Obligating a bank in Abu Dhabi to pay 155,000 dirhams to a client due to the negligence of its employees

The Abu Dhabi Court for Family and Civil and Administrative Claims ruled that members of a telephone fraud gang must pay one of their victims an amount of 289,000 dirhams. Immediate, custody and refund of the transferred funds.

In the details, a woman filed a lawsuit, requesting that a phone fraud gang be obligated to pay the plaintiff the amount of 240,000 dirhams that they illegally seized, and oblige them to compensate 100,000 dirhams with interest at 12% and oblige them to pay fees, expenses and attorney fees, noting that the gang stole her money from Through the means of information technology and a criminal judgment was issued to convict them.

The report of the banking expert delegated by the court showed that the plaintiff had previously opened and operated a personal account with the (entry discount) bank, and was exposed to a fraud by the defendants, as the gang managed to seize 240 thousand dirhams, indicating that the experience did not find any technical error. From the side of the entered discount, as the transfers were made correctly and according to electronic orders.

The expert indicated that despite the plaintiff’s communication with the bank’s call center after completing the transfer of funds, it was possible to seize all or some of the funds if the necessary measures were taken immediately upon receiving the communication, pointing out that after listening to the phone calls that took place between the plaintiff and the bank employee. The experience felt that there was some negligence on the part of the bank’s employees in not taking the necessary measures immediately. Rather, they sent requests to reserve the transferred funds and retrieve them after about 24 hours of the plaintiff’s contact with the call center.

The experience concluded that if the latter responded immediately after receiving the complaint, it would have been possible to seize the funds within at least two hours of receiving the complaint.

The report stressed that despite the proof of the parties’ mistake, the bank’s failure to check the transfers accurately, or to communicate with the plaintiff to ensure that there is an unusual movement in her account, becomes clear, and the bank’s call center employees are not aware of clear procedures to deal with these cases, as It was possible to seize 156,000 dirhams out of the amount of 240,000 dirhams, while the plaintiff failed, in her lack of knowledge of the principles and standards followed in the banking system, and her disclosure of information and data that were sufficient to enable the defendants to seize her money.

While the court confirmed, in the rationale for its ruling, that what was established from the penal judgment was the defendants’ conviction for a charge that led them to seize for themselves the amount shown on the papers and owned by the plaintiff. The entry was made in solidarity with the defendants by paying the amounts claimed. It is evident from the experience report that the entered opponent made a mistake for not taking the necessary measures immediately upon receiving the communication and that if he had taken the correct and immediate measures, the defendants would not have been able to transfer part of the amount from the plaintiff’s account.

The court ruled to compel the defendants to jointly pay the plaintiff an amount of 289 thousand, and the bank to jointly pay the defendants 155,000 dirhams, and obligated all the defendants to pay fees and expenses and in return for attorneys’ fees, and rejected other requests.

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