Why should we all pay for those who’ve been scammed?

[Raisinganiguana]

I’m watching Steph’s Packed Lunch and there’s a woman on there who sadly got romance scammed for £30k. Afterwards, the financial expert was really clear that if this happens to you, the banks have to give you your money back. He even said they can’t ‘weasel’ out of it.

I’m sorry for the lady, but why should everyone else pay for what is essentially someone choosing to give someone else money? We don’t pay people back if they gamble it away, so why do we demand it just because they’ve fallen for a story?

She wasn’t someone very old or vulnerable. She chose to send this man money.

btw the scammer’s story was ridiculous - and the man’s photos were actually of some super hot model - so how one falls for these is another thing….especially as there are back to back warnings everywhere and on every bloody programme nowadays.

AIBU that people need to take some responsibility?

Perhaps you should listen to Radio 4 File on Four this evening investigating scams and fraud and how highly intelligent individuals are conned into push payment fraud and the psychological’ spell’ exerted by very clever fraudsters.
Some banks are signed up to compensating victims. The programme dealt with the devastating effects resulting in some cases suicide.
The incidence of fraud is now enormous because of lack of regulations. The uk is known as the money laundering capital of the world. I wouldn’t be so judgemental- it will happen to you OP

@Raisinganiguana it’s 30k, lighten up. Do you have any idea how small that amount is to a bank?

Speaking as a bank shareholder, the more that is "creamed off" as you put it for shareholders the better IMO.

Remember under Company law, a company's first duty is to its shareholders not its customers.

Well, I'm always pleased to see when banks recompense people who have been scammed.

You never know, one day it might happen to you. Some of these scammers are so convincing.

Some people are more vulnerable than others - maybe very lonely or with mental health issues or learning difficulties.

I never thought I’d be caught out, but I was. Wasn’t a romance scam. Never got a penny back, nor did I expect to.

Well yes, I know, but there’s a a tension with banking, as it’s also a social good. One we can’t function without. So banks have to be mindful of that as well as grasping for every penny of profit. Hence regulations etc.

There’s making profit fairly and there’s fleecing people or treating your customers unfairly.

I was just chuckling at the idea the banks would use any profit to ease the burdens of their customers, if they didn’t have to! As you so rightly point out, pigs would fly sooner.

I agree. I mean banks should 100% cover stolen cards, cloned cards etc as that theft.
however someone willingly transferring money to a stranger…. I wouldn’t expect that to be covered.

I tried to transfer some money (£10,000) from my bank account to another bank. Trying to make the transaction I was asked repeatedly if I had been asked to transfer this money, I was also asked repeatedly if I was sure I wanted to transfer the money. The bank then stopped my account and asked me to telephone them. I had to go through a whole lot of security questions as to why I wanted to transfer the money, was I sure I knew who I was transferring the money to etc. At the time I was pretty annoyed as it was my money. But I realised it was for my protection. If after all of this I was still being scammed then I think it would be my own fault. Some of these women who think they are being talked to by a handsome young or middle aged man probably saying he is in the US army a doctor etc. should take a look in the mirror and think why the hell would a good looking younger doctor want me. I know I would.

I caught part of an interesting programme on R4 today about "magic spell" scams. The example they give was that of a woman who had been convinced that criminals had infiltrated her local branch of her Building Society and that, to protect her money, she must take out large sums of cash and put it into an envelope and post it to someone totally unknown to her to look after them. Part of the scam was preparing her for the fact that someone "pretending" to be from the BS's fraud department might contact her and convincing her that, if they did, she had to lie about it. The BS noticed that large sums of cash were being withdrawn and duly contacted her, and she duly lied about it. Fortunately she was a bad liar, and the investigator was very persistent and eventually got through to her that he was genuine and she really was being scammed, whereupon she was mortified both that she'd been taken in but also that she had lied.

Obviously it looks as if you would have to be totally naive to accept a story like that, but the person they were interviewing said that the techniques professional scam artists use are extremely sophisticated, and uncannily similar to the practices of people who groom vulnerable people in order to abuse them, and people who go in for coercive control. We know only too well how many people get sucked in by that sort of thing, so I wouldn't be too dismissive of people who fall for scams. We would never say that the grooming victim deserves to be abused, so why do some people in effect say that the scam victim deserves to be defrauded?

I caught part of an interesting programme on R4 today about "magic spell" scams.

In a world of magic words, it seems quite plausible.

We would never say that the grooming victim deserves to be abused, so why do some people in effect say that the scam victim deserves to be defrauded?

it’s nothing to do with anyone deserving anything. No-one deserves to be burgled but would you say you should fund returning their items/ money? No-one deserves to be mugged etc etc.

