Bank Card Cloned, Over 360,000 Yuan Stolen
Qingyuan News (Reported by Cao Jing, Communicated by Cheng Fayan and Qing Faxuan) - A bank card was cloned, resulting in over 360,000 yuan of a depositor's savings disappearing without a trace! Despite the bank later compensating the depositor with 180,500 yuan, the case eventually went to court due to irreconcilable differences. Yesterday, the Qingcheng District Court of Qingyuan announced its verdict on this bank card cloning case, ruling that the involved bank failed to fulfill its obligations and breached the contract, ordering it to fully compensate for the stolen deposit and interest.
Over 360,000 Yuan in Deposits "Vanished"
On March 13 at 9:30 AM, Qingyuan depositor Liu Mouhua received a text message from the bank stating that his card had been used for a transaction of 361,000 yuan. Realizing he hadn't made any purchases and that his bank card was still on him, Liu immediately went to a nearby bank branch to check. Upon confirmation, it turned out that the disaster had indeed struck—his account balance had dropped from 361,000 yuan to just 154 yuan. Liu promptly reported the incident to the bank and filed a police report.
The bank discovered through investigation that the transaction occurred at 9:30 AM via a POS machine at a fabric wholesale market in Shenzhen. On the same day, the funds were transferred to an account in Shenyang. Surveillance footage revealed that on February 26, 2009, at around 7 PM, several suspicious men wearing hats and glasses installed and removed what appeared to be a camera and card reader on an ATM machine belonging to the defendant bank. During this time, Liu's wife had made a withdrawal from that ATM.
ATM Tampered With, Bank Failed to Detect
The court ruled that the evidence formed a relatively complete chain: the ATM machine was tampered with by installing suspected cameras and card readers; Liu's wife made a withdrawal during the specified timeframe; after learning that the card was used for a 361,000 yuan transaction in Shenzhen, Liu immediately reported the matter to the bank and the police. The defendant bank's claim that the case remains unsolved and suspicions of collusion between the plaintiff and others lacked supporting evidence and were insufficient to overturn the established evidence chain. Therefore, the court determined that the consumption of 361,000 yuan was carried out by someone else. The court also found that the loss of deposits from the plaintiff's bank card was due to the bank's negligence in managing its self-service ATM network. Hence, the above judgment was made.