Depositors is no card cash bank sued the bank said it did not protect the password in the new networ misao

Depositors "is" no card cash bank sued the bank said it did not protect the password – Beijing "is" no card cash depositors bank sued the court of first instance bank depositors appeal 70% negative responsibility JINGWAH Times News (reporter Wang Xiaofei) found their card deposit are all removed, the bank’s depositors Mr. Liu was informed, is people using their own sign telephone, transaction password, no card cash bank business telephone booking. Mr Liu believes that the bank failed to keep depositors’ funds safety obligations, the bank to court. Court of first instance ruling the 70% liability for fault of the Bank of communications, Mr. Liu bear the responsibility of the fault of the 30%, Mr. Liu refused to appeal. Yesterday, the Beijing intermediate court hearing the case. According to Liu said that he was in the Bank of Communications Bank card opened the mobile banking business. During the card, Mr. Liu inexplicably found his 10 thousand yuan deposit was taken away. Mr. Liu after the inquiry found that he is someone who uses in the bank for the signing of a phone number, reservation code and transaction password, call the bank customer service telephone booking card free cash business, in the ATM machine to steal all his savings. With the bank after unsuccessful negotiations, Mr. Liu will be the bank to court, bank deposit and interest for the loss of his compensation. In the first trial, the bank contended that the appointment of Mr. Liu mobile phone number to be copied or stolen, communications operators are responsible for this; there is no evidence that the bank disclose Mr. Liu mobile phone number, bank card number, password, transaction password and other information query, so Mr Liu should assume corresponding responsibility. The court of first instance held that the current business is an emerging business card printing, most people do not understand this, Bank of communications did not inform the risk of possible existence of Liu’s business, there is a fault. No card access business needs to enter the bank card number, query password, transaction password banks can not be informed or controlled, Mr. Liu is responsible for the leakage of the password. In the end, for the loss of Mr. Liu, the court ruled that 70% of the liability of the Bank of communications, Mr. Liu conceit of the responsibility of 30%. After the court of first instance verdict, Mr. Liu said he refused to appeal to the Beijing third intermediate people’s court. Yesterday, the case is not in court verdict. > > the bank should bear full responsibility for Mr. Liu believes that since 2007, in the bank to open a bank card business has been normal use, the card is not lost, did not go through the ID card, mobile phone number has not been lost. "I have done my duty to the depositors, I do not know the situation in the opening of the card free business, the bank did not inform me." In court yesterday, Mr. Liu also submitted a list issued by a mobile phone supplier according to Mr. Liu, I did not take the money in the dial customer service phone. But the background of the bank has shown my phone number dialed customer service phone, indicating that the bank’s system there are significant risks." Mr. Liu said that the bank said the need for a card without the need for dynamic verification code, but the incident does not require dynamic verification code, indicating.相关的主题文章: