Unresolved *****ulent case

internal safeguards, transaction limits, or intervention.

2. Failure of ***** Detection and Risk Controls

Large, unusual transactions across multiple products should have triggered automated ***** detection, account blocks, or client verification, particularly for a private banking client.

3. Failure of the FNB App and Virtual Card Safeguards

The virtual card, an FNB initiative, became a point of vulnerability rather than protection, enabling the extensive loss of funds.

4. Failure of Duty of Care under Private Banking

The lack of proactive monitoring and delayed response represents a failure to uphold the standards reasonably expected under a private banking relationship.

5. Failure of Fair and Reasonable Resolution

Leaving the client to repay *****ulent debt while offering only R8,000 against a loss of R250,000 is grossly disproportionate, unfair, and inconsistent with consumer protection principles.

Conclusion and Request

Mrs Sithole’s life savings, accumulated over many years, were wiped out in a single incident. She has been left financially exposed, emotionally distressed, and burdened with debt arising from transactions she did not authorise.

Mrs Sithole formally disputes FNB’s decision and requests a full reconsideration of reimbur*****t, taking into account:

The systemic failures within FNB’s platforms

The failure of ***** detection and intervention mechanisms

The responsibilities inherent in a private banking relationship

The disproportionate and inequitable outcome currently imposed on the client

T

***** Incident, Financial Loss, and Failure of Duty of Care

Mrs NDH Sithole is a long-standing First National Bank (FNB) client, having banked with the institution since 2005, and is a Private Banking customer.

Background of the Incident

On 8 December 2025 at approximately 17:45, Mrs Sithole received several SMS notifications followed by phone calls from individuals who identified themselves as FNB representatives. During the call, she was informed that there were multiple suspicious transactions allegedly taking place at Takealot and that urgent verification was required.

In a state of panic and concern for the safety of her accounts, Mrs Sithole opened her FNB App to verify the information. At that moment, the application reflected a zero balance. The callers then instructed her not to open the app again, claiming they were in the process of securing her account.

Mrs Sithole was subsequently asked to provide details of her virtual card, which she did in good faith, believing she was communicating with legitimate FNB officials. It is important to note that the FNB App and virtual card are FNB-developed platforms, promoted to customers as secure banking solutions.

Mrs Sithole only realised the following day that she had been the victim of a ****. She immediately reported the matter to FNB, and investigations were opened under the following reference numbers:

Case Numbers:

*** / ***

Extent of the Financial Loss

The investigation revealed that:

Her cheque account was completely emptied

Her credit card was *****ulently utilised, despite there being no outstanding balance

Her savings account, accumulated over many years, was fully depleted

Further attempts were made to extract additional funds

The total financial loss amounts to approximately R250,000.

Despite the scale of the loss, FNB has advised that it will only reimburse R8,000, representing less than 4% of the total amount lost. As a result, Mrs Sithole has been left to absorb a loss of approximately R242,000 and is further required to repay debt owed to FNB arising from *****ulent credit card transactions she did not authorise.

Private Banking Oversight

Mrs Sithole is assigned a Private Banker, whose role includes proactive account monitoring, ***** awareness, and client protection. Following the incident, the private banker offered an apology for what had occurred. While the apology is acknowledged, it does not remedy the financial harm suffered nor address the serious failures that allowed this incident to escalate unchecked.

No proactive intervention, alerts, or immediate account suspension occurred, despite the abnormal and high-risk transaction activity across multiple banking products.

Failures by FNB

1. Failure to Protect Client Accounts

Even if access was compromised, it is unreasonable and unacceptable that multiple linked accounts (cheque, credit, and savings) could be emptied in a single ***** event without internal safeguards, transaction limits, or intervention.

2. Failure of ***** Detection and Risk Controls

Large, unusual transactions across multiple products should have triggered automated ***** detection, account blocks, or client verification, particularly for a private banking client.

3. Failure of the FNB App and Virtual Card Safeguards

The virtual card, an FNB initiative, became a point of vulnerability rather than protection, enabling the extensive loss of funds.

4. Failure of Duty of Care under Private Banking

The lack of proactive monitoring and delayed response represents a failure to uphold the standards reasonably expected under a private banking relationship.

5. Failure of Fair and Reasonable Resolution

Leaving the client to repay *****ulent debt while offering only R8,000 against a loss of R250,000 is grossly disproportionate, unfair, and inconsistent with consumer protection principles.

Conclusion and Request

Mrs Sithole’s life savings, accumulated over many years, were wiped out in a single incident. She has been left financially exposed, emotionally distressed, and burdened with debt arising from transactions she did not authorise.

Mrs Sithole formally disputes FNB’s decision and requests a full reconsideration of reimbur*****t, taking into account:

The systemic failures within FNB’s platforms

The failure of ***** detection and intervention mechanisms

The responsibilities inherent in a private banking relationship

The disproportionate and inequitable outcome currently imposed on the client

This matter remains unresolved and is submitted for urgent review.

his matter remains unresolved and is submitted for urgent review.