Banks responsibility for fraud detection

Please note this sub-forum does not provide professional finance advice. You should seek advice from a licensed financial advisor.

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification.

If investing please consider our affiliate link for new accounts: Sharesies.

Forums › Finance and wealth management › Banks responsibility for fraud detection

1 | 2

sen8or

1789 posts

Uber Geek

#3343556 17-Feb-2025 09:41

The Herald has another link up today, no story as such, but a recording of ANZ call centre staff assisting with a transfer of $250k to a fraudster. Its a little the Herald trying to hang ANZ out to dry, but equally, ANZ really didn't help themselves either with the call centre staff being very accommodating to the persons request

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/anz-worker-helps-woman-send-250k-to-scammers/MWKAKVTKVWXLGY2Q3OXS3V4ADQ/

Short version -

Customer phoned help desk as the amount was over the daily transfer limit.

ANZ confirmed recipients name and bank account number (something or other holdings ). They did ask if she had paid them money before, the customer said no (red flag #1), when the customer said no, there was no follow up questioning from the bank.

ANZ reconfirmed details back to the customer, got specific authorisation and then processed the payment.

Scammers seem so savvy now on how to defeat "checks and balances", I'm only pleased I'm not in the position of having a few hundred thousand sitting around gathering dust....

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3343568 17-Feb-2025 10:22

Dingbatt:

Perhaps all of you that are making sneering comments about the stupidity of the victim could offer your obvious scam-buster skills (to interpol free of charge of course) to help find and prosecute the criminals?

Remember these ordinary people are up against expert criminals using sophisticated techniques. They are likely to have lost their retirement savings.

You said it more eloquently than I would have.

A moments inattention is all it takes to trick people in some circumstances. Perhaps not this one, but the problem is, the mind works to corroborate what you already believe to be true.

If you think you are immune, you are kidding yourself. I have seen CFO's tricked a few times. Pretty smart people, pretty vigilant people under normal circumstances, caught out by circumstances.

I wonder how many of these people sneering would be so quick to sneer if it was their loved one who had been tricked. I'd like to see them say 'how could you be so stupid' to their grandparent, or 'you deserve to lose your life savings for being so dumb'.

Knock it off with the keyboard warrior crap already.

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3343622 17-Feb-2025 10:42

sen8or:

ANZ confirmed recipients name and bank account number (something or other holdings ). They did ask if she had paid them money before, the customer said no (red flag #1), when the customer said no, there was no follow up questioning from the bank.

I mean, why bother asking the question if it doesn't determine if additional questions should be asked.

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3343671 17-Feb-2025 10:46

A few times, I have been in the supermarket queue, and noticed someone in front or behind me holding a pile of Apple or other gift cards, or asking for a high denomination of gift cards.

I always stop that person and ask them if they were asked by a workmate or manager or a family member to purchase, to keep it a secret, etc. In every single case, the person has been nearly scammed. I've had a couple of initially rude responses to my enquiry, followed only sometimes by thanks for saving them $500.

I have raised the fact with our 3 local supermarkets that more than $100 gift cards should result in asking a customer to read a card, which details common scams, and for signs to go above all gift card displays, alerting people to the fact this is a common scam.

Unfortunately, all three supermarkets have given lukewarm responses.

boosacnoodle

963 posts

Ultimate Geek

#3343698 17-Feb-2025 11:35

networkn: I have raised the fact with our 3 local supermarkets that more than $100 gift cards should result in asking a customer to read a card, which details common scams, and for signs to go above all gift card displays, alerting people to the fact this is a common scam.

Even if you made people sign a waiver that this is a likely scam, they would still complain afterwards.

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3343704 17-Feb-2025 11:49

boosacnoodle:

Even if you made people sign a waiver that this is a likely scam, they would still complain afterwards.

I think there is a difference between $500 in gift cards and the amount of interaction and opportunity to prevent it in a supermarket, vs a conversation at a bank in a transfer of 10's or 100's of thousands of dollars.

The process should be more involved, more scrutiny should be applied. Not sure if I believe it's scruntised enough yet.

We can't save everyone from themselves, but considering the consequences when it goes wrong, we should be trying our best to help people make the right choices.

sen8or

1789 posts

Uber Geek

#3343707 17-Feb-2025 12:03

I think banks are between a rock and a hard place. Customer's have the right to do with their money what they choose to do and ultimately customers have a right to privacy (who likes strangers asking details of their financial transactions), but more increasingly, banks are being seen as the last guard between our money and a scammer and that their staff are (or should be) experts at preventing fraud, but if they don't (or can't) ask the right questions, they'll never stop a scam.

