In article <u2ge08$2dnp9$4@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> scribeth thus
>On 28/04/2023 13:14, Andy Burns wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> Barclays support is utter shit
>> Ever since I've had NFC-capable devices, Barclays have not allowed
>> google pay/wallet to use their cards, insisting the barclays app has to
>> be used for contactless payment.  This works, but is a pain in the arse
>> because every time their app updates, not only do you have to accept the
>> updated T&C, you have to reset their app as the default payment app for
>> the phone.
>>
>> Today I got a text saying I can no longer use the barclays contactless
>> payment, and have to enroll my debit card into google wallet ...
>>
>> Previously barclays were were very clear that provided I didn't use the
>> phone "incorrectly" for payments, they would cover any fraudulent
>> activity in the same way as they do for the actual debit card, now the
>> boundary between barclays and google sounds very "woolly" ...
>>
>>
>Barclays online banking are a total load of vaginas. The tech is crap,
>the support is zero, and the customer service ethic has long since
>vanished.
>
>If there were any better banks, I'd move. HSBC turned out to be even worse.
>
>The retail banks are criminals that are too big to prosecute
>
>Caveat emptor...
>
>

I know there people you now use Starling bank and they think its the
dogs wotsits!..

--
Tony Sayer

Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

On 30/04/2023 15:28, charles wrote:
> In article <u2lsbt$3hoan$2@dont-email.me>, Andrew
> <Andrew97d@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On 30/04/2023 12:56, Andy Burns wrote:
>>> Roger Mills wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't have any experience of personal banking with Barclays - except
>>>> for a Barclaycard which won't allow itself to be added to my Google
>>>> Wallet.
>>>
>>> previously my barclays debit card wouldn't allow it, but that's changed
>>> now, maybe give it another go?
>>>
>>> <https://www.barclaycard.co.uk/personal/customer/contactless-mobile>
>>>
>>>> But I DO have experience of their Business Banking - which is utter
>>>> crap.
>>>
>>> Several years ago, I wanted new business account, thought it'd be
>>> simple to use barclays as I'd had my personal accounts with them for
>>> decades.
>>>
>>> So went into the branch, asked to speak to someone, was directed to a
>>> desk with a phone on it which connected direct to their call centre,
>>> whoever answered offered me an appointment in two weeks time in a
>>> different town to discuss it ... i walked out of barclays, over the
>>> road into santander, and walked out with a functioning bank account ...
>
>> Which could be why 9 out of 10 identity thieves, who expressed a
>> preference, preferred Santander :-( . I got by with a Nationwide
>> Treasurers account for years. Totally free but limited to only 3 cheques
>> per month, after which there was a £2 fee per cheque. I don't think they
>> have this type of account any longer.
>
>> Even more amazing is Companies House who apparently do not even bother to
>> check the identities of directors names when a new company is created.
>
> My own experience of Barclays stemmed from being made Treasurer of a branch
> of a charity. I filled in the on-line form and got the other signatories to
> sign it and sent it off. After about a month I was told I'd used the wrong
> form. So we all filled in another form. a couple of months later that was
> rejected because they didn't accept the signatories. They wanted the
> original signatories for the account. Those people had both been dead for
> a number of years. It was pointed out to them that the signatories they
> rejected had been accepted by them on cheques for the previous 10 years.
> some 7 months after the original request, I became a accepted signatory.
>

But had Barclays ever been informed of the death of those
signatories, and a request made for reprinted cheques ?.

How were cheques signed when not all signatories were
alive ??

