Casimba - Withdrawl Sent To Discontinued Account

Hey everybody! :)

Believe it or not, I don't know anyone from this casino group. Nor I don't know all WHG brands and their reps :D
But what I will try is to connect with them and see if they want to work with us and help of course :)
Sorry, for some reason I assumed you had contacts.

sorry for the hassle lady j
 
Is there any reason they can't tell him the full card details? Surely it's part of his data so a SAR would provide it.

Regarding it going back to the card. Firstly WHG have a policy where it has to go back to the deposit method don't they? So if they didn't do that there is cause for complaint.
If the account is fully closed, ie a third party have bought the debt, then theres a good chance it will bounce back. If the account is still owned by the card company, but a debt collection agency is managing it, it will come off the debt.

If live chat speak to payments, payments will be able to supply the info.

Sorry @colinsunderland just seen this. I honestly don't think they will be able to see the full card details. Pretty sure we can see first 6 and last 4 but the stuff in the middle isn't available. Refunds are done on a "token" basis and we send to an encrypted string and the payment processor marries it up. I'll caveat this post with "this isn't my area of expertise".
 
Just a thought - if you can't get them to refund it, see if the lender is willing to accept it in full and final settlement. If they do, it'll show as partially satisfied on your credit file from the date of the default, but will drop off eventually. The advantage being you won't have to pay another penny.

Depends on the size of the debt as to whether they're likely to accept it.
 
Vanquis are investigating it their end now, I have said it was sent in error and shouldn't have been sent to a closed credit card and have asked them to send it back, but that was 2 days ago, just rang them again..."still investigating"
 
Aceking I am paying it monthly with what I can afford, these are winnings that I attained and were wrongly sent to an account I assumed closed not by me, but by error at Casimba...having used the same card for 12 months+ no way should this have gone there...

Your not paying it monthly with what you can afford., if your gambling.

This month you got lucky and had a withdrawal, you may of lost it all.

But luckily for you the money got sent to the company YOU owe money to.

If this was your wages i would rightly expect the money to be returned for you to live on.

But the fantastic thing that's happened here is, this was your casino winnings and it has gone to pay off some of your debt, rather than be lost back.

So you have actually gained.

You can jump up and down and stamp your feet, all you like, but the finance company have had a right result, and do you honestly think they or a court would make them pay gambling winnings back to you.

Just think of it as progress and maybe put your gambling budget towards your debts.
 
Last edited:
No, this was wrongly sent to a company I already have a payment plan with, you don't know how much I deposited, you don't know I am looking after my mum with dementia, you don't know I lost my job a few months ago in a "pandemic" there's lots more you don't know....

But I know this was wrongly sent to a credit card I no longer have access to, and credit cards were banned under the UKGC, this should be sent back imo.
 
Just because someone has debt, it does not mean that they cannot afford to gamble. Any debt management advisor will inform you - you're entitled to use some of your income for leisure. Unsecured debt, such as a credit card, is not a priority bill - the risk is on the lender, and once a plan is agreed, as long as it is stuck to, they will be happy with it.
 
Just because someone has debt, it does not mean that they cannot afford to gamble. Any debt management advisor will inform you - you're entitled to use some of your income for leisure. Unsecured debt, such as a credit card, is not a priority bill - the risk is on the lender, and once a plan is agreed, as long as it is stuck to, they will be happy with it.

Not when the Op is in a DMP and paying back £10 a month on the thousands they owe.

Keeping money back for leisure is for family, not for the debtor to chuck weekly into slot machines

Talking of your debt management adviser. What did he say when you told him about your winings?, Which you legally have to?
As your finances had changed and you had 1K to be spread out to your creditors.

Vanquish credit cards are for people already sky high in debt. A payment plan was obviously in place.

And they just got 10 years payments out the blue from the OP,s gambling winnings.
 
Last edited:
Not when the Op is in a DMP and paying back £10 a month on the thousands they owe.

And a debt manager adviser is just that an adviser.

Vanquish credit cards are for people already sky high in debt. A payment plan was obviously in place.

And they just got 10 years payments out the blue from the OP,s gambling winnings.
Unless they sold the debt and then it isn't Vanquis's money. Legally they would have no right to pass it to the DCA.
 
So the OP lied when he said Moorcroft are collecting the debt and taking his payments every month?
Missed the moorcroft bit.

I personally would say Moorcroft have bought the debt/account and the OP still legally owes it.

Now this 1K has turned up linked to that card (which the account for would not of been closed) I still think it's game over
 
Missed the moorcroft bit.

I personally would say Moorcroft have bought the debt/account and the OP still legally owes it.

Now this 1K has turned up linked to that card (which the account for would not of been closed) I still think it's game over
Moorcroft buy and manage debts, so it's 50/50, if the OP had a letter of assignment or something it would be easier to work out.
If they have bought the debt, then Vanquis cannot legally take that money and do anything with it, they have to return it to the customer. The debt is nothing to do with them any more. If the customer rings them and wants to pay the debt off in full, they cannot take payment as the customer legally has no debt with them anymore. The account will be closed if they have sold the debt.
Suggesting they can is akin to saying if you owe money on a tesco credit card, then go in, do your shopping, pay £100 through the POS, then them refuse to give you your shopping, saying they have sent the money over to tesco credit card to pay your debt off.

