Professional negligence - damages to remote?

[mickmac]

Dear LegalBeagles,

I have an agreement with my bank that they never block my debit card, if something is flagged as suspect they phone me.

Last year I attempted to pay a holding deposit for a very valuable purchase but my debit card was declined. I was advised to contact the bank and tell them I was making the transaction which they should clear. I sent an email to my manager and gave it a few days before attempting the transaction again. I should say there was plenty of money in the account to cover the debit.

Again the transaction was declined and my card was blocked. I lost the opportunity to purchase as another buyer had now paid his holding deposit.

I got an email from the bank saying the card was blocked and they had not phoned as it was late in the evening. The member of staff that blocked the card had then gone off shift and had not left instructions to call me.

A few days later, as luck would have it, the other buyer could not get the funds together and the item was again up for grabs. I contacted the bank and informed them that the item I was buying would be worth a great deal of money to my business. The transaction had to clear or I would again lose the opportunity. That was on the Friday. On the Saturday I got a call from the bank fraud department apologising about the block and the fact they should not have done it......I informed them that I was attempting to secure the purchase of a valuable item for my business. A smaller item had come on the market 5 years ago and having purchased that we made $2M profit. This one was twice the size.

I was assured that the block had been removed.

On the Sunday I got another call from the bank fraud department. Again I explained the importance and value of the transaction they had blocked. Again I was told the block had been removed.

On the Monday I again attempted to pay the holding deposit. The card was still blocked.

I contacted a manager in the customer service department and explained the problem the bank were causing. I further explained the $$$ that would be lost if the deposit was not paid. The manager assured me the card worked. I again attempted to pay the deposits and the card was still blocked.

This time there was no second chance and the purchase was lost.

I informed the bank the card was still blocked and they informed me I was wrong as they could see transactions on the account made via the card.

After weeks of arguments the bank admitted that the transactions on the account were from my wife's debit card and not mine. The had not checked the card number and just assumed as there was activity on the account it must have been my card.

So the bank were negligent and I lost out on the purchase. The bank, on 4 occasions, were informed how important this was and how valuable it was.

The damages are in the millions but are they to remote to recover?

When the card was first blocked the bank were not aware of the importance. They had breached the contract by blocking the card and not phoning. Here the damages are to remote I feel.

On the next attempts to purchase the card was still blocked. The bank had been negligent in not removing the block. They had been made very aware, on four occasions, the importance and value involved. Are the damages here to remote?

Many thanks.

[Tools]

Re: Professional negligence - damages to remote?

If I can ask for some additional information it may help anyone else able to reply.

How much was the deposit transaction and was it to a company outside the UK. I ask this because of Anti Money Laundering regulations and it may be relevant, not accusatory, just for reference.

Also which banks were involved?

[mickmac]

Re: Professional negligence - damages to remote?

1/ The holding deposit was £250.
2/ The seller was outside the UK (USA).
3/ The bank was HSBC
4/ Was attempting to send the deposit via MoneyGram.

The card was declined and then blocked as HSBC does not like MoneyGram I was informed.

[wales01man]

Re: Professional negligence - damages to remote?

Did you get the item the deposit was for?

[mickmac]

Re: Professional negligence - damages to remote?

Did you get the item the deposit was for?

'This time there was no second chance and the purchase was lost.'

No, the item was sold to another buyer.

[wales01man]

Re: Professional negligence - damages to remote?

Can I ask what was the Item and why were you paying by MoneyGram instead of account to account the advice is to not use MoneyGram or services like Western union read the Ebay vehicle scam threads

[mickmac]

Re: Professional negligence - damages to remote?

Can I ask what was the Item and why were you paying by MoneyGram instead of account to account the advice is to not use MoneyGram or services like Western union read the Ebay vehicle scam threads

With all due respect, your question and observations have no relevance. This has nothing to do with Ebay, Western Union, vehicles, scams or MoneyGram.

At no time did I say I was paying for the 'item' via MoneyGram.

[Amethyst]

Re: Professional negligence - damages to remote?

As I understand it you have a specific contract with HSBC that your debit card will not be blocked if they consider transactions to be suspicious but that they contact you first.

Is this in writing ? As this is the basis of the claim we need to know the exact details of that agreement between yourself and HSBC.

Is your wife's debit card attached to the same account as yours ? If so your agreement with the bank covers your debit card as opposed to your banking account ?

4/ Was attempting to send the deposit via MoneyGram.

The card was declined and then blocked as HSBC does not like MoneyGram I was informed.

At no time did I say I was paying for the 'item' via MoneyGram.

Sorry that has confused me a little I'm afraid, could you elaborate a little.

[wales01man]

Re: Professional negligence - damages to remote?

you mentioned MONEYGRAM?
Is this agreement in writing Have you ever As for Claiming Millions in Damages you need a good Solicitor and Barrister to fight for that
How did you try to make the transactions if they say it was with your wifes card they may be in the right you say the agreement is to not block Your card

[mickmac]

Re: Professional negligence - damages to remote?

As I understand it you have a specific contract with HSBC that your debit card will not be blocked if they consider transactions to be suspicious but that they contact you first.

Is this in writing ? As this is the basis of the claim we need to know the exact details of that agreement between yourself and HSBC.

Is your wife's debit card attached to the same account as yours ? If so your agreement with the bank covers your debit card as opposed to your banking account ?





Sorry that has confused me a little I'm afraid, could you elaborate a little.

1/ Yes its marked on my account that the bank should phone me and not block the card's. This is not disputed by HSBC and they have acknowledged that.

2/ Yes my wife has a debit card on the same account and the agreement covers both cards.

3/ MoneyGram informed me the transaction was declined by HSBC and that this was a normal everyday occurrence. I should inform my bank that it was safe to allow the transaction. Reading between the lines it sounded like HSBC blocked any transaction via MoneyGram until the customer contacted them and confirmed it was ok to clear the funds. Kind of like an authorisation code sometimes requested by merchants.

I was paying a holding deposits via MoneyGram. The seller would have then removed the item from sale and allowed us to authenticate the item and arrange a bank wire for full payment.

[mickmac]

Re: Professional negligence - damages to remote?

you mentioned MONEYGRAM?
Is this agreement in writing Have you ever As for Claiming Millions in Damages you need a good Solicitor and Barrister to fight for that
How did you try to make the transactions if they say it was with your wifes card they may be in the right you say the agreement is to not block Your card

Sorry you lost me here.

I've never said I used my wife's card. The bank never removed the block on my card, they simply looked at the account and reported back to me that debit card activity was showing on the account so my card must be working. The activity on the account was my wife using her card (different card number).

[wales01man]

Re: Professional negligence - damages to remote?

I am confused you have said in one post its nothing to do with MoneyGram then say MoneyGram said the transaction was declined?
With the greatest respect do you really thing a Bank will give you Millions in compo without a long costly fight are you prepared to fight it

[leclerc]

Re: Professional negligence - damages to remote?

Sorry you lost me here.

I've never said I used my wife's card. The bank never removed the block on my card, they simply looked at the account and reported back to me that debit card activity was showing on the account so my card must be working. The activity on the account was my wife using her card (different card number).

Am quoting the last post you made simply for ease of reference. Have you approached the bank? Have you made a formal complaint to the bank over the matter and what has been the response to yourself so far?

As I assume that you have a personal manager then we are talking about a HSBC Premium or even Private manager, ie a person with assets of either 100k+ or £250k+.

Depending on the banks' response will depend on the advice given but if the losses are in the millions then I suspect that the advice should be to consult your solicitor in this regards if you are looking at litigating with the bank due to the amount of damages that you believe have been caused by their negligence.

[Amethyst]

Re: Professional negligence - damages to remote?

1/ Yes its marked on my account that the bank should phone me and not block the card's. This is not disputed by HSBC and they have acknowledged that.

2/ Yes my wife has a debit card on the same account and the agreement covers both cards.

3/ MoneyGram informed me the transaction was declined by HSBC and that this was a normal everyday occurrence. I should inform my bank that it was safe to allow the transaction. Reading between the lines it sounded like HSBC blocked any transaction via MoneyGram until the customer contacted them and confirmed it was ok to clear the funds. Kind of like an authorisation code sometimes requested by merchants.

I was paying a holding deposits via MoneyGram. The seller would have then removed the item from sale and allowed us to authenticate the item and arrange a bank wire for full payment.

Okay that all sounds fine then and the bank has acknowledged they have messed up.

Damages wise - it would be based on loss of chance - which is notoriously difficult to claim on and quantify - although it may be foreseeable that the banks actions would cause the loss of chance - as you had specifically told them about the transaction in advance - particularly prior to your second attempt to make the purchase.

I'm not sure if you could have acted to minimise the effects - eg. in using an alternative payment method (eg. not through moneygram or by using a different debit or credit card) - or if the potential profits you might have made having made the purchase is too remote - particularly as the deposit was to secure the item for you to assess - and then decide whether to go ahead or not. Loss of chance damages would be to put you into the position you would have been in if you had not lost the opportunity - and you have no way of knowing whether the purchase would have led to profits or not.

I do think the most you can hope for is some compensation from the bank.

[mickmac]

Re: Professional negligence - damages to remote?

Thanks for the reply Amethyst.

I'm not sure if you could have acted to minimise the effects - eg. in using an alternative payment method (eg. not through moneygram or by using a different debit or credit card)

I was away from home and unfortunately had no other card. I could have suggested an alternative to Moneygram but my card had already been blocked so nothing was going to work.

or if the potential profits you might have made having made the purchase is too remote

Some 5 years ago I purchased a like item, all be it 50% smaller. All monies from that enterprise were deposited with HSBC for 3 years, so they knew the profits I had previously generated. This was pointed out to HSBC when I attempted to get the card unblocked. Does that still make it too remote?