Accountability can hardly be declared "almost impossible"
"After the deposit is lost, everyone is most concerned about whether it can be recovered." Xu Yuping, a lawyer at Beijing Bank of China Law Firm, said that the reality is "almost impossible".
The People's Bank of China clearly pointed out in the "Several Provisions on Implementing the Regulations on Savings Management" that "the national constitution protects the ownership of individual legal savings deposits from infringement." The contents of the certificates of deposit currently issued by ICBC and Agricultural Bank also clearly stipulate the bank's custody responsibility for deposits. However, there are no specific regulations on how to deal with the fraud and loss of deposits.
Faced with the problems of being cheated and losing deposits, most commercial banks often put the responsibility on individual employees or even "temporary workers".
"It is difficult to determine whether it is the responsibility of banks, depositors or employees." Liu Jicheng said. Some depositors of Anhui Postal Savings Bank, who suffered from "changing deposits into insurance policies", told reporters that misleading sales mostly occurred in remote areas, and the counter staff even folded the deposit slip to reveal only the signature column, which was directly signed by depositors who were not alert.
Some banks claim that the impostor provided the depositor's name, account opening time, account number and address, so the responsibility lies in the disclosure of the depositor's personal information. "But from the perspective of causality, information leakage can't mean that depositors must be at fault, and banks may also cause depositors' information leakage, which directly leads to deposit losses." Xu Yuping said.
For example, according to the Hunan Provincial Public Security Bureau, in 2005, Hu Mou, a citizen of Hengyang, Hunan Province, deposited150,000 yuan into China Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, Hunan Hengyang Baishazhou Sub-branch, and only 600 yuan was left recently. After investigation by the public security organs, the three suspects in the fraud case included the younger brother of the president of the branch. The criminal suspect forged the company seal left by the depositor in the bank, and successfully exchanged the seal at the bank and took away tens of millions of deposits.
After the deposit is lost, it is more difficult to get compensation, and it is common to argue for several years. In 2008, depositor Zhang deposited 9 million yuan in Jiangsu Yangzhong Sub-branch of Industrial and Commercial Bank of China. After the deposit expires, it is found that it has been transferred by the banking department owner to pay off personal debts. After six years of litigation, 20 14 years, the court of second instance found that the bank was not at fault.
In the cases of loss of deposits in Hunan and Zhejiang, depositors' claims have also been silent for many years. Some "loss-making" listed companies have also repeatedly gone to court with banks. For example, on 20 13, the listed company Jiugui Liquor announced that its deposit of 654.38 billion yuan in Hangzhou Branch of Agricultural Bank of China was stolen. Afterwards, although the suspect was arrested and some of the lost money was recovered, the listed company still lost 36.68 million yuan that year. This means that most of the losses are still borne by shareholders.
The bank can't accept them?
According to informed sources of Hangzhou police, "deposit thieves" often commit crimes on a large scale after they succeed in a certain place or a bank. Take the gang caught in this crime in Hangzhou as an example. They not only committed crimes in Zhejiang province, but also succeeded in committing crimes in neighboring provinces. The banks involved include large and medium-sized state-owned banks and local small rural credit cooperatives. "Although the methods are highly similar, banks can't get it."
Guo Hua, a postdoctoral fellow at China Academy of Social Sciences, and other experts said that from small and medium-sized banks to large state-owned banks, the frequent loss of deposits shows to some extent that banks are not alert to violations of laws and regulations and their technology upgrading is slow. Theoretically, except for the system display error, the phenomenon of losing money can be completely eliminated.
According to the Supervision Guidelines for Insurance Agency Business of Commercial Banks, bank sales personnel shall not confuse insurance products with savings deposits and bank wealth management products, and shall not apply concepts such as "principal", "interest" and "deposit". However, there are no clear penalties for sales staff's violations.
Zhang Zongxin, a professor at the Institute of Finance of Fudan University, believes that the relationship between depositors and banks is a savings contract. The depositor has money in the bank. If criminals impersonate through system loopholes, unless depositors participate, banks should bear at least part of the responsibility.
However, in practice, commercial banks frequently ask consumers to collect evidence themselves, otherwise they will not be responsible for "losing money". "When saving money, it is said that state-owned banks are the most reliable, and there are' high-tech' protections such as monitoring systems. If you lose money, you will come to the depositor for evidence recording. " The financial director of a listed company in Guangdong said that the burden of proof should be reversed in similar cases, and there is no fault in the bank's self-certification.
A bank insider admitted that without written evidence and recording, salespeople often don't admit that there is misleading, so it is also necessary to urge banks to improve contract supervision and establish a suspicious transaction monitoring system. "Now some grassroots employees even privately cooperate with third parties such as insurance companies and enjoy commissions. Banks should at least bear the responsibility of poor supervision. "