They are two different concepts.

’it looks as though you’d have to be totally naive to accept a story like that.’

I mean, it doesn’t ’look like’ it’s sheer stupidity. Sending all your savings in the post to a random person? Come on

Maybe there should be an IQ test for anyone seeking to open a bank account.

Worked out that the programme was You and Yours - https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001rq5h

Worth a listen.

One mistake such as falling for a phishing scam in an email is one thing. Persistently allowing yourself to be fleeced because you believe a hot 20 year old millionaire from the Med / Russian model has fallen for you, a 60-something grandmother / 70-year-old pensioner from Merseyside, is quite another

Exactly this!
Also, if I lend a friend money and they don’t pay me back even though they said they would, I don’t think bank would pay me back. What’s the difference?
I’m sure there are men and women who pretend to be in love with someone just to be able to live at theirs rent-free and/or get things paid for. Again, banks won’t reimburse.

Actually the mugging is a great example: if I buy an expensive item, walk out of the shop and someone grabs the shopping bag from me, the bank won’t reimburse anything.
But you could argue that I am even more blame-less than someone falling for a romance scam. How is that fair?

I would expect a burglary victim’s insurance policy to pay out. And I wouldn’t then moan about the infinitesimal effect this might have on my own premiums.

Because a burglary victim has insured themselves against burglary, that's why you'd expect it to pay out. It wouldn't pay out if they left the front door wide open, or didn't use the locks they specified in their application, or advertised that the house was empty, or left it empty for longer than the policy allowed.

Customers are expected to take reasonable precautions eg not writing down or sharing their security info for online banking, or card PIN

It's every lunchtime this week and it's been horrifying. Just glad that if it happened to me or vulnerable family members that we wouldn't be left penniless.

The other big area of focus is the banks/payment firms that allow fraudsters and money mules to open accounts to receive the proceeds of frauds

The fraudsters are using accounts that have been opened legitimately. Accounts of foreign students who have returned home, don't need their UK accounts but have sold them on for a handful of cash, people who've been asked to accept money for a 'friend' and pass it on....do you think people open a bank account announcing they're a money mule or a fraudster?

So the banks are advising people not to transfer money into a particular bank account because they think that that account belongs to scammers.
What's to stop them investigating that scam account? Why did they allow the scam account to be opened?

if you're in Lloyds bank and a customer insists on transferring all her money to a account with Metro, what investigations do you think Lloyds can do? they can warn the customer - which they do - they can tell her that a bank will never ask you to transfer funds to a safe account (which they won't); but if the customer insists and doesn't appear vulnerable and wants her money transferred, what do they do?

And banks don't allow scam accounts to be opened, as I've said upthread.

Strange to me that you're victim blaming people who got scammed.

I'm very savvy, as part of my past job I pointed out scams to other people but there's ones I've been on the receiving end that look incredibly realistic. If I'm a customer of a bank surely I'm entitled to support and protection from them? Otherwise why is my money there instead of a credit union or a suitcase under the bed? Everyone is to some degree vulnerable to scams and its unreasonable of you to judge them. What sickens me is the unbelievable bonuses and wages top bankers are on. Of course they should be helping customers who fall into trouble.

But then maybe you'd rather have about society with more poverty, more crime, poorer health rates, higher mortality rates... because we are 'paying' a minimal amount to make sure that's not the type of society we have. It benefits us all in the long run.

You and Yours on Radio 4 have been talking about all this week. Like a PP I heard the one today where the woman was told the lie to tell the fraud investigator. She refused to believe that it was fraud.
There was also a case where the scammers made the victim open a revolut account as they knew their protection was less. Revolut tried to stop them and got them to take a selfie holding up a sign saying something like ‘I have been told that I am being scammed but am still going ahead with the transfer’.

I have a friend who was the victim of a romance scam. He moved in with her etc but one day she woke up and he’d nicked everything he could and emptied her bank account of the little money she had.

An Interpol report from June on these scams might indicate why banks are refunding. This is a global issue with victims on all sides. It's really really not just a matter of a few people being foolish. https://www.interpol.int/en/News-and-Events/News/2023/INTERPOL-issues-global-warning-on-human-trafficking-fueled-fraud

An Interpol report from June on these scams might indicate why banks are refunding

why is this an argument for refunding? Surely consequences on those in first world countries would have more effect?

Have you read the statement? They consider that the problem is huge and worldwide, that potentially anyone can be affected and that those who are are victims of crime. They've listed the bodies that need to work together to solve it. That doesn't include victims.