Who should pay for the 340,000 stolen bank card?

On the morning of 20 15 12.23 1, Mr. Pan, who lives in Qiaokou District, was awakened in his sleep by the ringing of mobile phone messages. Mr. Pan picked up his mobile phone and looked at it. He fell asleep with surprise. According to the information, the consumption expenditure of your savings card with the suffix XXX is RMB 346,004.82, and the current balance is RMB 523.24. Mr. Pan quickly called the bank customer service to ask, and the customer service told him that the consumption occurred in Macau. Mr. Pan declared to the customer service that the consumption was not made by himself and asked the bank to seal up the frozen account.

Mr. Pan reported the case to the police station at 3 am that day. On the morning of the same day, the police and Mr. Pan went to the bank to collect the bank's running water, and once again asked the bank to take corresponding protection measures for the accounts involved. But until now, the bank card involved has not been frozen, and the criminal case is still under investigation.

After the incident, Mr. Pan communicated with the bank many times, with no results. Mr. Pan sued the bank in Qiaokou District People's Court, claiming that the bank missed the best stop-loss opportunity three times within 24 to 48 hours from the transaction to the transfer of the funds in the bank card to the counterparty, resulting in the theft of the funds in its bank card. Mr. Pan asked the bank to compensate him for his loss.

The court found that the funds in Pan Shiyi's bank card did not arrive in real time when swiping the card outside Chinese mainland. If the bank can stop payment immediately within 24 to 48 hours after the transaction, the money will not reach the counterparty's account.

The bank argued that Mr. Pan claimed that there was no evidence to prove that 340,000 yuan was stolen. And after the amount involved was consumed, Mr. Pan failed to report the loss as agreed. At the same time, Mr. Pan made mistakes in the use of bank cards, such as improper use and password leakage. Therefore, banks should not be liable for compensation.

The court finally held that in this case, when Mr. Pan found that the funds in the card had changed, he immediately informed the bank customer service and asked the bank to take corresponding measures to prevent the loss of funds. However, the bank only registered and did not make an emergency stop payment for the funds in the card, resulting in the transfer of funds in the card. In addition, according to the relevant alarm records, it is impossible for Mr. Pan to swipe his card from Macau within 2 hours and then report to Wuhan. What is certain is that the person who swipes the bill is not Mr. Pan himself.

At the same time, the court also held that the bank card involved was a magnetic stripe card, which was a technical product in the 1950s. Now it has been recognized that safety and reliability are low and should be eliminated. The bank has sufficient technical conditions to replace a more secure bank card for Mr. Pan, but it has not been replaced, which is also a manifestation of failing to fulfill its security obligations.

A few days ago, the Qiaokou court made a first-instance judgment, and ruled that the defendant bank compensated the plaintiff Mr. Pan for the deposit principal and interest of 348,426.85 yuan within three days from the effective date of the judgment.