During the seven-minute recording, the trained bank professional asks the victim for the name and number of the receiving account, reference field details and whethershe has sent money to the payee before.
When the victim replies she hasn’t, there is no further interrogation about why the money is being sent, whether it’s a risky first-time investment, or if the woman is confident the recipient isn’t a scammer.
Two banking experts have criticised ANZ for the lack of due diligence conducted during the call, given the amount of money that was at stake – with one describing the situation as “appalling on every level”.
“Banks usually hide behind lack of technology in payment security, but this one is a classic case of under-investment in staff training,” former fund manager and financial commentator Janine Starks said.
Financial commentator Janine Starks has criticised ANZ's handling of the case, labelling it "appalling on all levels".
The Herald revealed last month that ANZ helped the victim, Kate*, send her money to a known “mule” account under the name CADT Holdings – the same account name used to scam other victims just weeks earlier at ANZ.
Kate has now written to ANZ requesting a full review of her case. She claims the bank was negligent and wants compensation for her life-changing loss.
She said she and her husband were “shocked and concerned” that despite being on notice, ANZ had helped send their life savings to scammers.
“This failure has directly contributed to my loss and put other ANZ customers at risk,” Kate wrote.
“We would have expected ANZ as trained banking professionals to have asked necessary questions to check for and detect any red flags of a scam before processing the transaction.
“I feel ANZ’s handling of this case shows a failure of good banking practice and a lack of proper care and skill.”
ANZ is refusing to comment on the recording and whether it met good banking practice.
It has previously defended its actions, saying ANZ was acting on the customer’s instructions and did not contribute to her loss.
But following the Herald’s investigation and a request by Kate, ANZ has now launched a full review of the case.
‘Are you happy for me to make the payment?’
Kate lost $550,000 in a complex investment scam, after being convinced by fraudsters to sink the proceeds of a family property sale into Infratil bonds and a Westpac term deposit.
The first payment of $250,000 was conducted over the phone with assistance from ANZ staff on July 21, 2023.
The Herald has obtained a recording of the phone call after Kate requested it under the Privacy Act.
Releasing the recording, ANZ asked Kate not to share it with anyone or publish it “without ANZ’s prior approval”, citing confidentiality.
Kate says one payment would be easier and the staffer offers to process it for her over the phone.
“Have you made any payment to them before or is this the first time?” the staffer asks.
“No I haven’t,” Kate replies.
There is no further questioning about the payee, the reason for the huge money transfer, or discussion about whether it could be a scam.
ANZ has defended its handling of the case, saying it was not responsible for the customer's loss and was simply following her instructions.
The staffer then offers to add the recipient as a new payee, and asks for the account number and reference “particulars for yourself”.
Kate mentions “Plaza Funds” – the name of the investment firm the scammers claimed to broker for – which would be subject to an FMA public scam warning several weeks later.
The money was sent to a BNZ account before being immediately whisked overseas. Nothing was recovered.
Kate only realised she’d been scammed months later. ANZ has denied liability.
‘Appalling on every level’
Massey University banking expert Associate Professor Claire Matthews said she was surprised ANZ did not conduct more checks given the amount being transferred and the fact it was a first-time payee.
“It seems a very simple process to have gone through, and given the prevalence of scams I would have thought it would be more difficult.”
While it was the customer’s fundamental responsibility to ensure they were making legitimate payments, ANZ could have advised the victim to check CADT Holdings’ credentials after confirming she had not sent money to the company before.
Starks was more forthright in her criticism of ANZ, saying there were “no checks whatsoever” during the call and the lack of care was “appalling on every level”.
She claimed the bank had “blindly” paid Kate’s money to CADT Holdings, “despite already knowing a criminal who banked with ANZ had opened accounts in this name”.
And despite the “onslaught” of investment fraud, it appeared ANZ “hasn’t bothered” to invest in necessary professional training for frontline workers to protect customers from scams.
Starks said banks didn’t need to make this investment because the current regulatory regime was so weak.
The financial giants were making billions of dollars in profit. Investing in staff and technology would reduce shareholder profit.
The Herald put detailed questions to ANZ about whether the staff member conducted proper due diligence and checks when processing the payment, and whether ANZ was confident it acted with due care and skill.
A spokesman said the bank was now working directly with the customer to review the case and had “nothing further to add“.
* Victim’s name changed to protect identity.
Lane Nichols is Deputy Head of News and a senior journalist for the New Zealand Herald with more than 20 years’ experience in the industry.
Sign up to The Daily H, a free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
