Haig Artan [National Real Estate Network] ✔’s Post

How can your bank combat check fraud? Read our blog to explore the problem and how well-implemented solutions like positive pay can help stem the tide: https://bit.ly/4cl0fzd

My checking & savings accounts were emptied 'in minutes' after a text - bank thought I was transferring money to myself https://lnkd.in/exhvJE_c 🇺🇸3/18/2024/Mo.🇺🇲 Reading this article should enlighten YOU, to some of those different methods, criminals have and will use assorted ways to steal money from YOUR financial institution's account.

This article by The Sun is a stark reminder to stay vigilant online! A recent incident highlights the importance of secure banking practices. Stay informed, stay secure! Read the full article here to learn more. Member FDIC. #HeartlandBank #OnlineSafety https://bit.ly/3UJ4OwO

The Post /Press - Rob Stock. My view; I can’t think of a single scam, banks aren’t to blame for. Bold statement? Not at all. Let me explain. KPMG say banks might consider “joint responsibility” with customers. Unbelievable. Why would we want to relieve them of half the liability? Their joint liability is with each other; payee and payer. Think of any payment scam, and I’m pretty sure I could tell you why a bank is to blame. In short, two reasons: 1. They’re either the bank with a flaw in their technology and under invested in tech. Or; 2. They’re the bank harbouring a criminal. To expand: A lack of investment in security (like name-check and call-check), untrained staff, old rule-based fraud systems, lack of fraud warnings and willfully ignoring security advice from the ombudsman; it is blatant risk taking. It’s based on believing their liability is low in a self-regulatory regime. Alternatively they’ve made a commercial decision their tech is ‘good enough’ and it’s cheaper to pay for what slips through, than invest in better. Or; They’re the bank harbouring a criminal and ‘know-your-customer’ is riddled with holes, lack of care and under investment in monitoring. They’ve set up an account for a person or business without getting deeper info on their previous history, earnings, suppliers and setting appropriate limits. As customers we rely on the payee bank to monitor accounts. Their terms and conditions say accounts can’t be used for illegal purposes. So it’s reasonable to expect them to protect victims, suspend accounts and take action. Payee banks escape liability due to two things; a) The banking ombudsman scheme doesn’t hear complaints against a bank who allowed criminal activity. They can change this. The scheme rules were originally written by banks. b) The banking code of practice doesn’t mention any duty of care by the payee bank, despite their services being part of the transaction. It could; banks wrote it. They regulate themselves. They can change it and the Minister of Consumer Affairs has asked them to. He’ll end up with watered down gravy. Thin and murky is how they like consumer protection. Banks condition people to think victims are to blame by calling it authorised fraud. We need to call it for what it is “bank enabled fraud”. We are wising up. Let me say it again; I can’t think of a single scam a bank isn’t to blame for. ANZ Reserve Bank of New Zealand Bank of New Zealand Kiwibank ASB Bank Westpac Antonia Watson Catherine McGrath Vittoria Shortt Dan Huggins Steve Jurkovich Samantha Barrass Andrew Park FMA Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment Andrew Bayly Nicola Sladden Banking Ombudsman Scheme (NZ) KPMG New Zealand john kensington Jon Duffy Consumer NZ CERT NZ Netsafe New Zealand Brent Carey #scamawareness #fraudprevention https://lnkd.in/dW7KEmAy

By making all banking parties accountable for the implications of Fraud for the first time, we should see a significant change in how banks collaborate on investigation and recovery workflows…good news for the consumer 👍

Always good to see a solution that prevents fraudulent activity. Even better when its your own company putting in the hard work to stop it. If you want to stop people signing up for Direct Debits using someone else's bank details, then this is an article you want to read.

While Iowa State Bank implements many measures to help spot check fraud, there are many actions consumers can take to protect themselves as well. Here are seven simple tips consumers can take to avoid becoming a victim of check fraud:

REMINDER! The fraudsters are still out in full force sending text messages telling you that a transaction has been made on your account. Remember, this is fraud. DO NOT CLICK ON ANY LINKS OR PROVIDE ANY INFORMATION! The bad actors are randomly sending these text messages. There has been no data breach at The Dime Bank. Please see a sample of another fraudulent text message in this post. If you click on the link and enter your credentials you are then giving the bad actors access to your accounts and your money. Avoid any chances of compromising your accounts and providing fraudsters with an ability to transfer your funds out of your accounts and into theirs! REMEMBER, DO NOT CLICK ON ANY LINKS OR PROVIDE ANY INFORMATION! The Dime Bank, Member FDIC, will never ask you to click on a link and enter your credentials for online banking to confirm a transaction or request sensitive information!

In this article today, we will be answering a popular question and related FAQs in "Can Someone access your bank account with just your phone number?"

Scammers are targeting savings with complex schemes. Don't be fooled! Remember: never transfer money to 'protect' it, never share verification codes, and always verify with your bank directly. Stay vigilant! -- Learn more tips on how to protect yourself from scammers here: https://bit.ly/48On0Zo