Scam victim did not tell bank the true reason why she was taking money from her savings

Categories:

Fraud & scams, Bank accounts, Bank decisions,

Summary:

In June 2025, Doriane saw a social media advertisement appearing to feature a celebrity promoting an investment. Believing she had discovered a legitimate opportunity, she made three international transfers totalling $193,000 between July and August 2025. Doriane withdrew money from several term deposits to make the transfers. The so-called investment was a scam. The scammer helped her move the money from her overseas account to a cryptocurrency platform.

Published:

October 2026

In December 2025, Doriane tried to transfer $31,000 to the same overseas account. This transfer triggered the bank's fraud detection systems. It stopped the transfer and restricted her access to internet banking while warning her she was possibly being scammed. Doriane was convinced she was not and made another $30,000 transfer when the bank temporarily lifted internet banking restrictions. Still concerned she might be the victim of a scam, the bank retrieved the payment and told Doriane it would not process any more international transfers.

Doriane discovered she had been scammed in March 2026 when she couldn’t withdraw her supposed returns. She complained that the bank had failed to identify and respond to early warning signs of the scam, such as her withdrawals from term deposits and subsequent large international transfers, which were out of character for her. She also questioned why the December transfer had triggered the bank’s fraud detection systems when earlier, larger transfers to the same account had not.

Our investigation

Withdrawing money from term deposits does not, on its own, suggest a scam. Customers regularly transfer money between their accounts for legitimate reasons. Doriane also told the bank she intended to buy a caravan with her savings, rather than her true purpose of funding an overseas investment.

She used her internet banking on her standard device to make the transfers to a saved payee, and the transfers did not trigger the bank's fraud detection systems. The fact that the December transfer did trigger the bank's fraud detection systems did not mean the earlier transfers also should have triggered the systems. In the absence of any warning signs, a bank is not generally obliged to monitor or question a customer's use of their funds, and the bank had no reason to suspect Doriane was being scammed in July and August 2025.

Once alerted to a potential scam by the $31,000 transfer in December, the bank tried to recall the three earlier transfers but was unsuccessful. It was able to retrieve her subsequent $30,000 transfer. We were satisfied the bank took appropriate action within a reasonable timeframe to try to recover the money Doriane had lost. It did not have to reimburse her for her losses.