Fighting for your money

I fell for a parcel delivery scam and am terrified Monzo will refuse to reimburse my £9,000

QI have been the victim of a terrible scam where I was tricked into transferring all my savings and overdraft held with Monzo to another bank account. I lost a total of £9,152.

It all started a few days before my birthday in October when I received a message asking me to pay the fee for a parcel from France. I am French and my mum often sends me packages, so I am used to having to pay fees. I logged on to what looked like the Post Office website and entered my bank details.

A few days later I received a message asking me to verify a new direct debit that I had not requested. It was on the same message thread as other messages from my bank.

I then received a call from Monzo ( with the usual security questions) asking me about the text from the Post Office. The person told me it was a scam. He told me to delete it, which I did. He cancelled the direct debit and then I received another text on the thread confirming its cancellation. I was relieved. He then said he feared someone had gained access to my app and that I needed to act quickly to protect my account. The man reassured me my money would be safe as long as I transferred it into a safe account.

He then said he was following a “Bitstamp Level 3” procedure, which involved sending three random sums to the safe account. I was told not to share the codes I would receive – which is what Monzo always says. Then I was told that owing to technical difficulties I would need to complete a Bip level 4, which meant sending the money to Barclays, a “trustworthy” bank, and taking a £1,000 overdraft. I was then told I would receive a new card and Pin for this new bank account. I was then asked to delete my app.

It was only when I checked my Monzo account online that I realised I had been scammed. I called the bank immediately and was told I would be updated in 24 hours but I didn’t receive any useful information. I am really worried it will not refund me. – Anon A With the Black Friday weekend shopping frenzy in full swing and Christmas around the corner, I felt it timely to include your story as a warning to other readers.

Millions of us will be expecting packages to be delivered in the coming weeks and so could easily fall foul of the type of scam that caught you out. It was all too believable that a delivery was being held until you had paid your import duty. The moment you clicked the link you had been sent out of the blue, you were sucked into a spiral that ended with you losing more than £9,000.

This was a complex but effective fraud, where the crooks first hooked you in using a classic phishing technique – sending you a text message with the aim of getting you to click the link. Once you clicked, you were sent to a fake website designed to glean your passwords and personal information. The fraudsters then posed as your bank over the phone and tricked you into making payments, by persuading you that you needed to “protect” your money by moving it into a safe account.

The methods employed were convincing, even the so- called security measures referred to as “Bitstamp level procedures” – which were simply a ruse to trick you into transferring money to a cryptocurrency exchange.

The fraudsters posed as your bank and tricked you into making authorised payments

When you finally realised it was all a terrible scam, you were naturally distraught. You alerted Monzo but in your panic felt you were getting nowhere and so contacted me for help.

I quickly contacted the bank on your behalf and was assured it was already on the case. But it could not tell me at that point whether or not you would be reimbursed.

However, a couple of days later, after it had fully investigated what had happened, I am happy to say the bank decided to give you back every penny plus the fees accrued on the overdraft you had been forced to set up. You were mightily relieved and described my involvement as a “massive comfort”.

Monzo says it does all it can to prevent customers from falling for such scams, including issuing warnings that it would never ask customers to move money out of Monzo and into a “safe” account. Nor would it phone a customer without arranging such a call via the Monzo app first.

I hope Monzo’s actions in your case prove to be an example to other banks. I come across too many cases where banks stubbornly refuse to issue refunds, even when it is clear to me that their customers were innocent victims of fraud. After all, no one chooses to be defrauded of their savings.

Banks should be the guardians of our money and protect us fully when crooks attempt to steal it – and, I might add, that includes those banks at the end of the chain that receive the cash transferred via an “authorised push payment” fraud.

In 2019 many big banks signed up to a code called the Contingency Reimbursement Model to refund victims scammed in this way. But still too many claims were denied, often unfairly. The Financial Ombudsman Service went on to uphold three out of four such rejected claims in the 2020-21 financial year.

Under plans announced earlier this month to strengthen the powers of the

Payment Systems Regulator, which oversees the banking code, it is hoped refunds will eventually become compulsory, except in cases of “gross negligence” by customers.

I sincerely hope that the plans come to fruition – and quickly – and put an end to the miserable uncertainty of the reimbursement lottery that victims currently face.

Horse owner jumps extra hurdle to win battle over fence injury claim

Readers may remember a letter from August about the sad case of a retired racehorse called Abu that injured his leg after catching it on a paddock fence.

Fortunately, he has recovered from his injuries, which cost his owner £1,950 in vets’ bills. She was not immediately concerned about meeting these costs as she had taken out an equine policy with the insurer Animal Friends. But on making a claim she was shocked to have it turned down when the firm cited an exclusion for incidents that involved any kind of fence.

By the time I got involved, Abu’s owner had already referred the case to the ombudsman, which limited my ability to negotiate with the insurer. However, I wrote in my column about how unjust I felt it was to deny the payout, particularly because this fence exclusion ( which was odd because horses must be fenced in for security and safety reasons) came fourth from last in the lengthy list of claims the company would not pay. It was positioned between scenarios including radiation, explosions, nuclear fallout and terrorism and claims if owners engaged in horse trading.

When her complaint fell at the first fence with the ombudsman, she asked for a review of her complaint and sent a copy of my article as part of this request.

I am delighted to say that at the second attempt the ombudsman took a different view and earlier this month upheld the complaint. In his decision he said: “It does not feel fair for the clause to be tucked away on page 36 (under point 11.30 of general exclusions) of a 41-page policy document. Furthermore, I am satisfied that [the policyholder] would have acted differently had the clause been clearly highlighted in the policy summary.”

Animal Friends accepted the decision of this “stewards’ inquiry” and will meet the £1,950 claim, plus 8pc interest for the period since the vets’ bill was paid. The firm says it will review feedback. I hope this will mean clearer presentation of such an important exclusion in future – or, better still, its removal altogether.