The Civil Court has ordered Kasikornbank (KBank) to pay 1 million baht in compensation after ruling that the bank failed to detect suspicious late-night transactions linked to a scam that cost Thai-British actress Charlotte Austin 4 million baht in 2024.

Get today's headlines by email

The judgment, delivered on Wednesday, relates to a lawsuit filed by Miss Charlotte Co Ltd, the company that manages the Phuket-born actress’s assets and financial interests. The court found that while the bank could not have identified the first transfer as suspicious, it should have recognised two consecutive transfers made after midnight as unusual and implemented stronger safeguards.

Charlotte Austin, then aged 25 and the fifth runner-up in Miss Grand Thailand 2022, became one of Thailand’s first high-profile victims of organised scam gangs. On 7 December 2024, she received a video call from a man claiming to be an official from the Department of Special Investigation, who falsely accused her of involvement in money laundering connected to the Stark Corporation scandal.

The scammer instructed her to transfer 4 million baht so authorities could verify her innocence. While being kept on a continuous video call, she completed three transfers through the KBank mobile banking application, including two after midnight.

In May last year, the Criminal Court sentenced four people involved in the scam to prison terms ranging from six to seven years.

Miss Charlotte Co Ltd sought 4 million baht in damages, arguing that KBank had breached its obligations under its deposit agreement by failing to identify clearly unusual, high-risk transactions or issue warnings that could have prevented the losses.

Kasikornbank argued that its fraud prevention and transaction monitoring systems met industry standards and that the transfers were processed according to its normal detection criteria.

The court ruled that the initial 2 million baht transfer, made at 5pm, appeared to be a normal transaction and could not reasonably have been identified as fraudulent. However, it found that the second and third transfers, totalling 2 million baht and made consecutively after midnight, should have triggered stronger monitoring and intervention by the bank.

The court also concluded that Charlotte Austin had been negligent by transferring money to the scammers, and ruled that responsibility for the losses should be shared equally between the parties. As a result, KBank was ordered to pay 1 million baht in compensation, together with annual interest of 5% from 8 December 2024, reimburse court fees proportionate to the successful claim, and pay 20,000 baht in legal costs.

Manager Online reported that Lawyer Nitithorn “Lawyer James” Kaewto said the ruling establishes an important precedent for businesses in the entertainment industry and members of the public seeking to hold financial institutions accountable for their handling of suspicious transactions, particularly those occurring late at night. The judgment is also consistent with the amended emergency decree introduced in April 2025, which requires responsibility for financial fraud losses to be shared according to each party’s level of negligence.

Join the discussion?

12 July 2026

View full article

Good to know the legal precedent is now set: losing 2 million baht at 5:00 PM is perfectly normal, but losing 2 million baht at 12:05 AM is a banking system failure. Always get scammed during business hours, folks!

16 minutes ago, Georgealbert said:

The scammer instructed her to transfer 4 million baht so authorities could verify her innocence.

Isn't that always how a legit inquiry goes.

29 minutes ago, Nemises said:

Good to know the legal precedent is now set: losing 2 million baht at 5:00 PM is perfectly normal, but losing 2 million baht at 12:05 AM is a banking system failure. Always get scammed during business hours, folks!

It's farcical indeed. She transferred the money herself, it's not like her credit card was illegally used. Also, since she transferred out of her own volition, why would the bank be liable? Finally, would you transfer 4 million to a random person if you knew you had no involvement in what that person was talking about? Something doesn't add up...

Edited July 11Jul 11 by SABloke

4 hours ago, SABloke said:

It's farcical indeed. She transferred the money herself, it's not like her credit card was illegally used. Also, since she transferred out of her own volition, why would the bank be liable? Finally, would you transfer 4 million to a random person if you knew you had no involvement in what that person was talking about? Something doesn't add up...

it is farcical, indeed that you don't understand that Thai banks are required by law and Bank of Thailand regulations to flag suspicious or unusual potential scam transactions regardless of how they were made. Unfortunately, many people are convinced by scammers that demands for transactions, however ridiculous on the face of it, are legitimate that's how they successfully scam people. Not everyone is as on the ball as you are and do not deserve to be the subject of derision.

