Usually, the bank refunded the customer of card theft, except if there was talk of criminal intent or extreme negligence, but recently the bank refused and accused some customers leaving their PIN in their wallets.
The Bank Code is of opinion that the bank must be able to prove that the customer committed fraud or acted without reasonable care. According to consumer groups, a revision of this guideline is necessary because they have objections to the burden of proof of the banks. Stephen Murdoch, a Chip and Pin security expert from the University of Cambridge reveals that there are several manners how frauds can steal codes of PIN what proves that customers are not always guilty.
Sofie Van Bruaene
1 opmerking:
Usually, the bank refunded 'usually' is always followed by a simple present --> refunds the customer of card theft, except if there was talk if there is talk of criminal intent or extreme negligence, but recently the bank has refused and accused some customers leaving their PIN in their wallets.
The Bank Code is of opinion that literal translation! According to the Bank Codethe bank must be able to prove that the customer committed fraud or acted without reasonable care. According to consumer groups, a revision of this guideline is necessary because they have objections to the burden of proof of the banks. Stephen Murdoch, a Chip and Pin security expert from --> of the University of Cambridge reveals that there are several manners how frauds several ways in which fraudscan steal codes of PIN what --> which proves that customers are not always guilty.
Een reactie posten