is that they had 10 days to re-butt my claim so how can they write to me 5 months later with this demand?

Also Nationwide building society have froze my account and it is being dealt with by the special investigation department who are investigating all the DDI the nationwide have returned.

Should i just ignore the letter or reply? if i reply what content should i put in response?

Thanks in advance

When a GOOFer writes, "My understanding is that ...", junk inevitably follows.


EDIT to add:

murphy75 claimed this as a success on 16 October 2014. It was £26,000 in mortgage payments.

celica34 suggested he move the money asap, clearly recognising that Nationwide would want to claw back the clawback. As they have now done.

With luck, he salted away the £26,000 so he can pay it. But not through his frozen bank account, obviously. If this goes badly, he will lose his house.