5 hours ago, Nemises said:

Good to know the legal precedent is now set: losing 2 million baht at 5:00 PM is perfectly normal, but losing 2 million baht at 12:05 AM is a banking system failure. Always get scammed during business hours, folks!

Don't you mean always get scammed outside of normal business hours!? The midnight transactions are the ones the bank had to compensate her for.

Edited July 12Jul 12 by Liverpool Lou

7 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Don't you mean always get scammed outside of normal business hours!? The midnight transactions are the ones the bank had to compensate her for.

That’s… exactly the joke. The court decided 5pm was “normal”, but midnight suddenly made it suspicious. 😄

7 hours ago, Georgealbert said:

The scammer instructed her to transfer 4 million baht so authorities could verify her innocence.

Not to fault this young but why would anyone think the above is a normal transaction.

I once woke up 3 AM Thailand on skype verbal call Saying this is social security and there has been a crash involving a rented car and a drug bust and your credit card was used. And in a fog I gave my social security number before coming to senses. With no adverse consequences.

On 7/12/2026 at 4:29 AM, Georgealbert said:

who falsely accused her of involvement in money laundering connected to the Stark Corporation scandal.

If she didn't do any wrong, then why she paid?

So she was obviously hiding something??

Fishy

On 7/12/2026 at 4:29 AM, Georgealbert said:

The scammer instructed her to transfer 4 million baht so authorities could verify her innocence.

I thought those pageant candidates were qualified on their level of intelligence.

23 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Unfortunately, many people are convinced by scammers that demands for transactions, however ridiculous on the face of it, are legitimate that's how they successfully scam people. Not everyone is as on the ball as you are and do not deserve to be the subject of derision.

These scammers are extremely professional. They set up fake police stations with all the emblems etc, with fake officers and uniforms for the video calls. They have tannoy systems that call out the name of the police officer that is on the video call to come to the front desk etc to add legitimacy.

Someone that is unaware of how professional these scammers are could easily be tricked into believing it is real.

Geez I feel sorry for the bank. She just ups and transfers money like she thought it was normal. She can’t to smart not to question it!

If someone contacted me and accused me of money laundering I'd tell them to prove it and hang up. I most certainly wouldn't send millions of baht to a stranger. How can people with so much money be so stupid? And she's not alone. We read of similar scams all the time.

17 minutes ago, Packer said:

These scammers are extremely professional. They set up fake police stations with all the emblems etc, with fake officers and uniforms for the video calls. They have tannoy systems that call out the name of the police officer that is on the video call to come to the front desk etc to add legitimacy.

Someone that is unaware of how professional these scammers are could easily be tricked into believing it is real.

You are talking about actual, physical scam centres such as those that were located in Poipet and this is regarding a card banking scam, run through a legitimate bank.

12 minutes ago, Scouse123 said:

You are talking about actual, physical scam centres such as those that were located in Poipet and this is regarding a card banking scam, run through a legitimate bank.

This is not a card scam..she willingly transferred money from her bank account to the scammers account...so exceptionally dumb.

I’m thinking my daily limit and holdings would make me a poor target.

She willingly transferred the money herself. Incredible. And yes the bank probably should have flagged that as an unusual, suspicious transaction. But how about taking responsibility for your own actions?

Meanwhile I try to transfer funds from one of my bank accounts to my account in a different bank. Same exact account owner name. This sort of transaction occurs at least once per month so it is routine, not unusual. Every time the origin bank blocks the transaction due to suspicious activity. 🤦‍♂️

The people running these “fraud detection departments” have not one iota of common sense.

43 minutes ago, couchpotato said:

This is not a card scam..she willingly transferred money from her bank account to the scammers account...so exceptionally dumb.

OK,

Accepted, but these types of scams differ to what the poster was referring to, which were, full building facilities with fake officers posing as officials in walk in scam centres.

On a different note, the woman got scammed, but there are plenty out there who are intelligent human beings taken in by these scams that are getting more convincing every day and involve, on many occasions, hi tech.

Although not in her case, I understand.

