TONY HETHERINGTON: Cheque for £41,627 is stolen after a name change

Tony Hetherington is Financial Mail’s chief investigator on Sunday, battling the reader’s corners, revealing the truth behind closed doors and achieving victories for those who haven’t made money. Read below how to contact him.

Mrs JS writes: My aunt died and I received a check for £41,627 from the lawyers who administered her estate.

I posted this to my bank, First Direct, as it has no branches. The payment did not appear in my account and the lawyers say it was deposited into a Barclays account that someone had opened.

Barclays admits the account is fraudulent and has blocked it, but is unwilling to refund the money.

Tony Hetherington replies: First Direct has confirmed that the check never arrived at its Leeds office. It appears to have been stolen after you posted it. But you took the precaution of giving instructions on the back of the check stating that it should only be accepted in your own First Direct sort code and account number, and you signed it. Plus, you might have a unique name in this country. I’ve checked all sorts of sources, including voter registers, and your name is one-time only.

So how did a thief manage to open an account with Barclays in your name and then deposit your £41,627?

The answer is astonishingly simple. She opened an account months ago, put it on hold, and after getting her hands on the stolen check, she told Barclays she’d decided to change her name. The thief became you, as far as the bank is concerned. And after the check was settled, all but about £50 was quickly withdrawn.

Barclays’ advice was that you should contact Action Fraud, which you did, and you got a response from the National Fraud Intelligence Bureau. It said: ‘On this occasion, based on the information currently available, it was not possible to identify a line of inquiry that a law enforcement agency in the UK could follow.’

What a mess. The woman who opened the Barclays account showed her driver’s license as proof of her identity. She gave her address. And in addition to copying her license, including her photo,

Barclays has a recent photo of her using the bank’s online video services. If all this doesn’t count as a line of inquiry, then heaven knows what does. Barclays’ other advice was that since the lawyer’s check was issued by the Royal Bank of Scotland, it was up to RBS to open ‘an interbank investigation’ that would involve both First Direct and Barclays.

But you are not the customer of RBS. So you had to ask the executors to ask the lawyers to ask for RBS. You tried, but the lawyers were told that none of this had anything to do with RBS, whose staff had no idea what “an interbank investigation” might be. Their sense was that Barclays was just running you around.

And it’s hard to disagree. The check Barclays accepted was modified with Tippex to hide your First Direct account information and enter the fraudster’s account number with Barclays. And the fraudster’s recent video photo may not be the person depicted on the driver’s license unless she has aged noticeably.

I asked Barclays for comment on all of this, but it declined to discuss the fraudster’s account for privacy reasons. Even scammers and thieves have a right to confidentiality, it seems. Barclays would release all his information to the police, but that makes little sense if Action Fraud has already refused to take action.

So I tried several questions. Why didn’t anyone at Barclays see that the check had been tipped and altered? Why didn’t anyone at Barclays notice that the fraudster didn’t change her name until after the lawyers issued the check in her “new” name? And if a customer says he wants to change his name, does Barclays verify this by asking for a new driver’s license or perhaps utility bills with the new name?

The answers seem to be that no one is paying attention to the back of the check, and possibly not even the front. A spokesperson was happy to tell me that ‘Barclays complies with all regulatory and legal requirements and has a robust identity and verification process’ when opening a new account. But the bank was less than happy to explain what happens if that customer changes his or her name.

UK Finance – the banks’ trade association – confirmed the lack of strict rules on name changes and told me it is up to the banks to decide what proof they need. They can even settle for a single sheet of paper announcing the customer’s change of name by deed, as long as it is accompanied by at least one other piece of evidence in the new name.

Whether or not Barclays asked for such evidence remains unknown. But even if it did, changing a name is so easy — and free — that the theft of your check has uncovered a huge loophole in the system. No one’s account is safe unless the banks tighten their rules and put people back into the check-clearing process, as their machines and computers clearly don’t recognize Tippex when they see it.

Trip to Nice has gone to the dogs

Mrs LF writes: I booked our dogs to be transported to Nice with easyPet as we traveled separately to France. Then our vet said that if we weren’t going to drive the animals to Nice, the easyPet driver would have to be there to meet the vet when the necessary animal health certificate was issued.

I have contacted the Ministry of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and they have confirmed that the person in charge of the pets must be present when the owner is not present.

EasyPet said it would be impossible for drivers to visit every vet so we canceled our trip.

Nice in Nice: vet said the easyPet driver had to be present at a vet meeting when the necessary animal health certificate was issued

Tony Hetherington replies: The bottom line is the exact meaning of Defra’s advice, and how your vet interpreted it. According to Defra, when completing the pet’s health certificate that it is allowed to cross the border, the person responsible for the animal must be present if the owner cannot be present.

But this does not mean that the person present with the animal has to be the same person who actually chases the pet out of the country.

Basically, you can take your dogs to the vet to get their health certificate and then hand them over to the easyPet driver. The bottom line is that your vet is wrong, and I’m sorry this ruined your trip to France.

If you believe you have been the victim of financial misconduct please write to Tony Hetherington at Financial Mail, 2 Derry Street, London W8 5TS or email tony.hetherington@mailonsunday.co.uk. Due to the large number of questions, no personal answers can be given. Only send copies of original documents, which unfortunately cannot be returned.