Internet *****

I was a victim of internet / banking ***** where invoices were intercepted and account numbers changed. Please note that the account name was not changed. An amount of over R 40 000 of my money was then smoothly accepted in a ********** Capitec account. So the fact is that the account number (**********) and account name on the invoice did not match - yet they accepted the deposit???

This means that even in this day and age, Capitec cannot match account numbers with account names.

It also means that a ********** account was opened (or *******ly obtained), big amounts were paid into this account, just to be withdrawn nearly immediately – Why don’t these, obvious suspicious transactions not raise flags?

I reported the case to Capitec bank, and opened a case with the SAPS. With Capitec Bank I found ********, close to non-existent service, nowhere to really follow up the case, and the person who was appointed to the case was totally *********** – so much so that even after all my affidavits and statements she thought that I was banking with First National Bank! I got the feeling that the main purpose of Capitec Bank’s ***** Detection / Forensics is to put the case to sleep and to put all responsibility onto the client. I escalated the case to the CEO’s office, and later to the ombudsman. The ombudsman just reflects back the denial of Capitec Bank to except ANY responsibility of a crime that was committed in Capitec’s territory. Valid points I made to the ombudsman were just ignored and it seemed they also do not have the will, or capability to see reason in that.

The pattern that these cases reported to Capitec’s ***** unit and ombudsman follows, is long reaction periods to stretch out the case. They do not really investigate, they rather look for technical points to give them reason to deny any responsibility. On the other hand, SAPS are overloaded and don’t see these cases as priority. This creates and supports the bully effect one experience from the banks.

They hide behind “contractual relationship with you, the principles provided by the Code of Banking Practice, your version of events and any other applicable principles (e.g. Treating Customers Fairly) and regulations”, etc as they put it – long terms they quoted to accept no responsibility and to be untouchable....

But:

In many countries the "Confirmation of Payee" system is introduced and banks are forced to apply this. The new “CoP” system is designed to combat ******** and guard against customer errors when deposits are done, if the name of the person they think they're paying doesn't match the actual name on the account. This system was born out of the realization that clients are abused by banks...

It’s actually so logic, straight forward and simple – even when a courier delivers a parcel to an address, they will ask for identity...

Furthermore, logic dictates that the following should raise flags at Capitec Bank: • Frequent withdrawal of large cash amounts that do not appear to be justified by the customer’s business activity. • A large amount of cash is withdrawn and immediately deposited into another account • High velocity of funds through an account, i.e. low beginning and ending daily balances, which do not reflect the large volume of funds flowing through an account. • Transfers of funds from various third parties into an account, which is inconsistent with the nature of the customer’s business. My complaints fell on deaf ears which now force me to take the social media route, and possibly later follow with legal action to test the legality of Capitec not accepting even a percentage of responsibility:

I encourage people that were cheated out of their money, and were bul**** by the BIG BROTHER’s into believing that the banks carry no responsibility, to contact me.