PayPal helped itself to my cash
I SOLD a laptop on eBay in November 2009. The following March, a ‘ chargeback’ was raised against me by Barclaycard, the buyer’s credit card company. This meant it was taking £124.21 from my PayPal account.
I contacted t he buyer, who confirmed he was satisfied with the laptop and had not initiated the chargeback. The £124.21 was then returned to my account.
But then PayPal removed £114 from my account and said it was continuing with the investigation — despite having been given further proof from the buyer that they had got it wrong.
The buyer had bought another laptop on eBay which was unsuitable, and the chargeback should, in fact, have been raised against this vendor.
But PayPal said the chargeback was correct.
D.B., Chatham, Kent. OH DEAR, PayPal really does have egg on its face — although to be fair, once I contacted the company it did immediately offer you a goodwill refund of £135.79 while it investigated; it was so obvious a mistake had been made.
The trouble was PayPal firmly believed t he fault lay with Barclaycard i n applying t he chargeback.
But no sooner had I set up a dialogue between the two than PayPal came back very sheepishly.
Having dug deeper, it transpires it was actually PayPal’s fault the chargeback had been applied to t he wrong s el l er’ s account. Apparently, t he chargeback procedure was carried out manually, and obviously there are shortcomings in the system, which PayPal is now investigating.
It is very apologetic and the refund of £ 135.79 ( the original transaction, plus chargeback fee) has been credited to your account.
And in view of the poor service you received, it is also going to add another £100 by way of apology. IN OCTOBER I cashed in two investments with Standard Life and was surprised I also received two ‘chargeable event’ certificates in respect of any tax liability.
My brother advised me to contact HMRC and ask for an R40 form to claim any tax repayments which might be owed to me.
I was told it could take up to six weeks. There was correspondence in December, when I amended some of the figures regarding my bank interest.
After that I heard nothing. Many phone calls later, I was told in March that my papers might be lost or even still in the post room!
I have since been informed that they have been forwarded to the right department, but it is now more than five months since I applied.
Mrs E.S., Dorset. THE wheels of HMRC can turn extremely slowly, but given that HMRC apparently lost your paperwork in the process, it did seem to me that it should quickly assess whether you were due a tax rebate and expedite any proceeds as soon as possible. And yes, HMRC agreed. I t has apologised f or t he problems you encountered with a tax refund.
It has done its sums, too, and you’ll be pleased to hear that it calculates you are due a tax repayment of £837.57 and a cheque will be sent out within the fortnight. LAST October we booked a holiday in the U.S. for this May, paying a £350 deposit. We are in our mid-70s and took travel insurance with Saga for both of us at a total cost of £647.53.
Unfortunately, my husband had a varicose vein rupture in February and, on his doctor’s advice, we cancelled the holiday. We quite understood that we would lose the £350 deposit and made a claim to Saga, but it has agreed a settlement figure of only £330, which I find most unfair
given that our insurance cost nearly double that amount.
Mrs J.B., Grays, Essex. I THINK there has been some confusion here about what exactly is covered by a travel insurance policy and what is outside its scope.
Your Saga travel policy has, in fact, paid out the cost of your lost deposit, £350, minus an excess of £10 per person, which brought the payout down to £330.
It is sometimes difficult for older people to obtain travel cover and it can be expensive. However, and I agree sadly in your case, given the cost of your travel insurance, the policy does not pay out a refund of the insurance premium.
This isn’t something that Saga has dreamed up — with any insurance, the premium is non-refundable. I AM the executor of my late mother’s estate. Going through her papers, I have found statements from the former Woolwich Building Society (now part of Barclays). I also believe she had some free shares from when the society demutualised, but think these may have been sold.
The trouble is I just don’t know how much money she may or may not have i n the two accounts. The statements show several thousands in each account.
I have come to a complete standstill in trying to ascertain the facts from Barclays. I have telephoned and visited my local branch, to no avail.
C. S., Lichfield. Staffs. YOUR problem isn’t contentious; all you wanted to know is whether your mother’s accounts were still extant. Barclays should have been able to handle this without my involvement.
At the very least, they could have suggested sending your simple query to the bank’s specialist bereavement centre.
It seems likely that when your local branch tried to find out the answers themselves, the stumbling block was the different systems used by the Woolwich to identify accounts.
Woolwich accounts preceding the Barclays merger in 2000 all had the same sort code, and this made it difficult to locate your mother’s accounts.
Existing accounts have all been modified, which gives you a clue to the response that Barclays has now provided.
One of your mother’s accounts was closed in 1998 and the other in 2001.
As you suspected, the 574 free shares in Woolwich were sold in March 1998.