The Criminal Court in Dubai sentenced five accused members of a gang to a five-year prison sentence for breaking into the accounts of bank customers, after they were convicted of pirating the accounts of a businesswoman, and withdrawing nearly six million dirhams from them after extracting a lost allowance from her phone, and recruiting an unknown woman to impersonate her through the phone service with The bank, and the court also ruled a fine of 150,000 dirhams for each accused and deportation after serving the sentence prescribed for them.

A witness of proof from the bank in the Dubai Public Prosecution investigations, said that "the victim is a customer, and she has three accounts", pointing out that a phone call was received from the anti-fraud department in another bank, stating that there are transfers received from the victim's accounts to some accounts with The last bank, and asked him to verify these transfers, contacted the victim without success, then called the land number of her company or her father’s company, so the response came that they are outside the state, so he asked the company’s employees to communicate with them and inform them about the matter of these transfers, so I was shocked by the news and confirmed It did not make any transfers, and I reviewed the bank to find out how these transactions took place.

The witness added that the bank conducted immediate investigations, and it was found that anonymous the person of the company that provided the telephone calls, and was able to extract a replacement for the business woman's phone number associated with the bank, using false documents, then a woman took the identity of the victim, contacted the bank, and was able to answer the identification questions that The client, which is the mother’s name, date of birth, the number of credit cards, and the number of accounts, then requested to change the e-mail of the amount, and to issue a withdrawal card, her requests were approved, she obtained the card, and she was able with the rest of the accused to withdraw huge sums of money from The victim's account.

The witness indicated that he did not know how the anonymous woman had accessed the confidential data of the victim, and could not confirm the complicity of a bank employee with her, and provide her with answers to the introductory questions.

He pointed out that the embezzlement of money was carried out in two ways, the first by means of financial transfers to external accounts, and the second by direct withdrawal through the withdrawal card, but that woman did not withdraw the money herself, but rather it was withdrawn by other people.

In addition, a sales clerk at the telecommunications company that issued a replacement for the victim’s phone chip said that she only knew one defendant from the accused, as he came to the sales outlet, applied for a lost replacement, edited an electronic request to him, and took over the signature on the tablet , Given that the phone is registered in the name of a company, after he provided the facility card original, and a photocopy of the commercial license, proving that he is the company's manager, and other documents.

She indicated that she had photocopied those documents, and conducted the transaction in the usual ways, and in the absence of a signature stored by the owner of the phone with the company, she was unable to compare the signature of the accused, and was satisfied with matching his electronic signature with the signature on his identity card, and she issued him a card in lieu of a lost number, and delivered him to The spot.

Forged passport

A witness who demonstrated proof from the bank in the Dubai Public Prosecution’s investigations revealed that the woman impersonated the businesswoman received the withdrawal card through Aramex, and provided the company representative with a passport photo in the name of the amount, but in a different form, and later it became clear that the passport photo was forged, explaining that The unknown suspect used the victim's phone number registered with the bank to call.

He pointed out that the reported accounts were suspended, because they had not entered the country for more than 120 days, pointing out that the internal investigation is still in progress to verify whether one of the employees was complicit in them in entering the client’s account and leaking her data.

The bank conducted immediate investigations, and it was found that an unknown person had extracted a lost phone number for the businesswoman associated with the bank.

Follow our latest local and sports news and the latest political and economic developments via Google news