If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Jeremy Clarkson proved wrong
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
0
Comments
ETA - can he get it back or does the fact he disclosed his details mean the bank has no obligation to return the money?
I hope they find who did it and punish them appropriately for what is a serious theft.
I presume it must be someone who works for the diabetes charity, or at least has access to their computer systems?
It's pretty lax security by the bank really. But that's hardly a surprise, seeing as looking after people's money seems to come a distant 10,000th in the list of priorities for a bank these days.
I know its technically a theft, but I think its good that its at least going to charity. Whoever did it must have a good sense of humour because they didn't actually take it for themselves.
I don't think this was caused by the bank's "lax security". I think it was Clarkson's fault and he's admitted he's wrong now, so all is good.
When I said the "all good" comment, I was talking about the Clarkson article and how he was proved wrong. I know it was related to the bigger story about losing personal data, but I was focusing on the Clarkson story.
I know the rest of it isn't good, because the govt lost personal data which they shouldn't have and blah blah blah. I know that, but I wasn't talking about that.
Clarkson admitted that he was wrong in that he expected his bank to not allow people to take money from his account. It's a shame he was wrong about that.
The fact still remains that it shows that the banks security procedures are not stringent enough. It is too easy to take money from someone else's account. The fact that it was Clarkson's money means that everyone takes the mick out of the loud-mouthed car guy off the telly, but that hides a much more serious point.
If someone did it to him for a laugh (though having £500 nicked out of your account is no laughing matter) who else have they been doing it to?
As far as I can tell, he didn't disclose any information that someone couldn't find by just looking at your bank card. But the banks claim that it is impossible to take money out of someone's account without using their pin or security code (and indeed have refused to give people their money back because of this claim). So he's demonstrated that the banks are clearly wrong.
On a seperate note...
To be fair if you publish your account details in the paper the bank may have decided that you're taking a pretty lenient approach to your account...
When I worked for the bank we filled in a fraud report for any instances of suspected fraud (which was passed to the fraud department) but normally don't give any information out at all to anyone unless we know we explicitly can. Not worth the average clerk's / CSO job since the calls are recorded and all that.
Concurred. At least some sort of medal.
:yes: tho that isn't to say that he didn't ask for it
So you don't think someone should be prosecuted for stealing money out of a bank account? What about if I set up a DD to a charity from your bank account? Would you like that?
Or is the issue more that you don't think someone should be prosecuted for stealing money out of Jeremy Clarkson's bank account?
It's a rash and novel concept, but how about checking the fucking DD mandate to make sure that it's genuine? A quick phone call is all it would take.
Whilst Clarkson was being rash to prove a point, and it backfired, it bloody well shouldn't have backfired. My account number, sort code and name are on my bank card. Presumably if my card was nicked someone could do exactly the same thing to me.
It's disgraceful. Mind, given the number of times I've not been asked for ID when withdrawing large sums of money (in excess of £500) from my account over the counter, it doesn't come as a surprise.
Nope, I'd be pleased. It happened to me whilst I was in Germany. The £10 phone bill was irritating but better than having my account emptied- especially as I had a couple of grand in my account at the time.
I dont, because if it had happened to any one of us, we woudlnt be laughing
lol well i wouldn't have published my bank details in a newspaper, it's like walking around with a sign on your arse saying kick me, and then complaining you've got a sore arse!
safe to say i think he's learned his lesson.
Perhaps it does, but that's to miss the crucial point.
Someone has helped themselves to a lot of money out of his bank account using the exact same details that the Government lost. They've done it using the exact same details that are printed on the front of most bank cards.
He took it one step further by printing it in a national newspaper, but that's not the point either. Get your wallet nicked and the exact same thing can happen to you because some bone idle bank staff can't be arsed to do their job properly.
It's easy to laugh because he's that loudmouthed Jeremy Clarkson, but it's really no laughing matter when you think about it.
If it had been someone's granny who'd had their money stolen you sure as hell wouldn't be sitting there laughing about how funny it is.
It would be impossible for banks to phone a customer every time a D/D is setup surely?
Even so he'll get it back through DD indemnity.
They're pretty damn quick at ringing me up to sell me another fucking credit card, or when I've missed a payment on the credit card I already have with them. You seriously trying to tell me that they can't ring people up about this instead?
Of course they can, it's just that there's no profit to be had in looking after people's money properly.
True.
Thats obviously how they get around not checking tho, by hiding behind the indemnity. Same with signature on cheques not being checked i suppose.
Whoever took the money from Clarkson's account, regardless of what they did with the money afterwards, has some questions to answer. So do the banks which allowed this to take place in the first place. I'd leave it to the charity itself to decide whether it wants to give Clarkson his money back, but I don't think he'd ask them for it.
When it comes to banks, you can arrive with £1million worth of £20 notes and they'll happily take the money, no questions asked, and they probably won't even ask for identification. Yet last year, when I wanted to move almost £2,000 of my out of HSBC when I closed my account with them, they were absolutely adamant on seeing ID. I don't blame the bank staff, far from it. They're doing their job. But I find it odd how banks are so keen to take your money, yet far less keen to give it out.
Obviously.
They can't be seen to be making a fuss over taking your money (im guessing your referring to £1million in £20s being suspicious) because that could be seen as tipping off.
Obviously only right that they insist on ID for 2k cash going out.
the anti money laundering laws in place these days are quite strict.
I don't know any specifics of the case but I spent a lot of the time checking validity of cheques whilst I was at the bank and everything was double and triple checked. I've phoned customers up because they've given out cheques out of sequence (people who steal corporate cheques tend to take them from the middle of the chequebook so nobody notices). At least where I worked in my department we erred on the side of caution, I don't know how it works for DDs because I didn't handle them.
Yep. Thats what I was getting at.
You don't have to declare where its from, but if the person who takes it off you thinks its suspicious they have to report it.
If asked, your well within your rights to say 'mind your own business'.