will start blocking or delaying transfers en masse cambodia telegram data starting in the summer?
— No, because the law clearly provides for cases in which the bank must suspend the transfer.
The first case when he sees that the transaction falls under the signs of fraud. For example, the client makes atypical transactions – large transfers at night, and from a new device. The bank has the right to ask the client whether he really makes the transfer himself and whether he is under the influence of fraudsters. If, despite the warning, the person insists on the transfer, the bank is obliged to execute the transaction.
The second case, when the recipient’s
account is in our database, the financial institution is obliged to suspend the transfer for two days, even if the client insists. If after two days the person has not cancelled the transfer to the same fraudulent account, the bank is obliged to execute the transaction. And in this case, it is released from financial liability.
Currently, the average compensation
share is about 5%. Will it increase after the law comes into force?
— Today, banks reimburse money only in one case, when the theft occurred without the client’s participation, i.e., he did not give the fraudsters access to his money: did not provide card details, SMS key metrics in media planning codes, login or password. However, a large number of fraudulent transactions occur using social engineering, when a person voluntarily transfers savings to the attackers. Such cases do not fall under the current compensation mechanism. The adopted agb directory law is aimed at combating such thefts, among other things.