GLOBAL SUB-PRIME CRISIS

BANKILEAKS

Click on our Secret Library of Evidence ------>

    BANKILEAKS Secret Library

Loan Application Forms (LAF's)  

    Bank Emails to Brokers  

    Then Click on 'VIEW NOTEBOOK'

Join us on facebook
 

facebook3           facebook2 

BFCSA
MORTGAGE
DISTRESS SOS

What BFCSA Does...

BFCSA investigates fraud involving lenders, spruikers and financial planners worldwide.  Full Doc, Low Doc, No Doc loans, Lines of Credit and Buffer loans appear to be normal profit making financial products, however, these loans are set to implode within seven years.  For the past two decades, Ms Brailey, President of BFCSA (Inc), has been a tireless campaigner, championing the cause of older and low income people around the Globe who have fallen victim to banking and finance scams.  She has found that people of all ages are being targeted by Bankers offering faulty lending products. BFCSA warn that anyone who has signed up for one of these financial products, is in grave danger of losing their home.

Visitors

Articles View Hits
690972

Whistleblowers' Corner!

To all mortgage brokers, BDMs and loan approval officers! 
Pls Call Denise: 0401 642 344 

"Confidentiality is assured."

Cartoon Corner

Lighten your load today and "Laugh all the way to the bank!"

Denise Brailey

Led by award-winning consumer advocate Denise Brailey, BFCSA (Inc) are a group of people who are concerned about the appalling growth of Loan Fraud around the world. BFCSA (Inc) is a not for profit organisation in the spirit of global community concern and justice.

Click on the Cluster Map.

  • Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this blog.
  • Bloggers
    Bloggers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Login
    Login Login form

BFCSA: Bank customers may cover cost of fraud under new UK proposals

Posted by on in BANKSTERS
  • Font size: Larger Smaller
  • Hits: 1225
  • 1 Comment
  • Print

Bank customers may cover cost of fraud under new UK proposals

Patrick Jenkins and Sam Jones

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/e335211c-2105-11e6-aa98-db1e01fabc0c.html#axzz4A6ziUpN9

 

Bank customers could be forced to foot the bill for fraud on their accounts, under proposals being discussed by Britain’s lenders in conjunction with the UK government, the Bank of England and spymasters at GCHQ.

Under the plans, individuals or companies with lax online security could find themselves frozen out of banking services or even excluded from the system whereby banks compensate customers whose accounts are hacked.

 

Consumer groups immediately criticised the plans. Lindsay Cook, co-founder of consumer rights advocacy organisation Money Fight Club, said: “It’s going to be a tax on the less sophisticated, the old and the frail.”

Which? policy and campaigns director Alex Neill said consumers could find themselves locked out of online banking. “Banks should do more work looking at their own systems to see where the potential vulnerabilities are,” he added. “You can’t just say to people ‘oh, you go and figure it out’.”

At present, banks routinely cover the cost of fraud, regardless of blame. Any move to put the burden of fraud losses on to customers is likely to be highly contentious and would be a stark change from current norms in many western countries.

The authorities have become increasingly worried about the vulnerability of financial institutions to cyber attacks, whether from thieves, nation states or terrorists. Banks themselves are also concerned about mounting fraud losses.

Financial fraud losses across UK payment cards, remote banking and cheques totalled £755m last year, up by more than a quarter on the previous year, according to Financial Fraud Action UK, which collates data on the issue.

Some of the biggest increases came in areas linked to online financial services activity. The cost of internet banking fraud leapt 64 per cent to £134m in 2015, according to FFA.

GCHQ, the government’s electronic eavesdropping and cyber security agency, is pushing hard for banks and other private sector organisations to take a more “active” approach when it comes to cyber defence.

The agency believes that companies must do more to try and encourage their own customers to improve their cyber security standards. Customers using outdated software — sometimes riddled with vulnerabilities that hackers can exploit — are a weak link in the UK’s cyber defences, GCHQ officials have told banks. The agency believes it is up to companies to redress the problem, however, and has told the private sector it will not take responsibility for regulatory failings.

A government security official said GCHQ was being forceful in articulating its concerns to regulatory bodies like the Bank of England in order to try and push for tougher rules.

GCHQ declined to comment.

 

Adrian Leppard, former chief of City of London police, and now a director at cyber security consultancy Templar Executives, said: “It seems reasonable that customers should take the most basic steps to prevent crime and that banks should only have to recompense those who have done so. It is also a good step in encouraging a necessary culture shift that requires society to take such steps. At present there seems little motivation to do so if the banks will always [pay] out!”

Any changes to the system would take several years to implement, according to bankers, and would happen in three or four stages.

As a preliminary move, customers detected using an outdated browser or ineffective antivirus software, would be urged to upgrade. At a second stage, customers may be barred from all but the most basic online banking services.

Some participants in the talks believe a third stage should involve internet service providers barring customers altogether if they are known targets of so-called malware, or malicious software.

In the event that fraud is perpetrated on a customer with poor cyber security, a final step could involve the bank refusing to compensate any losses, according to people briefed on the plans.

Bankers are nervous of being seen to be penalise customers, given the sector’s tarnished reputation following the financial crisis and the multiple scandals that have emerged in its aftermath. Fraud experts said legislative change may be necessary to implement the proposals, unless banks can argue that lax security equates to “gross negligence”.

The proposals could also be politically sensitive, as they may prove more penal for less sophisticated, older customers.

Given the sensitivity, bankers are hoping that GCHQ and the government will push companies beyond the financial sector to engage in the initial stages of the exercise. If there is a general improvement in customers’ software security, it could obviate the need for more punitive sanctions.

Additional reporting by Naomi Rovnick

 

Last modified on
Rate this blog entry:
0

Comments

  • organza
    organza Monday, 30 May 2016

    Is this a joke? Banks need to be do some serious soul-searching and ask the question 'who forced customers to do on-line banking and why'. I rest my case.

Leave your comment

Guest Thursday, 09 April 2020