He believed ANZ’s fraud detection systems should have picked up the unusual spike in Tsai’s normally “frugal” spending, but had instead failed to prevent the theft.
“My mum is not at fault. She’s the victim of a burglary.”
Tsai’s Greenlane home was broken into in late April while she visited family in Taiwan. The thieves stole her ANZ, Westpac and ASB Eftpos cards, which were hidden under clothes in a draw.
Tsai - an ANZ customer of 27 years - used the same PIN number for all three cards, which ANZ says is a breach of its terms and conditions.
Between May 1 and 9, the thieves used the cards to drain more than $45,000 from Tsai’s three accounts before she became aware of the unauthorised transactions, blocked the cards and reported the theft to police.
Liu told the Herald ASB and Westpac investigated the matter and refunded their portions of the stolen money.
However, ANZ refused liability and declined to refund $31,545.64 stolen during 31 separate transactions.
Bank records show the thieves splurged on bling from Michael Hill Jeweller, clothing and food, and also made multiple $800 ATM cash withdrawals before the cards were frozen.
“ANZ boasts on its website that it utilises state-of-the-art fraud detection systems and that it has a dedicated fraud monitoring team who review banking activity around the clock for anything potentially suspicious or fraudulent,” Liu wrote in a complaint to the Banking Ombudsman.
“However, for reasons that have not been explained, ANZ’s fraud monitoring team failed to detect any of the unauthorised transactions despite the sudden sharp change in spending pattern, which went from months of inactivity to 31 high-value transactions over the course of three days.”
In a letter to Liu in September, a senior ANZ customer relations manager said: “Although we can appreciate your clients’ [sic] position and can empathise with her over the financial loss stemming from the burglary, we don’t agree we’ve contributed to that loss nor should be liable for it.”
The letter said because the thieves had used Tsai’s correct PIN number after only one unsuccessful attempt, ANZ considered Tsai had failed to take “reasonable care” to protect her banking.
“This indicates the PIN was either known to the offender, written down, or was easy to guess.”
ANZ - which recorded a $2.3 billion profit this year - stressed there was no general obligation on banks to monitor customer accounts for fraud. However, the bank tried to minimise loss to customers through a “proactive risk management tool which flags some transactions for review”.
“Unfortunately, given the offender knew the PIN number on Ms Tsai’s card, they were able to make these transactions undetected. None of these transactions alerted our risk management tool.
“I appreciate this isn’t the outcome you’ve been seeking. However, we do hope you’ll find recourse from the perpetrators responsible for this crime.”
Liu, who is the director of Auckland firm Heritage Law, complained to the Banking Ombudsman, seeking reimbursement and compensation to his mother for emotional distress.
But in a preliminary finding this week, the watchdog sided with ANZ.
It said there was no suggestion Tsai had been “dishonest or negligent, or otherwise failed to take reasonable steps to protect your banking”.
However: “Our preliminary view is that the bank is not liable to reimburse you for the disputed transactions because, on the balance of probabilities, it appears that you have breached the Eftpos card and ANZ Visa Debit Card Conditions of Use ... because the person who made these transactions knew your PIN.”
Liu told the Herald his mother was adamant she did not write down her PIN, disclose it to anyone or make it easily guessable, and was prepared to file a signed affidavit to that effect.
He was disappointed at the positions of both ANZ and the Banking Ombudsman, which he said effectively reversed the burden of proof on to his mother.
He now planned to prepare civil proceedings against ANZ.
ANZ declined to comment.
Police said a detailed report was taken after the burglary was reported on April 28 and police visited the property to collect evidence.
“Despite extensive efforts to identify the alleged offenders, police have exhausted all lines of inquiry and the matter has been filed.
“Should new information come to light, police are open to reassessing the matter.”
Anyone with information can contact police via the 105 phone service or online at https://www.police.govt.nz/use-105, using Update My Report, referencing the file number 220428/4279.
Information can also be provided anonymously via Crime Stoppers on 0800 555 111.
