Thailand’s Digital Economy and Society (DES) Minister Prasert Chantararuangthong has thrown his weight behind a groundbreaking proposal that could see commercial banks sharing the financial burden when their customers’ accounts are hacked.

 

Prasert, who also serves as Deputy Prime Minister, publicly backed opposition MP Wiroj Lakkhanaadisorn’s suggestion during a heated House debate. Wiroj, from the People’s Party, argued that banks should not escape responsibility when call-centre gangs siphon off their clients’ hard-earned cash.

 

“Why should banks get a free pass? It’s time they bear some of the blame.”

 

 

 

 

The proposal calls for Thailand’s central bank to force commercial banks to share the financial losses suffered by victims of online scams. Prasert confirmed he would table this for discussion at the upcoming Anti-Online Scam Operation Centre (AOC) meeting. The AOC, established last year to combat the surge in online fraud, operates out of National Telecom Plc’s headquarters in Bangkok.

 

Wiroj insisted that since the AOC has failed to halt these rampant scams, National Telecom should also be on the hook for compensation. Prasert, while cautious, said the matter needed careful consideration to determine the most suitable action.

 

Addressing another of Wiroj’s proposals – delaying the transfer of funds to scammers – Prasert revealed that the AOC is working closely with the Bank of Thailand (BoT) to enhance security. He assured that measures to protect bank accounts have already undergone central bank scrutiny, but further improvements are in the pipeline, reported The Nation.

 

By Puntid Tantivangphaisal

Photo courtesy of The Nation

 

Source: The Thaiger

-- 2024-09-18
 

 

2 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

Prasert confirmed he would table this for discussion at the upcoming Anti-Online Scam Operation Centre (AOC) meeting.

It will be very interesting to see if this gets any traction beyond being "tabled for discussion".............

It has become a very serious issue for many people and the banks do not seem that interested in really finding out how and why when money goes missing. I base this on recent third hand experience with an expat working here.

13 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

“Why should banks get a free pass? It’s time they bear some of the blame.”

If a singular bank is responsible then it lays with them for compensation.

2 hours ago, hotchilli said:

If a singular bank is responsible then it lays with them for compensation.

If of course the bank was proven responsible. It is unfortunate that some people are not totally up to speed with online banking, and others are easily drawn into what sounds like its too good to be true. It is also very easy to input one wrong figure on the bank App, and the money is lost in many cases. QR codes are not as secure as they could be, and auntie Joe who is almost blind without her glasses, is as much to blame as the bank.

Yes, these are things which should be checked before making payment, but even with cash, people make mistakes.

Then again, there are people who are not as smart as the average bear!

17 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

The proposal calls for Thailand’s central bank to force commercial banks to share the financial losses suffered by victims of online scams.

 

If they can't keep the accounts safe, they shold be responsible.

6% - 8% is the interest a customer pays for a loan (mortgage, not consumer credit i.e. credit card installments) 
0% - 2% is the interest a customer gets for a deposit (current account to fixed deposit parking) 

So the earning for the bank is between 4% and 6% and, as we know, in Europe on mortgages it is considerably lower. 

Consecutively you cannot expect the poor, poor Thai banks, they are burdened with very complicated procedures and instructions and more a temple of inefficiency rather than a bank. So, as the owners want to see profit at the end, the customer shall burden these costs. Thai logic behind it is, that it was not the bank which hacked ........ capitol? 

Thailand banks could be forced to share hacking costs,

 

Yes they should  If they can't keep their costumer accounts Safe from hackers It's the banks responsibility.

This only should be for the accounts .

Not if people get scammed into something and then transfer their cash, or make mistakes on their transactions online and apps.

 

They especially should if they are forcing you to use phone apps by discontinuing relatively secure online transactions, closing branch offices, and reducing ATMs. I'm talking about you, SCB.

I would have been a bit more diplomatic “… It’s time they bear some of the blame.”. Well, certainly to take more of the responsibility of not better policing to protect customers.

6 hours ago, Surasak said:

If of course the bank was proven responsible. It is unfortunate that some people are not totally up to speed with online banking, and others are easily drawn into what sounds like its too good to be true. It is also very easy to input one wrong figure on the bank App, and the money is lost in many cases. QR codes are not as secure as they could be, and auntie Joe who is almost blind without her glasses, is as much to blame as the bank.

Yes, these are things which should be checked before making payment, but even with cash, people make mistakes.

Then again, there are people who are not as smart as the average bear!

A bank should be held responsible if money is stollen  from an account and compensate promptly 100%. UK banks cover upto £80,000+ in your accounts. Credit cards will claw back and compensate dodgy purchase scams. So why can't Thailand and stop charging to take money out of an ATM if in another province, its one country.

9 hours ago, Sydebolle said:

6% - 8% is the interest a customer pays for a loan (mortgage, not consumer credit i.e. credit card installments) 
0% - 2% is the interest a customer gets for a deposit (current account to fixed deposit parking) 

So the earning for the bank is between 4% and 6% and, as we know, in Europe on mortgages it is considerably lower. 

Consecutively you cannot expect the poor, poor Thai banks, they are burdened with very complicated procedures and instructions and more a temple of inefficiency rather than a bank. So, as the owners want to see profit at the end, the customer shall burden these costs. Thai logic behind it is, that it was not the bank which hacked ........ capitol? 

 

fractional banking,  the bank lends out your money 9x more in loans

 

they don't make 6-8% but 50-72%... with your money...they keep your deposit in their books... how else do you think your us/can/aus/uk bank can give you 5% with their low mortgages...  

 

18 hours ago, john donson said:

 

fractional banking,  the bank lends out your money 9x more in loans

 

they don't make 6-8% but 50-72%... with your money...they keep your deposit in their books... how else do you think your us/can/aus/uk bank can give you 5% with their low mortgages...  

 

I referred strictly to Thai banks. If you want to understand banking - see Switzerland