She called the bank, but it was unable to retrieve any of the money. Malia subsequently complained that the bank had not warned her sufficiently about crypto-scams. The bank did not accept this, and Malia asked us to investigate.
We listened to the recording of Malia's call to the bank. The bank began by explaining that it wanted to make sure she, and not a fraudster, was making the transfers. She confirmed it was her and explained that she was sending money to a crypto-currency trader. The bank asked if she had chosen a genuine trader, warning that there were a lot of fake as well as genuine traders. Malia said she thought the one she had selected was genuine, adding that it appeared to be using a legitimate American bank. The bank confirmed it was a genuine bank, but said this did not necessarily mean the recipient at that bank was genuine. It warned Malia that the risk was hers once money was sent. It reiterated that there were genuine and fake crypto-currency traders, and that customers should check carefully that they were dealing with a genuine trader.
We told her the bank had provided an adequate warning and was not responsible for his loss.
In the meantime, she sent funds to another crypto-currency trader via another bank and reported back to us that the second bank had done a much better job of alerting her to the risks of crypto-scams. She said that had the first bank done as good a job as the second one, she would not have lost $340,000. We listened to the recording of her call to the second bank, but remained satisfied the first bank had given adequate warnings about the risks of crypto-scams.
We did not uphold Malia's complaint.Print this page