On 29/04/2023 23:28, Tim Streater wrote:
> On 29 Apr 2023 at 20:48:56 BST, "Roger Mills" <mills37.fslife@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 28/04/2023 13:14, Andy Burns wrote:
>>> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>> Barclays support is utter shit
>>> Ever since I've had NFC-capable devices, Barclays have not allowed
>>> google pay/wallet to use their cards, insisting the barclays app has to
>>> be used for contactless payment. This works, but is a pain in the arse
>>> because every time their app updates, not only do you have to accept the
>>> updated T&C, you have to reset their app as the default payment app for
>>> the phone.
>>>
>>> Today I got a text saying I can no longer use the barclays contactless
>>> payment, and have to enroll my debit card into google wallet ...
>>>
>>> Previously barclays were were very clear that provided I didn't use the
>>> phone "incorrectly" for payments, they would cover any fraudulent
>>> activity in the same way as they do for the actual debit card, now the
>>> boundary between barclays and google sounds very "woolly" ...
>>
>> I don't have any experience of personal banking with Barclays - except
>> for a Barclaycard which won't allow itself to be added to my Google Wallet.
>>
>> But I DO have experience of their Business Banking - which is utter
>> crap. Getting signatories added to or removed from the account is a
>> total nightmare - particularly if online banking is involved. And they
>> keep encouraging us to use their mobile app - except that you can't use
>> it on accounts where two signatures are required! Lloyds, on the other
>> hand, DO allow their mobile app to be used in the same circumstances -
>> so there can't be any technical reasons why Barclays refuse to do it.
>>
>> My advice is to avoid Barclays like the plague!
>
> My experience e to small business / community banking, where none of them
> appears to have a sensible method for changing signatories - the list of
> signatories being something which tends to change. Further, they encourage
> online banking but don't seem to provide a method for doing it securely. Send
> a cheque and they want (say) two signatures. Do it online and the (one) person
> with online access is allowed to do it (and in principle could, by themself,
> empty the account).
>
> You'd think they could come up with a scheme whereby online requires two
> people with access, the first of whom initiates an online activity (e.g.
> sending dosh to pay a bill), which triggers an email to the second person, who
> them has to login and approve the activity.
>
To an extent, they already do this as long as you use a computer and
browser. Both Barclays and Lloyds do this. Lloyds also allow it to be
done using a mobile app but Barclays don't. If you have a so called
"complex mandate" you can't use the app at all - not even for checking
the balance. If you want to use the app, you have to change to a simple
mandate - where any one person can run riot with the account, unchecked.
UGH!
--
Cheers,
Roger

On 30/04/2023 15:28, charles wrote:
> In article <u2lsbt$3hoan$2@dont-email.me>, Andrew
> <Andrew97d@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On 30/04/2023 12:56, Andy Burns wrote:
>>> Roger Mills wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't have any experience of personal banking with Barclays - except
>>>> for a Barclaycard which won't allow itself to be added to my Google
>>>> Wallet.
>>>
>>> previously my barclays debit card wouldn't allow it, but that's changed
>>> now, maybe give it another go?
>>>
>>> <https://www.barclaycard.co.uk/personal/customer/contactless-mobile>
>>>
>>>> But I DO have experience of their Business Banking - which is utter
>>>> crap.
>>>
>>> Several years ago, I wanted new business account, thought it'd be
>>> simple to use barclays as I'd had my personal accounts with them for
>>> decades.
>>>
>>> So went into the branch, asked to speak to someone, was directed to a
>>> desk with a phone on it which connected direct to their call centre,
>>> whoever answered offered me an appointment in two weeks time in a
>>> different town to discuss it ... i walked out of barclays, over the
>>> road into santander, and walked out with a functioning bank account ...
>
>> Which could be why 9 out of 10 identity thieves, who expressed a
>> preference, preferred Santander :-( . I got by with a Nationwide
>> Treasurers account for years. Totally free but limited to only 3 cheques
>> per month, after which there was a £2 fee per cheque. I don't think they
>> have this type of account any longer.
>
>> Even more amazing is Companies House who apparently do not even bother to
>> check the identities of directors names when a new company is created.
>
> My own experience of Barclays stemmed from being made Treasurer of a branch
> of a charity. I filled in the on-line form and got the other signatories to
> sign it and sent it off. After about a month I was told I'd used the wrong
> form. So we all filled in another form. a couple of months later that was
> rejected because they didn't accept the signatories. They wanted the
> original signatories for the account. Those people had both been dead for
> a number of years. It was pointed out to them that the signatories they
> rejected had been accepted by them on cheques for the previous 10 years.
> some 7 months after the original request, I became a accepted signatory.
>

Very similar to my experience. There is a very high probability that
they will lose any forms which you send them. On at least 2 occasions
we've had to start from scratch with our signatories because their
records are dire and they have people listed who died years ago.
--
Cheers,
Roger

On 30/04/2023 22:06, Andrew wrote:

>
> But had Barclays ever been informed of the death of those
> signatories, and a request made for reprinted cheques ?.
>
> How were cheques signed when not all signatories were
> alive ??

I have concluded from my experiences that the main problem is the
dreadful telephone support system. In all cases issues that could be
resolved by turning up in branch armed with e.g. drivers licence and/or
passport, were resolved efficiently and quickly by staff.

But the online support was simply beyond belief. You never talk to the
same person twice, and then it was always some Indian call centre using
low bandwidth VOIP with such poor quality that the subcontinental accent
became completely unintelligible, you walked through a security script
which took 5 minutes every time you called, and then they didn't have
the power to fix the problem or know the answer anyway.

The whole experience of dealing with online support at both HSBC and
Barclays led me to close the two associated accounts.

It was clear that neither was interested in having me as a customer.

