Questions Of Cash: It's Barclays vs Carphone in a debit dispute. Guess who lost?

Paul Gosling
Saturday 18 November 2006 01:00 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Q: I bought a mobile phone online from Carphone Warehouse in the spring. A monthly direct debit was set up and the first payment of £32 taken from my account. But Carphone Warehouse claimed this payment was rejected and required me to pay it again - which I did. When I spoke to my bank, Barclays, it insisted the sum had been paid. Each says the other has the money. Who has?
AA, by e-mail.

A: Initially, we had the same experience - Carphone Warehouse and Barclays each blamed the other. Eventually, we established that in your initial payment instruction online, you accidentally inserted your credit-card number in place of your current account number, sparking months of confusion.

There remains a disagreement between Carphone Warehouse and Barclays about what happened next - but Carphone Warehouse now accepts that it collected an extra month's direct debit and has repaid £32 to you.

We are concerned at the volume of complaints we receive about Carphone Warehouse. This - on top of Ofcom's criticism of it for making "silent calls" (because its computers dial too many phone numbers to be handled by its call-centre staff), and a fine of £245,000 from the Financial Services Authority for failures in its sales of insurance - suggests that the company needs to sort itself out.

Q: I bought a Viyella jacket in its Chichester store for £31.20. When the bill came from Clydesdale Financial Services in early September, I inadvertently made an internet payment transaction of £3,120. I immediately spoke to Clydesdale FS, which said it could do nothing until the payment was processed - in the meantime, my bank has charged me £25 a day for going overdrawn.

When Clydesdale FS did receive the money, it said it would take three to five days to process a refund. But it has taken more than 10 days and by the time the cheque is processed by my bank I will have been overdrawn for weeks.
LH, Hampshire.

A: This is a timely warning - in the run-up to the Christmas internet shopping season - of what happens when internet payments are treated with insufficient care. Clydesdale Financial Services, part of Barclaycard (Clydesdale Bank is unconnected and part of the National Australian Bank), apologises for the misinformation suggesting that a payment could be cleared in three to five days. You should have been told that it would be seven to 10 days. By Barclaycard's calculations, it took eight days - but allowing for postal delivery and cheque clearance time, you were overdrawn for longer than this. As a contribution to your financial loss, Barclaycard is sending you £25 as a goodwill payment.

Q: Since I moved to my home four years ago, my electricity supplier British Gas has undercharged me, because of its use of estimates. I now face a bill of £1,133.78, with BG offering just 10 per cent off for inaccurate billing - even though it can access the meter. I believe I have now been overcharged, as I use very little electricity. I have asked for the meter's accuracy to be checked. Before I moved in, a four-person family paid only £83 a quarter. BG has twice failed to attend as arranged to check the meter, when I have taken time off work.

Yet BG has threatened me with legal action for non-payment of the bill, despite promising that my bill would be suspended until the meter was checked.
PA, Newport.

A: British Gas has agreed to write off half the balance - £566.89 - in recognition of its failure to resolve this matter quickly and the inconvenience this has caused you. It has now installed a check meter for three months.

A 2 per cent variation is regarded as within tolerance limits, but if your electricity meter is found to be overcharging by more than 2 per cent, your bill will be further credited to cover this.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in