Man loses C&P Phantom Withdrawl case

[Tony Naggs]

2009/6/6 Nicholas Bohm <nbohm at ernest.net>:
> Roland Perry wrote:
>> http://www.finextra.com/fullstory.asp?id=20102 and judgement at:
>> http://www.alikelman.com/jobhbos.pdf
>
> For those disinclined to read the whole, the essence is at paragraph 20:

Hi Nicholas

I think most people here, if they were to read the whole judgement
would feel that the claimant's case is weak, and that even with
missing details on the bank's side it may be reasonable for the judge
to find on the balance of probabilities against the claimant.

Paragraph 18 enumerates some of circumstances, and how this case
differs from the bank's point of view from typical cases of card
fraud, (apologies in advance for any typos):

  18. Mr Kramer also makes submissions about the surrounding and attending
  circumstances:

  (i)   If this was a fraud, the criminals would not have chosen a
basic Electron
        card account, which cannot go into overdraft.

  (ii)  Having the use of the card, a fraudster would not have
confined himself to
        ATM transactions with a maximum of £300 per day, and without
        knowing the probably modest amount in the account, rather than trying
        point of sale transactions.

  (iii) The last attempted use of the card was the day before the matter was
        reported to the bank, and there were no attempts to use it
thereafter, so
        if this was a fraud the perpetrator coincidentally stopped before the
        bank was alerted.

  (iv)  The 2 ATM's concerned were close to the Claimant's house and ones
        which he used regularly.

  (v)   The Claimant is in fact careless with his cards.  In the few
years he had
        an account he seems to have lost 7 cards. In addition 2 cards were sent
        to him, one of them a credit card, which says he did not receive.

  (vi)  Mr Job had already in 2005 obtained a refund after reporting non
        receipt of a credit card and PIN.

  (vii) No withdrawals other than the disputed ones were made during the
        period in question.