






















A stranger got hold of my debit card details and keeps ordering takeaways to their address on the app Uber Eats.
Uber will not help me to block my card or address, citing data protection regulations.
My bank, Barclays, keeps issuing me new debit cards, but this doesn’t seem to stop the thief making orders.
I am on my fifth debit card since February. Barclays can’t seem to sort the problem either.
They simply tell me to go to the police. Please help.
L.L., Camberley, Surrey.
Takeaway trickery: A fraudster is using a reader's debit card details to order takeaways on Uber Eats
Sally Hamilton replies: You contacted me in late April, by which time you were getting heartburn from Uber Eats’ inability to block an account opened by an unknown person who had hijacked your card details.
You have never had an account with either the minicab app Uber or its food delivery arm Uber Eats, so were baffled by the turn of events.
Uber Eats wouldn’t tell you where it was delivering the orders to for data protection reasons, but they certainly weren’t arriving at your home, which is the address linked to your debit card.
The sums involved weren’t huge, totalling about £10 or £20 each time. However, you were afraid other payments might be taken and so cancelled your Barclays debit card.
Being told to go to the police by Barclays for these mystery payments seemed over the top. But you did as suggested, only to be directed instead to the website of Action Fraud, recently renamed Report Fraud.
The clue in the name is that it collects reports of fraud but does not investigate them. It passes cases to the police, but only if it feels they are viable. I felt you had been fobbed off.
You tried the Financial Ombudsman Service, only to be told that Uber Eats did nothing wrong and was right not to talk to you due to data protection regulations.
The matter was becoming urgent, as you and your partner are hoping to move house and will soon have a large sum of money in your account for the transaction.
You were fearful the Uber Eats fraudster might somehow be able to access these funds. I asked both Uber Eats and Barclays to help you.
A few days later, Uber Eats finally served up the right answer and shut the fraudster’s account.
I have heard some businesses are offering incentives for customers to leave glowing reviews.
If this has happened to you, email sally@dailymail.co.uk
An Uber Eats spokesman says: ‘We have closed the account in question. Uber Eats takes all allegations of fraudulent activity on accounts seriously and we stand ready to support law enforcement with further investigation.
‘This support experience fell below our high standards and we are investigating so we can improve going forward.’
Uber Eats says it will reimburse the £47.50 spent by the thief as a goodwill gesture.
Barclays found that the original debit card had been cancelled as part of its fraud prevention processes, when an unauthorised person used it to book a ride on a taxi app.
The replacement card was used to buy two Uber Eats orders using an Uber Eats account in the perpetrator’s name.
You only noticed the second order after you had received the third card, which you also cancelled, even though the order was on the previous one.
The fourth card’s details were then used by the crook to order another takeaway. You cancelled this one and ordered yet another card. There have been no unauthorised transactions on this card to date.
Barclays admitted human error in dealing with your cards. The bank failed to remove the link between your old card details and the Uber Eats account involved as soon as the new card was issued.
This meant the bank account remained linked and the thief didn’t need to enter the new card information.
Barclays has also reimbursed the £47.50 in unauthorised payments, meaning you have been repaid twice. It also paid you £100 as an apology for the inconvenience.
On March 25, I received a letter from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) saying they were sorry about the death of my partner, ‘Mr P.T.’, and that they had awarded me an increase in my monthly state pension.
As I had never heard of this person, this was obviously meant for someone else.
I phoned the DWP and was passed from pillar to post, ending up with the department where deaths are reported. No one I spoke to could help me.
The last person I spoke to recommended I return the letter to the Pension Service with a covering letter explaining the situation and they would get back to me.
When I heard nothing, I sent a letter with copies of the relevant paperwork to the complaints department.
That was April 2 and I still have not heard from anyone. Since then, I have had two payments into my bank account that do not belong to me. This has been very distressing for me.
S.B., Maidenhead.
Sally Hamilton replies: I applaud you for being so diligent in attempting to get the DWP to correct this upsetting mistake, which amounted to you receiving two payments totalling £596.
Bouquets to you but brickbats to the DWP for the blunder, and for being unable to put you in touch with the people who could correct it. They simply told you to write in, which you did.
What worried both you and me is that while you were trying to get this matter sorted, the bereaved partner of PT was not receiving the payments due at a distressing time in their life.
I stepped in and asked the DWP to put the situation right, pronto.
Within a few days, it came back to explain that, due to an administrative error, your state pension record was incorrectly updated on March 17 to include inheritable National Insurance components linked to a Mr PT, who died on March 3.
A DWP spokesman says: ‘We apologise to Mrs B for the administrative error made to her state pension account and for any distress this caused. We have spoken to her directly to apologise, and have now resolved the matter.’
Your pension has been restored to its correct rate of £231.20 a week. The DWP will not be clawing back the overpayment as it was an error on its part.
Normally, overpayments of benefits or the state pension need to be repaid, and are taken in deductions over the following months.
If the person is no longer receiving a particular benefit, they are usually invoiced for the excess sum or asked to sign up to an instalment payment plan. You were most grateful for my help.
I recently used the metro in Manchester for two days and ‘tapped on’ using my debit card.
A ticket inspector checked my card and didn’t mention there was an issue, but when I looked I had been charged the daily maximum of £9.20 for both days plus a £60 fine for not ‘tapping off’.
I believe I did – but may have been distracted as there was commotion when I got off due to a protest. I am a pensioner and this will put me into food poverty.
J.R., via email.
Transport for Greater Manchester has decided to refund you. It has explained to you how the contactless system works.
***
I have been a loyal member of Cineworld’s Unlimited scheme for 14 years. I pay £17.99 per month, allowing me to attend as many showings as I like. ,
I will soon be going abroad for three months, so I’d like to cancel and reinstate it upon my return.
But Cineworld’s phone line for members has shut down. I removed my card details from the website thinking the payments would stop, but £17.99 was still taken out.
C.F., via email.
Cineworld has refunded you the £17.99 and has agreed to pause your membership for three months.
***
In March, my wife and I downsized to a rural location. In our previous house we had phone, broadband and TV with Sky, for £94.50 per month.
Sky said it couldn’t connect the phone or internet in our new home, but we could keep the TV for around £50 per month.
An engineer came to set this up but found it wouldn’t be possible as we are in a ‘dip’ and surrounded by tall trees that would block the signal.
He said we would be able to leave our contract early but Sky won’t cancel our account.
G.E., West Sussex.
Sky apologises for the delay in closing your account. It has now cancelled your contract with no early termination charge.
此内容由惯性聚合(RSS阅读器)自动聚合整理,仅供阅读参考。 原文来自 — 版权归原作者所有。