Caroline also complained about how the way the bank handled her complaint. She said the bank’s complaint outcome letter recorded one of her scam payments as $2,100 when it was $1,200, and that the bank would not agree to correct this. She also asked the bank to explain a $1,497 deposit into her account, including whether it could have come from the scammers, but she said she did not receive a clear answer.

Our investigation

We reviewed Caroline’s calls with the bank on 30 June and 1 July 2025, including discussion about withdrawing $13,000 in cash. We found nothing in those calls that should have given the bank grounds to suspect a possible scam. The bank was therefore under no obligation to make further inquiries or issue a scam warning.

We also considered the steps taken by the bank to try to recover the money. Caroline reported the scam at a branch at 1.30pm on 8 July, and the bank sent emails to the receiving banks soon after 3pm the same day seeking the return of the money. We were satisfied the bank acted promptly and reasonably in trying to recover her money.

We reviewed the bank’s handling of Caroline’s complaint. The Code of Banking Practice requires banks to communicate with customers clearly and effectively. We found the bank did not meet that standard when it declined to correct the wrong payment amount and then failed to follow up after saying it would look into the $1,497 deposit, as Caroline had requested. The bank offered $600 as a goodwill payment for the stress and inconvenience caused by those communication failures.  

Outcome

Caroline accepted the bank’s offer.