SINGAPORE: All parties – banks and customers alike – should shoulder the responsibility for fighting scams, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) says.

       It said that OCBC’s recent S$13.7mil (RM42.54mil) payout to its customers who had been scammed were a one-off gesture, considering the circumstances, such as how the bank had not met its own expectations of customer service and response.

       “They do not set a general precedent for future cases,” the financial sector regulator added.

       MAS said it would seek public feedback on a framework that would spell out how losses from scams are to be shared between consumers and financial institutions, including responsibilities of other key parties involved.

       This may be revealed within the next three months, it said.

       OCBC recently made goodwill payments to fully refund 790 OCBC Bank customers who were victims of a phishing scam where fraudsters spoofed the bank’s name in SMSes.

       Some customers claimed that it took so long to get through to a person via OCBC’s hotline that, by the time it was able to take action, the scammers had siphoned much of their funds.

       MAS is leading a task force, called the Payments Council, to review practices that the financial industry can put in place to better protect consumers.

       It was mentioned last July that this included a review on how to apportion the liability of a fraudulent online transaction.

       Under the liability framework, MAS said “all parties have responsibilities to be vigilant and to take precautions against scams”.

       For example, financial institutions must have measures to safeguard customer accounts, and detect and respond to suspicious transactions.

       Customers have to take precautions, such as never giving away personal or banking credentials to anyone. They should never click on links in SMSes or emails that seemingly come from a bank, and should transact only through the bank’s official website or mobile app.

       The proportion of losses each party bears “will depend on whether and how the party has fallen short of its responsibilities”, said the authority.

       MAS will be seeking public feedback on this framework, which also covers “the responsibilities of other key parties in the ecosystem”.

       Currently, victims misled into giving out their banking details in phishing scams are often held responsible for the funds lost, especially if the bank’s information technology system has not been compromised, lawyers said.

       But banks may have to bear scam losses in cases where they failed to take reasonable care while the customers took steps to protect their interests, said lawyer Steven Lam, a director at Templars Law.

       This includes instances where banks failed to adopt proper safety and due diligence protocols, or internationally recognised good practices. — The Straits Times/ANN