ATM hacking is a security lapse on part of the bank

ATM hacking is a security lapse on part of the bank

A man's account was hacked and the court has accused the bank of security negligence. The bank will reimburse the lost amount to the consumer.
 
ATM hacking is a security lapse on part of the bank
Permanent Lok Adalat says that security lapse on part of bank resulted in ATM hacking.

Permanent Lok Adalat has directed a bank to reimburse the lost amount to its consumer as the issue of ATM hacking has been considered as a security lapse on part of the bank. Consumer Bhavesh appealed to the court against SBI when his account got hacked. He said that he has an account with Pratapnagar branch of SBI. One day he went to the ATM to withdraw some amount but the transaction could not be processed. He tried twice but in vain. After a few minutes, he got a message stating that an amount of 25,000 rupees was withdrawn from his account. He notified the bank which did not help him in any way and he also filed a report with Pratapnagar police station. 
The bank in its statement said that the appellant allowed someone else to carry out their transactions when his transaction could not be processed. This was proved in CCTV footage. The other person who carried out his transaction at that time may have probably hacked the account of Bhavesh. The bank management also said that it is the task of police to catch the culprit and that the bank is not responsible for this hacking.
On the other hand, the court investigated the other angle of this case. As per the court, there are 2 ATM machines in the same chamber. There is a glass wall in the name of partition between the 2 machines. In the case of 2 machines, there can be no prohibition on the entry of a 2nd person in the ATM chamber. The appellant tried twice to withdraw the amount, but did not get it. Then someone else entered the same chamber, hacked the previous person's account and withdrew the amount. The bank has not appointed any security guard in a mutli-entry chamber. This has been considered as a gross security lapse on part of the bank.
The court also said that the bank showed its negligence by not investigating the case on demand of the consumer. It has barely provided the police with the CCTV footage and shrug off the responsibility. Since the bank did not take care of securing the ATM chamber, it is responsible for reimbursing the lost amount along with additional 5000 rupees against mental agony as even RBI has stated that a faulty transaction is not the consumer's fault SBI will now pay 30,000 rupees to the consumer within 2 months as directed by the court. 

To join us on Facebook Click Here and Subscribe to UdaipurTimes Broadcast channels on   GoogleNews |  Telegram |  Signal