A low profile leemand will get a low profile and chao turtle leesponse
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
No worries. OCBC decided to compensate those who were scammed
- Thread starter syed putra
- Start date
PUBLISHED
25 MINS AGO
FacebookWhatsApp
SINGAPORE - All OCBC customers affected by a recent spate of SMS phishing scams will receive "full goodwill payouts" covering the amount they lost, OCBC Bank said in a statement on Wednesday (Jan 19).
More than 100 victims have already received the payouts and the bank will make arrangements for the payout with all remaining affected customers by next week, it added.
"We seek the understanding and patience of our customers as thorough validation of each case requires time to ensure accuracy. This process is necessary so that every case is fairly and properly treated," said OCBC group chief executive Helen Wong.
"We apologise for taking more time than expected to resolve the issues with our customers during this time of distress and anxiety," she said.
Ms Wong said the bank has contacted customers who might not be aware that their banking activities were susceptible to the phishing scam.
"This has helped to prevent another 200 and more customers from falling prey to the scam," she added.
Nearly 470 OCBC customers lost at least $8.5 million last December to the phishing scams. Some victims have lost life savings built up over the years for their families.
The victims received unsolicited SMS messages purporting to be from the bank, claiming there were issues with their banking accounts and they had to click on a link given in the message to resolve the issue.
The link led to fake bank websites and victims were asked to key in their Internet banking account login details.
Many victims of the latest scams were fooled because the SMS sender name “OCBC” was spoofed by the scammers, and the fake SMS messages were grouped in the same SMS thread with genuine ones sent previously by OCBC for one-time passwords (OTPs) and transaction alerts.
OCBC said on Monday it had been making goodwill payments to affected customers since Jan 8.
In a separate statement on Monday, the Monetary Authority of Singapore said it would consider supervisory actions against OCBC and that it expected all customers to be treated fairly.
On Tuesday, The Straits Times reported that several OCBC customers had received payouts from the bank, but the victims declined to reveal details of the payouts, citing non-disclosure agreements they had signed.
25 MINS AGO
FacebookWhatsApp
SINGAPORE - All OCBC customers affected by a recent spate of SMS phishing scams will receive "full goodwill payouts" covering the amount they lost, OCBC Bank said in a statement on Wednesday (Jan 19).
More than 100 victims have already received the payouts and the bank will make arrangements for the payout with all remaining affected customers by next week, it added.
"We seek the understanding and patience of our customers as thorough validation of each case requires time to ensure accuracy. This process is necessary so that every case is fairly and properly treated," said OCBC group chief executive Helen Wong.
"We apologise for taking more time than expected to resolve the issues with our customers during this time of distress and anxiety," she said.
Ms Wong said the bank has contacted customers who might not be aware that their banking activities were susceptible to the phishing scam.
"This has helped to prevent another 200 and more customers from falling prey to the scam," she added.
Nearly 470 OCBC customers lost at least $8.5 million last December to the phishing scams. Some victims have lost life savings built up over the years for their families.
The victims received unsolicited SMS messages purporting to be from the bank, claiming there were issues with their banking accounts and they had to click on a link given in the message to resolve the issue.
The link led to fake bank websites and victims were asked to key in their Internet banking account login details.
Many victims of the latest scams were fooled because the SMS sender name “OCBC” was spoofed by the scammers, and the fake SMS messages were grouped in the same SMS thread with genuine ones sent previously by OCBC for one-time passwords (OTPs) and transaction alerts.
OCBC said on Monday it had been making goodwill payments to affected customers since Jan 8.
In a separate statement on Monday, the Monetary Authority of Singapore said it would consider supervisory actions against OCBC and that it expected all customers to be treated fairly.
On Tuesday, The Straits Times reported that several OCBC customers had received payouts from the bank, but the victims declined to reveal details of the payouts, citing non-disclosure agreements they had signed.
Still a goodwill payout when fraudster can bypass a physical token ?
死要面子?Ocbc is subsidising the stupidity of sunkie and encouraging the works of the scammers and lightening the loads of IT security and police. This matter will not come to a full stop. History will repeat itself.
Does tummysick have investments in OCBC bank? If not why is she acting against the banks self interest?
I hope the CEO of Standard Chartered Bank will follow OCBC to make goodwill payment to me for the scammed amount of about $2.1K.Still a goodwill payout when fraudster can bypass a physical token ?
They have been keeping silent, not as steady as OCBC
Care to share how was it scammed ?
My uncle promised he won't laugh at you 
Maybe my uncle can even help you to leetrieve the 2.1k ?
That's going to open the floodgates for the scammers.
So what's to stop some OCBC customers from working with the scammers to get scammed deliberately and then get back compensation?
So what's to stop some OCBC customers from working with the scammers to get scammed deliberately and then get back compensation?
Easier for ocbc to put more restrictions on overseas transfers etc than to keep doing payouts
My uncle think maybe the existing batch of claimers already contains some. Don't be greedy claim 10k easilee approve. How to locate and invite the scammer ?
just in :
SINGAPORE: DBS Bank warned on Wednesday (Jan 19) that scammers are "actively targeting" customers via suspicious login alert messages.
The warning comes on the back of a recent spate of phishing scams that affected hundreds of OCBC Bank customers, with total losses amounting to at least S$8.5 million.
OCBC said on Jan. 19 that it will make "full goodwill payouts" to all affected customers of the recent SMS phishing scam.
OCBC said more than 100 victims have received the full goodwill payouts so far.
OCBC first announced that they would be paying out affected customers on Jan. 17, but made no mention whether this payout would be the full amount that the victims lost in the scam.
Arrangements to be made with all victims by next week
OCBC said they have been making these payments since Jan. 8, 2022.
Group CEO of OCBC Bank, Helen Wong said: "We seek the understanding and patience of our customers as thorough validation of each case requires time to ensure accuracy. This process is necessary so that every case is fairly and properly treated."
OCBC said that the arrangements will be made with all affected customers by next week for the full goodwill payout.
Apologised for taking more time than expected
Wong said the bank had also proactively reached out to customers who might not be aware that their banking activities were susceptible to the phishing scam.
"This has helped to prevent another 200 and more customers from falling prey to the scam," said Wong.
"We apologise for taking more time than expected to resolve the issues with our customers during this time of distress and anxiety,” she added.
Last edited:
Last edited:
Banks with all the legal resources at its disposal will not do this kind of payout unless it is not confident it can win any legal suit -and its staff will be subject to questioning by lawyers , revealing more skeletons .
As leslie fong has pointed out, MAS must also take responsibility that the payment system are not robust enough .
Leslie also pointed out that the authorities/banks have not revealed to which countries and the accounts these fraudulent transfers were made -only causing people to speculate wildly about which foreign country has the most IT staff here and were they colluding with foreigners to fraud locals ?
PAP-I guess they are still busy trying to figure out how to punish WP and also how to make life more miserable for the unvaccinated.
As leslie fong has pointed out, MAS must also take responsibility that the payment system are not robust enough .
Leslie also pointed out that the authorities/banks have not revealed to which countries and the accounts these fraudulent transfers were made -only causing people to speculate wildly about which foreign country has the most IT staff here and were they colluding with foreigners to fraud locals ?
PAP-I guess they are still busy trying to figure out how to punish WP and also how to make life more miserable for the unvaccinated.
Last edited:
The bottom line is banks n most big businesses are protected by the law which benefits them as there is no consumer protection. N the telecom security itself is weak. Hence if there was any liability, telecom n MAS are at fault as they are sleeping on the job. Tat is why Singkieland is a target for scams
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/ocbc-scam-goodwill-payout-sms-compensation-lawyers-2445061
"Currently, banks can single-handedly set all the rules for this bank-customer relationship without customers being able to object to it because what happens if they object is they can't open an account and cannot participate in electronic banking services," said Assoc Prof Hofmann.
"In this time and age, when we all are fully dependent on electronic payment systems or have no more choice of abstaining from these kinds of transactions, we need a very clear and robust legal and regulatory framework."
An example, he said, would be the European Union's Payments Services Directive, introduced in 2007, which states that banks can only claim damages for the losses incurred from fraudulent third-party transactions if they can prove that the customer acted with gross negligence.
Assoc Prof Hofmann said the key difference is that the burden of proof is on the banks, rather than the customers.
"According to EU law, the bank needs to tell you what all the technologies it uses are, and unless the bank can prove that there was a grossly negligent breach of obligations on the customer side, the customer does not bear any losses," he said.
"In Singapore, there is no guidance from the law so everything is purely determined by the contractual terms between the bank and the customer and I think that needs to be addressed."
In November last year, the UK's payment systems regulator announced that it would make necessary legislative changes to provide for mandatory reimbursement for scam victims.
It also proposed to make it compulsory for the country's biggest banks to publish data reimbursement levels for victims of push payment fraud, as well as which banks and building societies' accounts are being used to receive the fraudulent funds.
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/ocbc-scam-goodwill-payout-sms-compensation-lawyers-2445061
"Currently, banks can single-handedly set all the rules for this bank-customer relationship without customers being able to object to it because what happens if they object is they can't open an account and cannot participate in electronic banking services," said Assoc Prof Hofmann.
"In this time and age, when we all are fully dependent on electronic payment systems or have no more choice of abstaining from these kinds of transactions, we need a very clear and robust legal and regulatory framework."
An example, he said, would be the European Union's Payments Services Directive, introduced in 2007, which states that banks can only claim damages for the losses incurred from fraudulent third-party transactions if they can prove that the customer acted with gross negligence.
Assoc Prof Hofmann said the key difference is that the burden of proof is on the banks, rather than the customers.
"According to EU law, the bank needs to tell you what all the technologies it uses are, and unless the bank can prove that there was a grossly negligent breach of obligations on the customer side, the customer does not bear any losses," he said.
"In Singapore, there is no guidance from the law so everything is purely determined by the contractual terms between the bank and the customer and I think that needs to be addressed."
In November last year, the UK's payment systems regulator announced that it would make necessary legislative changes to provide for mandatory reimbursement for scam victims.
It also proposed to make it compulsory for the country's biggest banks to publish data reimbursement levels for victims of push payment fraud, as well as which banks and building societies' accounts are being used to receive the fraudulent funds.
Similar threads