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

tripper1000

1617 posts

Uber Geek

#3343710 17-Feb-2025 12:12

richms: How do people this stupid have that much to lose just sitting in a bank account?

1) Some people simply loose their marbles in their old age (I am fairly confident that my father will rapidly be scammed if he outlives my mother. I think I will have to control his savings and have automatic payments to his daily accounts to limit the damage that will be done).

2) Some people don't have the wherewithal to retain it because they never even had the wherewithal to make in the first place. They probably don't appreciate its true value and guard it accordingly. Examples can be money that came "easy". Proceeds of inheritance, divorce, property appreciation or their partner was the primary breadwinner.

3) Some people don't appreciate how much they don't know and forge into unknown territory without judicious caution with an unjustified sense of confidence. They may have been born and raised in societies that were insular and virtual 'walled gardens'. People with free educations, jobs for life, cheap first properties, living in mono-cultural societies, and who blindly followed the actions of their peers to get to success without realising the railway-tracks to success that were riding and the hazards they were being protected from.

Banks get the blame when the institutionalised are groping around for the protective rails that were always there, but seem to have momentarily disappeared. Those of us who were never so fortunate, have conversation like this.

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3343711 17-Feb-2025 12:15

sen8or:

I think banks are between a rock and a hard place. Customer's have the right to do with their money what they choose to do and ultimately customers have a right to privacy (who likes strangers asking details of their financial transactions), but more increasingly, banks are being seen as the last guard between our money and a scammer and that their staff are (or should be) experts at preventing fraud, but if they don't (or can't) ask the right questions, they'll never stop a scam.

There is a fine line, and I understand the difficulty, however, considering the consequences, it's not unreasonable to be looking for ways to help people identify when they might be being scammed.

It's not like Banks are struggling and don't have the resources. They are also in the best position to lead the way.

alasta

6704 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#3343746 17-Feb-2025 14:30

The premise that only dumb people get scammed is quite outdated. Scammers have become increasingly sophisticated, and meanwhile the population have become surprisingly relaxed around privacy.

The only way to really protect yourself is to have strict procedures in place, for example requiring certain documentation for transactions over $5k. I also have really tight gatekeeping on my phone and email and it is extremely rare that I receive any scam calls or emails, though admittedly it probably makes it a bit more difficult to contact me for legitimate purposes.

mkissin

389 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

#3343750 17-Feb-2025 14:58

sen8or:

Customer phoned help desk as the amount was over the daily transfer limit.

It's not an excuse on either side of the fence, but one thing that struck me about the call was that the persons normal daily transfer limit was already set way up at $100k. That seems very high to me, and I'd say best practice would be to have it as low as practical.

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3343752 17-Feb-2025 15:02

alasta:

The premise that only dumb people get scammed is quite outdated. Scammers have become increasingly sophisticated, and meanwhile the population have become surprisingly relaxed around privacy.

The only way to really protect yourself is to have strict procedures in place, for example requiring certain documentation for transactions over $5k. I also have really tight gatekeeping on my phone and email and it is extremely rare that I receive any scam calls or emails, though admittedly it probably makes it a bit more difficult to contact me for legitimate purposes.

The smartest lady I know is my wife. I'd consider her to have well above average computer skills. She believed until recently that the only reason for someone to steal your credentials was to access financial records.

She was pretty horrified when I told her extortion was the big game in town now, and it's less about encrypting data, as the bad guys have cottoned on to the increased vigilance on backups.

When I explained that taking medical records was as much about extorting the patients as the doctors she wasn't too happy.

It explains why she was puzzled when I went ballistic a few years ago when a practice she worked for refused to pay $2 a user per month for for doctors to get MFA in their patient management system.

I told my doctor he could charge me the entire MFA fee for the year in advance at the start of every year, so long as he had it. Same with my Physio.

alasta

6704 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#3343757 17-Feb-2025 15:23

networkn:

When I explained that taking medical records was as much about extorting the patients as the doctors she wasn't too happy.

It explains why she was puzzled when I went ballistic a few years ago when a practice she worked for refused to pay $2 a user per month for for doctors to get MFA in their patient management system.

I told my doctor he could charge me the entire MFA fee for the year in advance at the start of every year, so long as he had it. Same with my Physio.

Slight off topic, but I was very disappointed when I recently signed up to a new GP clinic and they asked me to email identification documents to them. I told them I would instead physically come into the clinic for them to sight my passport but they still insisted on taking a photocopy of it which I wasn't really happy about given the prevalence of data breaches.

There seems to be still a lot of complacency among businesses.

1 | 2