-
Article in the Guardian today – hackers who steal Avios are selling them on Facebook. Someone bought Avios on FB, got them transferred into their account & then BA took them back as they’d be stolen from someone else…
The guy in the article was lucky his own BAC account wasn’t closed down as BA doesn’t allow the buying or selling of avios via social media. It’s quite common for people to post here asking if it’s a good idea to buy avios (usually on eBay) and are always told it’s a bad idea!
You’d also have to give some of your BAC account details to the scammer for the transfer to take place which is slightly worrying. I’m assuming that BA is actively investigating reports of accounts being accessed unlawfully and avios been transferred out, and watching which accounts they go to. Presumably these account holders are then the ones offering them for sale.
Buyer beware. £200 for 60000 is obviously too good a deal to be true.
How did the transfer occur? I thought the names on the accounts had to match.
They would have been transferred from the seller’s BA account to the recipient’s, I presume, with the recipient giving the seller the details they needed. There’s only a name match required if you’re transferring them, say, from Amex to BAC. £200 IS very low, unless the transfer fee was charged separately.
But he is REFUNDED the £200!!!!!!
Presumably by his bank if it agreed that the transaction was fraudulent. So he’s back where he started, but with no flights.
What is the FB group with 75k members?!
It’s not his bank that refunded him it us the consumers with higher charges , higher interest on loans , lower interest on savings.
Sorry I think that people should take more care. They should have known buying avios from another person is against the rules.
Basically banks should protect the vulnerable, people with dementia etc…. People who run their own businesses should be savvy enough to take care.
I’m surprised that BA looked on the buyer of the Avios so kindly. I would expect to have my account shut down if I tried this.
Which is what I said in my first post. Though BA wouldn’t have known that he bought them (unless he told them), only that he paid the transfer fee to have them moved from another account. They may know now, however!
@Garethgerry, I meant as in the refund came from his bank (presumably). I’ve read of people having much more than £200 returned after committing what some
might say was equal or worse idiocy!@northernlass, sounds like we both agree, banks are treated as a soft touch. This person was both a careless and attempting to defraud BA yet bank felt they had to reimburse them. Clearly not a vulnerable person as run own business.
If it looks too good to be true, it probably is.
Personally, it sounds like the guy knew EXACTLY what he was doing – the bank especially is a soft touch. Time to stop refunding people that act dishonestly/carelessly. Enough years or warnings and scam alerts.
I do think they got off lightly. The much-referenced story of the lady who had her return avios flights cancelled and BA account frozen while she was away on holiday because BA discovered she had been trading use of her garden (the botanical variety 😱😂) for avios serves as a salutary tale for anyone tempted to play fast and loose with the Ts and Cs!
If it looks too good to be true, it probably is.
Personally, it sounds like the guy knew EXACTLY what he was doing – the bank especially is a soft touch. Time to stop refunding people that act dishonestly/carelessly. Enough years or warnings and scam alerts.
Blame the regulators, not the banks.
Blame the regulators, not the banks.
Thanks for correcting me! But whilst the banks have a “duty of care” to their customers, so do customers for keeping their accounts safe and be responsible. The person in the article probably knew exactly what they were up to (IMHO).
Blame the regulators, not the banks.
Thanks for correcting me! But whilst the banks have a “duty of care” to their customers, so do customers for keeping their accounts safe and be responsible. The person in the article probably knew exactly what they were up to (IMHO).
They do, but the regulator’s view seems to be that people who get scammed despite various warnings are entitled to their money back regardless.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Popular articles this week:
