covery Bank failed to freeze a known mule account resulting in avoidable financial loss

On Friday morning, I was the victim of a WhatsApp impersonation **** where funds were transferred from my Discovery Bank account to another Discovery Bank account. Shortly after the transfer, it was confirmed that the receiving account was a mule account.

I immediately contacted Discovery Bank’s ***** Division. During this call, I was explicitly informed that: • The receiving account was already identified as a mule account • Multiple victims had previously reported the same account • Funds were being moved out immediately • Some funds had been “set aside” for recovery on a first-come-first-served basis

This raises a serious concern: Why was a confirmed mule account still active and able to receive funds?

Despite prior reports and clear indicators of *****, Discovery Bank allowed the account to remain operational, enabling further victims (including myself and my wife) to suffer losses. I was instructed to submit documentation within 24 hours to keep the account “locked”, despite the fact that the account had clearly already been flagged.

When I queried this inconsistency with a second ***** consultant, I was unable to receive a clear explanation as to why the account had not been immediately frozen once ***** was detected.

Both the sending and receiving accounts were held within Discovery Bank, giving the bank full visibility and control. In my view, the failure to immediately restrict the mule account constitutes a breakdown in ***** prevention, risk management, and customer protection.

I am requesting: • A formal written explanation from Discovery Bank • Accountability for the failure to immediately freeze a known *****ulent account • Reimbur*****t of the funds lost as a result of this failure

This matter raises serious concerns around Discovery Bank’s ***** controls and treatment of affected customers.