Bank Fraud Compensation

[Theodoric]

Firstly, an instance of how even the once upright Times is descending to levels of scaremongering worthy of The Express and The Mail.

Today's front page headline reads Victims of internet bank fraud will have to pay up and the first sentence is BANKS will no longer honour the debts of victims of internet fraud after a sudden rise in attacks against online accounts, The Times has learnt. "Gulp", I thought, "One slip and I'll lose my life savings!" However, if you plough on to para 7, it starts hinting that this is only likely to occur some time in the future.

Now, go to the corresponding BBC article and you find the headline Banks could refuse fraud refunds (my emphasis) with a first sentence of People considered to have ignored safety advice before losing money in online banking scams could soon be denied compensation by banks.

Ah well, yet further proof of the BBC being a falsifier of news and containing only lies, as many people seem to complain.

Anyway, back to the subject matter. The BBC site gave
a link to the Bank Safe Online site which gives advice on the subject. This gives a further link to a site containing a test on your knowledge of "phishing". I only got a miserable 50%. I'd say that it's much harder than you think to distinguish the scam from the legitimate.

[Strzelecki]

I got 80%, but the 2 I got wrong I said were phishing fraud, so at least it was an error on the cautious side!

[punky]

I was lucky. I got caught by a lebanese-loop card catcher at an ATM a little while ago. I got 100% back and fairly quickly (I think I got both my ATM and POS withdrawls within 3 weeks), which I thought was really good. What annoyed me at the time was that the police and the bank had no interest in prosecuting or investigating. I told them to grab the CCTV for the garage where one of my POS withdrawls went through and they could have got the thief's picture. They never bothered.

I am kind of split over this though. I personally would never fall for a phishing scam, so I could say "yeah that's fair", but I think to someone who isn't so computer savvy, it could be very hard to detect these scams. I think the best thing would be to stress that computer banking is for moderate-to-advanced and PC users and higher, and anyone who isn't that advanced should use a branch. All these refunds end up getting passed back to all of us in the end.

[greencreeper]

The emails should never be sent in the first place - that's the issue to address, not whether victims should be compensated by the bank or through private claims in the courts. Users are really ignorant of the dangers and facts though - it's frightening.

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by Strzelecki

I got 80%, but the 2 I got wrong I said were phishing fraud, so at least it was an error on the cautious side!

Me to Capital 1 and Bank of America

[greencreeper]

The test is useless - the emails usually do look genuine but if you look at the raw format of the message you'll instantly see they're not. That test doesn't allow you to view the code - they could all be genuine

[edit] I got 60% by random ticking

[Chimaera]

Well I looked hard and concentrated - and got 100% right! Mind you I like to thing I am careful with these things!

[punky]

Just noticed the quiz. I got 80%, but it is hard to tell with pictures. The easiest way to check is by the links in the email.

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by greencreeper

The test is useless - the emails usually do look genuine but if you look at the raw format of the message you'll instantly see they're not. That test doesn't allow you to view the code - they could all be genuine

[edit] I got 60% by random ticking

Originally Posted by punky

Just noticed the quiz. I got 80%, but it is hard to tell with pictures. The easiest way to check is by the links in the email.

But if you look at the bottom of the picture it shows you the http of the key link in the message. Probably as much as average joe could be expected to understand.

Originally Posted by greencreeper

The emails should never be sent in the first place - that's the issue to address, not whether victims should be compensated by the bank or through private claims in the courts. Users are really ignorant of the dangers and facts though - it's frightening.

But if you have moved to an online service, they do need to push information to you (e.g. you have a new statement), that requires emails to be sent.

[greencreeper]

Originally Posted by SMHarman

But if you look at the bottom of the picture it shows you the http of the key link in the message. Probably as much as average joe could be expected to understand.

It shows the text in the onMouseOver statement for the hyperlink, or the default status bar text for the page. That's partly why people should ditch Outlook (Express) and choose a safer email client.

Originally Posted by SMHarman

But if you have moved to an online service, they do need to push information to you (e.g. you have a new statement), that requires emails to be sent.

I have used online banking for a number of years, without problem and without ever been emailed by my bank. I don't see that there's any reason to be emailed - everyone should check their bank account at least once a week. Around pay day I'm always checking

I never follow logon links in e-mails, I go direct to the site.

Any e-mail that asks me to "verify" my details gets binned, end of story.

[nffc]

I didn't believe any of them, TBH.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Paul M

I never follow logon links in e-mails, I go direct to the site.

Any e-mail that asks me to "verify" my details gets binned, end of story.

Same here.

[Nikko]

I fell victim to this - the scammers cleaned out my overdraft & the bank refuse to investigate.

Anything like this, I go direct to the bank/ cc company's main site and see what it has on there if I'm at all interested/ worried.

I wouldn't trust *anything* that comes via an e-mail asking me to click on a link!