An automated message stated, “We are currently experiencing a high volume of calls due to a processing error by the Bank of Scotland. If a transaction has been duplicated this will be automatically refunded. The Bank of Scotland have a recovery plan in place.”

I was promised a full refund for being charged twice for the same goods. Well its five days after the mistake and the recovery plan seems to be taking its time, as I am yet to receive any refund. Not convenient for myself, and one would guess thousands of other banking customers.

Upon looking further into the issue, it appears that similar problems have previously affected customers of Bank of Scotland who are now part of the Lloyds Banking Group. In 2009 shops across the UK received complaints from customers accusing them of being charged twice for the same transaction. The fault was located to electronic point of sale systems and their chip and pin cards.

It is very surprising to see that two different banking groups have experienced similar issues within a short space of time. In both instances it has led to money being incorrectly taken from customer accounts, and the timing of the latest problem comes at the point where many people’s finances are stretched to the limit after the Christmas and New Year period.

It is very possible that the mistake could also lead to people receiving bank charges for going overdrawn and have transactions refused due to insufficient funds. Whilst I am sure that the banks will eventually refund these it is an unnecessary hassle and customers should not have to chase for refunds.

Whilst mistakes can always happen, customers should have been notified rather than having the shock of finding out themselves, and it should not have taken over 5 days to resolve.

It does call into question what Backup, Disaster Recovery and Business Continuity solutions the banks have in place to enable them to recover from such incidents.

Natwest and RBS customers experience overcharging is a post from Backup Technology's Blog. Contact us today for further information on our Online Backup and Business Continuity services.

Andrew Brant, a malware prevention blogger, explained in a recent post that consumers should be wary of any emails claiming to have originated from Visa and asking them to follow a link and update their payment card details online.

The malicious emails link to the phony but authentically designed site and users are then encouraged to enter a significant number of personal details, including answers to any security questions you may have used when setting up your Visa account.

Brant assured readers that this was the first indication that something was afoot, as no Verified by Visa payment type scheme should ever ask you for extensive personal information. This rule is applicable to site online with which you already hold an account and vigilance is essential if consumers wish to avoid having their personal information harvested with their unknowing complicity.

It is believed that this new phishing scam is being perpetrated by a particularly sophisticated group that has put a lot of effort into making the page look authentic. A casual viewer might be hard pressed to tell the difference between an official Verified by Visa page and the fake site.

Online security expert Nigel Hawthorn urged worried consumers to invest in a URL filter for their computers so that they would never accidentally enter information on phishing sites. Because data harvesting via phishing does not utilise virus or malware techniques, but is instead a con based on misleading online shoppers, standard antivirus software will not be an adequate defence.

Hawthorn emphasised the need for additional security tools which do more than just filter spam and remove viruses. He also pointed out that the new Visa phishing campaign could have a widespread effect because Visa itself has been associated with watertight online security in the past, so consumer trust is intrinsically assured by the brand.

Visa online payment system targeted by cyber criminals is a post from Backup Technology's Blog. Contact us today for further information on our Online Backup and Business Continuity services.

IBM has called the lengthy breakdown an ‘interruption’ which it says was caused by a major upgrade to the payment system which occurred in unison with the switch-over. Customers who could not make the Congestion Charge payments online were forced to use either the mobile payment service or to make their payments at one of the many retail outlets in and around London.

Transport for London was forced to apologise on behalf of IBM and assured its customers that no one would be improperly penalised as a result of the recent crash. Sources inside TfL claimed that some customers could be issued with incorrect penalty notices. It was also claimed that IBM had not undertaken the necessary planning in order to ensure a smooth changeover, though these allegations have yet to be substantiated.

The downtime further detracted from the reputation of the IT giant after Southwark Council began the process of claiming £700,000 in damages from IBM just three days earlier. The allegations levelled at IBM include claims that they failed to provide the council with a satisfactory Master Data Management system. It was also alleged that IBM failed to act on the findings of a review which identified the key areas of failure within the MDM system.

In response to the lawsuit, IBM stated that it regards the allegations as founded on false evidence and that it will be refuting any limitations to its services during the ensuing legal proceedings. Whether these events will tarnish the reputation of a trusted brand within the capital remains to be seen, but IBM has certainly had its data management skills brought under the glare of the media spotlight.

Congestion charging online payments fail during hand-over is a post from Backup Technology's Blog. Contact us today for further information on our Online Backup and Business Continuity services.