Having said that, the author was surprised when I first saw this news, so I kept asking about the follow-up, trying to figure out the ins and outs of it. I discussed it with my lawyer friends and felt that the verdict was not problematic. Big, in fact, to put it simply, the Qingxu County Court believed that Ms. Ding, as a depositor, should have a duty of care for the safety of funds.
In fact, the focus of the dispute in this case lies in the main cause of property loss: Did Ms. Ding lend the certificate privately? Or is it a loophole in bank management?
These two points will be elaborated below.
First, let’s briefly review the timeline of the incident and the details of the case:
In June 2019, Ms. Ding went to the bank with her ID card to check her deposit, and unexpectedly discovered that 12 million yuan was missing. "Fly" and immediately reported the case.
In September of the same year, Wang Moumou was criminally detained on suspicion of fraud. He was later prosecuted for fraud and sentenced to life imprisonment.
In April 2020, Ms. Ding took Qingxu Rural Commercial Bank to court. According to the official website of Qichacha, the case was heard for the first time on July 6, 2021.
In 2021, the court of first instance ruled that Ms. Ding bore 80% of the responsibility.
In October 2022, Ms. Ding received the second-instance judgment from the court, upholding the original judgment.
Wang Moumou is Ms. Ding’s nephew-in-law. In early 2017, Wang Moumou approached Ms. Ding and said that the unit had financial management tasks and hoped that she could help. Ms. Ding successively transferred 5 million yuan to Wang Moumou, and the due principal and income of financial management were 5.43 million yuan. In March 2019, in order to help Wang Moumou complete the task, Ms. Ding agreed to convert the money into a fixed term and deposited an additional 2 million yuan in current deposits.
On April 3 and April 4 of the same year, Ms. Ding deposited time deposits of 3 million yuan and 2 million yuan in the Qingyuan Branch of Qingxu Rural Commercial Bank and the business department of Qingxu Rural Commercial Bank respectively. After the last deposit, Wang went to the business hall to ask for Ms. Ding's deposit slip and ID card on the grounds that he could receive gifts for large deposits.
However, ten days later, the gift was not delivered, and Ms. Ding repeatedly asked for her ID card to no avail. Ms. Ding then went to the bank to inquire and found that the 5.43 million yuan she had previously deposited had not arrived, and the other 7 million yuan had also been transferred by Wang Moumou.
After subsequent investigation, on the morning of April 3, 2019, that is, the day after Ms. Ding deposited a time deposit of 3 million yuan, Wang Moumou held Ms. Ding’s ID card and deposit certificate, and held her personal identity card. Please go to the counter of Qingxu Rural Commercial Bank Qingyuan Branch to complete the transfer procedures. On the afternoon of the day when Ms. Ding deposited 2 million yuan, Wang went to the business department of Qingxu Rural Commercial Bank to handle the transfer procedures.
Why do depositors have to bear 80% of the responsibility?
Out of trust in her husband’s nephew-in-law Wang Moumou, Ms. Ding voluntarily handed over her ID card and bank card to Wang Moumou for safekeeping and use. Ms. Ding’s financial loss was caused by Wang’s criminal fraud. Wang was punished by law and should bear the liability for compensation.
In addition, Ms. Ding and Wang XX are not just ordinary relatives of trust. There is a large amount of evidence that Wang XX himself has a large number of frequent economic contacts with many members of the Ding family for a long time.
Wang Moumou was entrusted by Ms. Ding to handle deposits and transfers, and held Ms. Ding’s identity document, passbook, deposit receipt, bank card, etc. Ms. Ding also informed Wang Moumou of the relevant passwords.
Why do banks only bear 20% responsibility?
I asked a lawyer friend, who said that if Ms. Ding really handed over important information such as her ID card and password to Wang Moumou, it was indeed Ms. Ding who had made a major mistake and needed to be investigated. Take primary responsibility.
Looking through the judgment disclosed online, the court found that the reason why the depositor was responsible was that, under normal circumstances, depositors should know the assets of their personal account before handling personal savings business, otherwise they will not be able to handle subsequent personal savings business. However, Ms. Ding gave her ID card to others for long-term use. She should have foreseen the possibility of illegal infringement, failed to take any preventive measures, and failed to fulfill her basic duty of care for the safe custody of her property. She should bear the main fault for the loss of her property. responsibility.
The bank only bears 20% of the responsibility because Qingxu Rural Commercial Bank failed to fulfill its duty of care and attention to protect the safety of depositors' funds when depositing and withdrawing large amounts of money involved on the same day or the next day. Ms. Ding should bear certain fault liability for the loss of deposits in this case. Accordingly, the court ruled that Qingxu Rural Commercial Bank should bear 20% of the liability.
How to divide the responsibilities of banks and depositors?
A lawyer friend said that generally speaking, when depositors deposit money in banks, banks do have the responsibility to ensure the safety of deposits, but the specific circumstances of this case are different.
In this case, the depositor Ms. Ding provided Wang Moumou with certificates of deposit, ID card, power of attorney and other documents, which caused Wang Moumou to transfer deposits through normal bank procedures. There was active authorization, so the depositor is personally responsible. Primary Responsibilities.
If the depositor did not actively authorize criminals to transfer deposits through forgery, alteration, etc., it is necessary to determine whether the bank made any mistakes in verifying the identity of the parties during the business process.
Currently, there are no clear legal provisions on the scope of banks’ responsibilities for depositors’ deposit losses, which need to be determined based on specific circumstances. Irregular procedures by rural commercial banks or local banks are usually the main reason why they bear dispute risks.
Judging from the current public information, there was no obvious major fault of the bank in this case, but Wang Moumou still blamed the bank staff. Therefore, the court ruled that the bank should bear 20% of the responsibility, and it may be more Considered from the perspective of bank staff management.