If Moorcroft are just collecting it on behalf of Vanquis, then I would say it is close to 100% that he won't see a penny of it, as it is still a debt belonging to Vanquis and they are fully entitled to offset it against the debt.
 
Unless they sold the debt and then it isn't Vanquis's money. Legally they would have no right to pass it to the DCA.
I dont profess to be fully clued up on this, but i would not be surprised if when Moorcroft bought the debt, there was not a clause that any future money that came into that account was passed on to them, as they now legally own the debt. Plus i would expect they will now want the OP,s finances going through again to increase their payments
 
I dont profess to be fully clued up on this, but i would not be surprised if when Moorcroft bought the debt, there was not a clause that any future money that came into that account was passed on to them, as they now legally own the debt. Plus i would expect they will now want the OP,s finances going through again to increase their payments
I have NEVER seen an arrangement that allows for that.
Once the debt is sold, it has nothing to do with Vanquis any more, it's pretty much as simple as that. I've done quite a lot of work in this field, albeit a while ago, and am confident in being right on this, unless things have changed recently, which I doubt as I would have likely seen it.
 
Not when the Op is in a DMP and paying back £10 a month on the thousands they owe.

Keeping money back for leisure is for family, not for the debtor to chuck weekly into slot machines

Talking of your debt management adviser. What did he say when you told him about your winings?, Which you legally have to?
As your finances had changed and you had 1K to be spread out to your creditors.

Vanquish credit cards are for people already sky high in debt. A payment plan was obviously in place.

And they just got 10 years payments out the blue from the OP,s gambling winnings.

Having worked in the industry, I can say that the definition of leisure will differ from person to person; if an arrangement has been agreed, it is in place until one/both parties has agreed that it will end, either by a specified date (at which point it may be renegotiated), or by default of payment (at which point it may still be renegotiated.)

If they then proceed to court, it will be for the court to decide if the offer of payment is reasonable, and if the amount they wish to keep back for leisure is unreasonable.

Long gone are the days when a debt collector would be able to tell you that you had to use every spare penny of your disposable income to service unsecured debts. Truth be told, they're encouraged not to, as this advice only leads to people needing to take out further credit to cover "disposable" income.

In this case - Vanquis may choose to keep the money if they still legally own the debt. The OP's quarrel strictly isn't with Vanquis, as the problem is White Hat's - they were instructed to use a specific card, their terms provide that they will, and they didn't do this. While the OP is not strictly out of pocket (his debt is reduced), they have deprived him of those funds against his wishes (and seemingly their policy.)

The ideal outcome here is that White Hat own the error and pay the OP. They can then try to take it up with Vanquis. Or given that (to them) it's a relatively small amount of money, accept he needs to be paid twice and draw a line under the matter.
 
Having worked in the industry, I can say that the definition of leisure will differ from person to person; if an arrangement has been agreed, it is in place until one/both parties has agreed that it will end, either by a specified date (at which point it may be renegotiated), or by default of payment (at which point it may still be renegotiated.)

If they then proceed to court, it will be for the court to decide if the offer of payment is reasonable, and if the amount they wish to keep back for leisure is unreasonable.

Long gone are the days when a debt collector would be able to tell you that you had to use every spare penny of your disposable income to service unsecured debts. Truth be told, they're encouraged not to, as this advice only leads to people needing to take out further credit to cover "disposable" income.

In this case - Vanquis may choose to keep the money if they still legally own the debt. The OP's quarrel strictly isn't with Vanquis, as the problem is White Hat's - they were instructed to use a specific card, their terms provide that they will, and they didn't do this. While the OP is not strictly out of pocket (his debt is reduced), they have deprived him of those funds against his wishes (and seemingly their policy.)

The ideal outcome here is that White Hat own the error and pay the OP. They can then try to take it up with Vanquis. Or given that (to them) it's a relatively small amount of money, accept he needs to be paid twice and draw a line under the matter.
My thoughts exactly, you put it better than me :)
If Vanquis have sold the debt, am I right in thinking it can't be offset against it?
 
My thoughts exactly, you put it better than me :)
If Vanquis have sold the debt, am I right in thinking it can't be offset against it?

Not entirely sure; I would think that there would be some contract between them and the debt purchaser that funds received to their account should be transferred to them. But then there is also the issue that the amount Vanquis may have sold the debt for could be significantly less than the actual debt. Debt purchasers often pay pennies in the pound, but are entitled to recover the full amount.
 
Debt Collectors are awful people imo, as they by bulks and bulks of debts for very little value and try to threaten the customer with all sorts of letters which would not be enforceable.

I see the OP has posted in Consumeractiongroup also regarding this, they are usualy quite a nice bunch to sort things out with a customer mindset, so if it doesn't work out I hope they can help you out.
 
Debt Collectors are awful people imo, as they by bulks and bulks of debts for very little value and try to threaten the customer with all sorts of letters which would not be enforceable.

I see the OP has posted in Consumeractiongroup also regarding this, they are usualy quite a nice bunch to sort things out with a customer mindset, so if it doesn't work out I hope they can help you out.
They're certainly not as brash as they once were.

The internet/people sharing info has helped as well - their bully boy tactics hold little weight now.

Seems to have been a bit of a clearing of the riff raff over the years and they're seemingly a lot more reasonable now. Even the banks: Llloyds/HSBC have even been sending folk goodwill payments for 'not treating customers fairly' during periods of financial difficulty.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top