--
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

In article <u2ml9i$3n5jn$1@dont-email.me>, Andrew
<Andrew97d@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On 30/04/2023 15:28, charles wrote:
> > In article <u2lsbt$3hoan$2@dont-email.me>, Andrew
> > <Andrew97d@btinternet.com> wrote:
> >> On 30/04/2023 12:56, Andy Burns wrote:
> >>> Roger Mills wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I don't have any experience of personal banking with Barclays -
> >>>> except for a Barclaycard which won't allow itself to be added to my
> >>>> Google Wallet.
> >>>
> >>> previously my barclays debit card wouldn't allow it, but that's
> >>> changed now, maybe give it another go?
> >>>
> >>> <https://www.barclaycard.co.uk/personal/customer/contactless-mobile>
> >>>
> >>>> But I DO have experience of their Business Banking - which is utter
> >>>> crap.
> >>>
> >>> Several years ago, I wanted new business account, thought it'd be
> >>> simple to use barclays as I'd had my personal accounts with them for
> >>> decades.
> >>>
> >>> So went into the branch, asked to speak to someone, was directed to a
> >>> desk with a phone on it which connected direct to their call centre,
> >>> whoever answered offered me an appointment in two weeks time in a
> >>> different town to discuss it ... i walked out of barclays, over the
> >>> road into santander, and walked out with a functioning bank account
> >>> ...
> >
> >> Which could be why 9 out of 10 identity thieves, who expressed a
> >> preference, preferred Santander :-( . I got by with a Nationwide
> >> Treasurers account for years. Totally free but limited to only 3
> >> cheques per month, after which there was a £2 fee per cheque. I don't
> >> think they have this type of account any longer.
> >
> >> Even more amazing is Companies House who apparently do not even bother
> >> to check the identities of directors names when a new company is
> >> created.
> >
> > My own experience of Barclays stemmed from being made Treasurer of a
> > branch of a charity. I filled in the on-line form and got the other
> > signatories to sign it and sent it off. After about a month I was told
> > I'd used the wrong form. So we all filled in another form. a couple
> > of months later that was rejected because they didn't accept the
> > signatories. They wanted the original signatories for the account.
> > Those people had both been dead for a number of years. It was pointed
> > out to them that the signatories they rejected had been accepted by
> > them on cheques for the previous 10 years. some 7 months after the
> > original request, I became a accepted signatory.
> >

> But had Barclays ever been informed of the death of those signatories,
> and a request made for reprinted cheques ?.

They already had replacement signatures for these people and accepted them
on cheques. No change of cheques regquired

> How were cheques signed when not all signatories were alive ??

They knew about the new signatories

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On Sun, 30 Apr 2023 15:28:06 +0100, charles <charles@candehope.me.uk>
wrote:

>In article <u2lsbt$3hoan$2@dont-email.me>, Andrew
><Andrew97d@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On 30/04/2023 12:56, Andy Burns wrote:
>> > Roger Mills wrote:
>> >
>> >> I don't have any experience of personal banking with Barclays - except
>> >> for a Barclaycard which won't allow itself to be added to my Google
>> >> Wallet.
>> >
>> > previously my barclays debit card wouldn't allow it, but that's changed
>> > now, maybe give it another go?
>> >
>> > <https://www.barclaycard.co.uk/personal/customer/contactless-mobile>
>> >
>> >> But I DO have experience of their Business Banking - which is utter
>> >> crap.
>> >
>> > Several years ago, I wanted new business account, thought it'd be
>> > simple to use barclays as I'd had my personal accounts with them for
>> > decades.
>> >
>> > So went into the branch, asked to speak to someone, was directed to a
>> > desk with a phone on it which connected direct to their call centre,
>> > whoever answered offered me an appointment in two weeks time in a
>> > different town to discuss it ... i walked out of barclays, over the
>> > road into santander, and walked out with a functioning bank account ...
>
>> Which could be why 9 out of 10 identity thieves, who expressed a
>> preference, preferred Santander :-( . I got by with a Nationwide
>> Treasurers account for years. Totally free but limited to only 3 cheques
>> per month, after which there was a £2 fee per cheque. I don't think they
>> have this type of account any longer.
>
>> Even more amazing is Companies House who apparently do not even bother to
>> check the identities of directors names when a new company is created.
>
>My own experience of Barclays stemmed from being made Treasurer of a branch
>of a charity. I filled in the on-line form and got the other signatories to
>sign it and sent it off. After about a month I was told I'd used the wrong
>form. So we all filled in another form. a couple of months later that was
>rejected because they didn't accept the signatories. They wanted the
>original signatories for the account. Those people had both been dead for
>a number of years. It was pointed out to them that the signatories they
>rejected had been accepted by them on cheques for the previous 10 years.
>some 7 months after the original request, I became a accepted signatory.

Best I had was when the treasurer of our Residents' Association went
to prison for fraud. Barclays wanted his signature on the form for
change of signatories. Eventually, they agreed to accept a certified
copy of the minutes.

On 01/05/2023 09:57, Scott wrote:

>
> Best I had was when the treasurer of our Residents' Association went
> to prison for fraud. Barclays wanted his signature on the form for
> change of signatories.

Much like the Companies House fraud where a fraudster is using a random
UK address as a company registered address. When the householder
complains to Companies House about the fraud Companies House will only
remove the address if authorised by the fraudster.

I don't know what the full details of the fraud but the random address
that has been registered will later start getting letters from HM
Revenue & Customs.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

alan_m wrote:

> Much like the Companies House fraud where a fraudster is using a random
> UK address as a company registered address.  When the householder
> complains to Companies House about the fraud Companies House will only
> remove the address if authorised by the fraudster.

I had someone use my home address as the registered office for a
company, I spoke to Companies House, they said they would have to write
to the directors at both my address and their personal addresses, and
that when I received the letter I should simply ignore it (that part
obviously in case I was maliciously reporting an incorrect address).

Never heard anything else after that.

On Mon, 1 May 2023 15:00:26 +0100, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
wrote:

>alan_m wrote:
>
>> Much like the Companies House fraud where a fraudster is using a random
>> UK address as a company registered address.  When the householder
>> complains to Companies House about the fraud Companies House will only
>> remove the address if authorised by the fraudster.
>
>I had someone use my home address as the registered office for a
>company, I spoke to Companies House, they said they would have to write
>to the directors at both my address and their personal addresses, and
>that when I received the letter I should simply ignore it (that part
>obviously in case I was maliciously reporting an incorrect address).
>
If they were half decent fraudsters, surely their personal addressees
would also be false?

Scott wrote:

> Andy Burns wrote:
>
>> I had someone use my home address as the registered office for a
>> company, I spoke to Companies House, they said they would have to write
>> to the directors at both my address and their personal addresses, and
>> that when I received the letter I should simply ignore it (that part
>> obviously in case I was maliciously reporting an incorrect address).
>>
> If they were half decent fraudsters, surely their personal addressees
> would also be false?

IIRC the gist of the letter was "if you don't correct the details, we'll
strike-off your company" so if all the addresses they used were false
that would effectively end their fake company.

On 01/05/2023 15:28, Scott wrote:
> On Mon, 1 May 2023 15:00:26 +0100, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> alan_m wrote:
>>
>>> Much like the Companies House fraud where a fraudster is using a random
>>> UK address as a company registered address.  When the householder
>>> complains to Companies House about the fraud Companies House will only
>>> remove the address if authorised by the fraudster.
>>
>> I had someone use my home address as the registered office for a
>> company, I spoke to Companies House, they said they would have to write
>> to the directors at both my address and their personal addresses, and
>> that when I received the letter I should simply ignore it (that part
>> obviously in case I was maliciously reporting an incorrect address).
>>
> If they were half decent fraudsters, surely their personal addressees
> would also be false?

And fake directors names too -

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/want-set-up-scam-company-26371651

In article <kb1rljF17t8U1@mid.individual.net>,
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> > Barclays support is utter shit
> Ever since I've had NFC-capable devices, Barclays have not allowed
> google pay/wallet to use their cards, insisting the barclays app has to
> be used for contactless payment. This works, but is a pain in the arse
> because every time their app updates, not only do you have to accept the
> updated T&C, you have to reset their app as the default payment app for
> the phone.

> Today I got a text saying I can no longer use the barclays contactless
> payment, and have to enroll my debit card into google wallet ...

> Previously barclays were were very clear that provided I didn't use the
> phone "incorrectly" for payments, they would cover any fraudulent
> activity in the same way as they do for the actual debit card, now the
> boundary between barclays and google sounds very "woolly" ...

Using an Android phone, the Barclay app was shaky at best for contactless.
The Barclaycard App - despite looking near identical - better. But only
with a debit card. And still flaky.

Gave up with support. Constant promises to get back to me with a solution,
then nothing. The rest of the App worked OK for doing other payments, etc.

Pleased to say Google pay works every time.

--
*If God had wanted me to touch my toes, he would have put them on my knees

Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman wrote:

> Pleased to say Google pay works every time.

Another advantage is that it geolocates each contactless payment ...
quite handy when you come across a pub which sets its name to "." on the
bank statement!