Private investigator Nick Mayer has built a dossier of information about a "money mule" who received $100,000 in stolen money from his client.
Private investigator Nick Mayer has built a dossier of information about a "money mule" who received $100,000 in stolen money from his client.
An Auckland money mule used her ANZ account to steal cash from up to nine scam victims before one of the duped investors approached another bank with concerns and exposed the sophisticated criminal scheme.
One of the victims, a retired North Shore insurance professional who lost $100,000 in October, believesANZ should be held partially liable for the victims’ losses.
He claims ANZ failed to properly vet the mule when setting up her account, and failed to detect any of the fraudulent money transfers to and from the bank account as suspicious.
“I’m highly p***ed off quite frankly. ANZ and any bank should not be able to harbour clients ... carrying on known illegal mule or laundering activities.”
However, ANZ is defending its security and vetting processes as robust and stresses its fraud monitoring and anti-money laundering checks are up to scratch.
The North Shore man thought he was investing money in a Suncorp term deposit and that the funds had been sent to a Suncorp holding account.
He only learned it had been stolen when his own bank Westpac contacted him in March saying another victim had come forward and it was likely he had been scammed.
Westpac alerted ANZ but none of the stolen money was recovered.
The man then hired private investigator Nick Mayer. He identified the mule as an Auckland woman in her 30s with multiple credit defaults and an adverse court judgment involving a debt recovery agency.
Police have told the victim the woman has no major assets, having spent the proceeds of her offending on “shopping, gambling and material living”. The woman is yet to be arrested.
They are aware of nine separate victims and say the money was wired to Australia and Vietnam.
The man told the Herald that despite banks claiming to have high-tech security and vetting procedures in place, he believes today’s banking system “is actually far worse than when cheques were issued”.
With cheques, especially those marked “not negotiable”, payments could only be made to the intended recipient - the name written on the cheque.
“Modern practice internet banking reversed this and now the payee named is of no relevance.
“Our New Zealand banking system is grossly inadequate in this respect,” he claimed.
NZ Private Investigators director Nick Mayer.
Mayer said the woman was clearly party to the scam, with her account used to launder victims’ money for the criminal masterminds based overseas.
Given the number of victims, he believed the case raised serious questions about ANZ’s anti-money laundering processes and fraud detection systems and that ANZ should therefore shoulder some liability for the losses.
An ANZ spokeswoman said the bank realised being scammed could be stressful and sympathised with the victims, but was limited in what it could say due to the ongoing police investigation and privacy obligations.
“While we are unable to confirm whether the account has been closed or what steps we’ve taken to investigate, we do take our response to scams and fraud very seriously. Typically, when we see fraudulent or malicious behaviour, we will exit those accounts.”
The spokeswoman said when ANZ learned an account may be involved in a scam, it worked with police and may freeze the account.
It had a standard process when opening any new account to meet anti-money laundering and customer due diligence requirements.
“ANZ has a fraud monitoring system and a team of fraud analysts in place to identify suspicious activity on customer accounts.”
The bank would not comment on specific fraud detection processes “as scammers are increasingly using this information to trick customers”.
ANZ urged customers to be vigilant and particularly wary of scam websites when searching online for investment opportunities, to carry out independent research and seek professional investment advice.
The North Shore victim complained to Westpac that its fraud detection systems hadn’t flagged the $100,000 payment as suspicious and should therefore bear partial liability.
The man also complained to the Banking Ombudsman, sparking a review by Westpac of his original complaint.
In a letter this week a customer solutions manager said the bank acted on the man’s payment instructions and its two-factor authentification fraud protection system “worked as designed”.
“There is no doubt that you authorised the transaction.”
Westpac said it had no prior knowledge “that the ANZ account you transferred funds to was involved in any fraud or scam”.
Neither was there any FMA alert relating to a fake Suncorp investment scam until May this year.
Westpac had no obligation to accept responsibility or liability for the accuracy of information provided by customers, nor any obligation to check account numbers were correct.
“You are solely responsible for ensuring such information, including other parties’ bank account numbers, is accurate.
“The capability to provide bank account name and number matching does not yet exist within New Zealand’s current interbank payments system.”
Westpac found it had acted with appropriate care “and carry no liability for your unfortunate loss”.
The case is the latest in a string of high-profile investment scams in which Kiwi victims are losing millions of dollars to offshore criminal syndicates, sparking calls for banks to better protect customers from fraud.
