Small Court Claim against Bank

[onebigissue]

I'd like to sue Barclays for £2500 payment dispute and I'd be grateful if you guys can help me if this is possible or not without judging me. I live in Scotland and thinking to submit Small court claim in the England. I also have option to start Simple procedure claim in Scotland but I am confused between these two.

Background, around 4 months ago, I sold some assets online and buyer made online transfer from his account to my Barclays account. I also made some additional verification checks which were alright and I didn't think this could be a fraud. Next day, he reported my bank account for charge back and bank frozen my account and started fraud investigation. I believe, buyer himself did this fraud and he reported my account for chargeback after receiving assets.

Bank accepted my evidence that I was innocent and not to be blamed for this but bank returned £2500 to the sender and closed my account. Bank told me over the phone that buyer account details including his mobile phone were stolen and someone else made that payment not the buyer. Bank said I am the victim of online fraud not the buyer whose account was hacked. I asked the bank to provide me some information what evidence they have to make this decision but I was not provided anything at all. I believe bank not have any evidence from other side and they just accepted his words to return money. Bank even refused me to tell under what circumstances this payment was authorised, did buyer report this to the Police and how his mobile phone used to authorise payment.

I also reported this incident to the Police and Police advised me to forward crime reference to the bank. Police said bank should refer this incident to the Police if they think fraud had happened but bank refused to refer to the Police. I also submitted complaint to the website but website asked me to provide evidence from bank how this decision was made but bank refused to provide me anything.

I've completed bank complaint procedure and now don't want to go to Financial Ombudsman. They not addressed £2500 dispute in the final response letter and I just received a generic letter.

I can't sue the buyer directly as I have his name and bank account details but don't have his address.

Can I sue bank on the basis of evidence as bank doesn't have any evidence and not provided any explanation? I can prove why I received payment but bank can not prove who made payment from other side.

Is there any other way to sort this out which I may not be aware of?

Please share your expert advice and experiences.

Thank you.

[echat11]

Why don't you want to go to the FOS?

[onebigissue]

Why don't you want to go to the FOS?

Please check TrustPilot FOS reviews, 90% people can't be wrong. I want my case to be decided by a qualified judge not by an unqualified case worker.

[echat11]

Please check TrustPilot FOS reviews, 90% people can't be wrong. I want my case to be decided by a qualified judge not by an unqualified case worker.

Yes, but Courts should be seen as a last resort.
The Courts will want to see that you've tried everything to resolve the matter before you turn to them.
Not everybody who has a case with the FOS lodges a review with Trustpilot. TrustPilot isn't reliable.

[onebigissue]

Yes, but Courts should be seen as a last resort.
The Courts will want to see that you've tried everything to resolve the matter before you turn to them.
Not everybody who has a case with the FOS lodges a review with Trustpilot. TrustPilot isn't reliable.

Yes, I've tried everything on my disposal except FOS to resolve this matter without going to the court. Sent five letters and called more than 10 times and completed their complaint procedure but not received a single word why they deducted money from my account. Now I sent Letter before claim and waiting 14 days passed.

I've documented evidence of everything. I can't see any worth first spending more than 2 years with FOS and then go to the court if I lost and bank could use FOS decision in court as a defence if I lost and it'd be impossible for me to win.

[EXC]

Please check TrustPilot FOS reviews, 90% people can't be wrong. I want my case to be decided by a qualified judge not by an unqualified case worker.

TrustPilot reviews aren't an accurate indicator of their performance. The uphold rate of FOS is actually 40%.

If you go to FOS first you still have the option of going to court after, but not the other way round.

I can't see any worth first spending more than 2 years with FOS and then go to the court if I lost and bank could use FOS decision in court as a defence if I lost and it'd be impossible for me to win.

FOS decision are based on what they think is fair and reasonable and court decisions are based on the law. So FOS decisions are worthless in the context of legal proceedings.

[des8]

You sold assets which were paid for by transfer from the buyer's bank.
The buyer then made chargeback on basis he had not authorised payment.
Why don't you sue the buyer?

[onebigissue]

You sold assets which were paid for by transfer from the buyer's bank.
The buyer then made chargeback on basis he had not authorised payment.
Why don't you sue the buyer?

I don't have buyer address. I do have his name and bank account details but not address.

[onebigissue]

FOS decision are based on what they think is fair and reasonable and court decisions are based on the law. So FOS decisions are worthless in the context of legal proceedings.

That is why I want my case to be decided on the basis of law and bank must prove their decision in the court. I only want to try one route and if I lost in the court, that would be the end of the story. Not worth time and effort to go to FOS first and then court.

I called MCOL and they confirmed I can start small court claim without going to the FOS and guy told me to follow pre-action protocol which I already started.

I also asked the bank to explain me under what law, terms and condition they deducted money from my account but they are not replying to me.

Does bank have to follow any rules and law to do this?

[echat11]

That is why I want my case to be decided on the basis of law and bank must prove their decision in the court. I only want to try one route and if I lost in the court, that would be the end of the story. Not worth time and effort to go to FOS first and then court.

I called MCOL and they confirmed I can start small court claim without going to the FOS and guy told me to follow pre-action protocol which I already started.

I also asked the bank to explain me under what law, terms and condition they deducted money from my account but they are not replying to me.

Does bank have to follow any rules and law to do this?

Banks will have Terms and Conditions, they'll have there own complaints procedure.

Banks are Regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority - https://www.fca.org.uk/

[onebigissue]

Banks will have Terms and Conditions, they'll have there own complaints procedure.

Banks are Regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority - https://www.fca.org.uk/

Thank you for sharing these info.

I want to clear one confusing if anyone here can help me. I've documented evidence to prove myself but bank not providing any info or evidence to prove their decision. I understand parties have to exchange evidence before hearing in small claim courts. I do have 3 legal grounds to sue bank like unfair treatment and negligence but my main reason would be bank have to explain and provide evidence in the court to prove their decision. I think in this situation proof of burden would be on the bank. Can court decide on this basis if bank failed to provide any evidence?