28 minutes ago, Front Row said:

She willingly transferred the money herself. Incredible. And yes the bank probably should have flagged that as an unusual, suspicious transaction. But how about taking responsibility for your own actions?

Meanwhile I try to transfer funds from one of my bank accounts to my account in a different bank. Same exact account owner name. This sort of transaction occurs at least once per month so it is routine, not unusual. Every time the origin bank blocks the transaction due to suspicious activity. 🤦‍♂️

The people running these “fraud detection departments” have not one iota of common sense.

And the bank security departments probably view it as, ' Damned if they do block it, and damned if they don't '

1 hour ago, CallumWK said:

I thought those pageant candidates were qualified on their level of intelligence.

I thought they were called "beauty pageants."

The really important question is...was it her Brit side or Thai side that made this absolutely dumb move.😂

36 minutes ago, Front Row said:

But how about taking responsibility for your own actions?

Yes. Rushing to make a high amount money transfer at two after midnight is avoiding to confirm legitimacy of the call allegedly from the bank. She should instead be the first person standing at the bank door when bank opens, if not calling the police?

23 minutes ago, Scouse123 said:

And the bank security departments probably view it as, ' Damned if they do block it, and damned if they don't '

Like I said, they have no common sense.

How is sending money from your bank to yourself even remotely suspicious?

58 minutes ago, Front Row said:

The people running these “fraud detection departments” have not one iota of common sense.

For decades I spent a couple of weeks a year in Dubai for business. Same time every year. And every time I used my UK Visa card it was flagged as being used in the UAE. Actually looking at the card history never occurred to them. Barclaycard, the bank it was issued by, used to have a method for informing them if there was going to be 'unusual activity' but they abandoned that.

I was once in Tokyo trying to make a retail purchase with my HSBC card and it was declined. This was the card I used for all of my business expenses, globally.

So I called them up. (This was back when you could still talk to a human being at your bank. LOL).

Me: Why was the transaction declined?

HSBC: We noticed that there was a charge from a company in Thailand this morning. So how can you be in Thailand and Japan at the same time?

Me: Who was the Thailand charge from?

HSBC: A company called True UBC.

Me: Did you not notice the same charge in the exact same amount from True UOB last month, and the month before, and the month before that, and the month before that? It is automatic billing of my cable television service.

HSBC: Oh, sorry. Please have the retailer run the charge through again. It will be approved.

Well she was obviously a fool to believe a scam like this. I would have insisted on verification of identity and I would have offered to send no more than 100 baht. I also would have insisted on going to their office to meet somebody in person.

There are a lot of people these days who refuse to work for a living and spend their time trying to steal other people's money. They are the vampires of modern day Society sucking the blood of the people. We absolutely have to be super vigilant to guard against their many scams, some of which are quite clever.

3 hours ago, Front Row said:

Like I said, they have no common sense.

How is sending money from your bank to yourself even remotely suspicious?

I'm on your side.

On 7/12/2026 at 7:29 AM, Georgealbert said:

Thai-Brit Actress Awarded B1m in KBank Scam Case

I had to lock my kasikorn credit card recently, a few unauthorised transactions.

I phoned the bank, they suggested I lock my card, great tool.

I've got a new card to replace expiring card next month.

I tried to unlock my card to purchase a Lazada item, told to come back after 4am to unlock, purchase goods and relock.

A little bit of inconvenience for good protection.

Edited July 13Jul 13 by SAFETY FIRST

5 hours ago, Front Row said:

Like I said, they have no common sense.

How is sending money from your bank to yourself even remotely suspicious?

She didn't send it to herself. She sent it from her account to the scammers account without verifying first.

On 7/12/2026 at 12:21 PM, JerryM said:

Not to fault this young but why would anyone think the above is a normal transaction.

I once woke up 3 AM Thailand on skype verbal call Saying this is social security and there has been a crash involving a rented car and a drug bust and your credit card was used. And in a fog I gave my social security number before coming to senses. With no adverse consequences.

I just hang up on all of them, once in a while, a legitimate one will call back - but SSA will NEVER call you for anything.