A bank has paid almost $30,000 to a customer who fell for a scam, because she genuinely believed she was giving her details to the bank.

The case is one that was dealt with by the Banking Ombudsman, and is highlighted in its latest annual report.

The woman received a text that claimed to be from the bank, saying it had detected unusual activity on her new card. It asked her to click a link if it was not her.

The link took her to a website that looked like the bank’s login page, although it was not. She entered her username and password.

She then received a text with codes, which she was told to enter into the site. A scammer was then able to set up the bank’s mobile app on another device and take $28,505 from her account. The bank was only able to recover $4490.

She asked the bank to give her the difference but it said she had breached the terms and conditions of her account by disclosing her username and password, and the codes.

The ombudsman’s office noted that banks must reimburse unauthorised online transactions unless the customer had been dishonest or negligent, had breached the terms or conditions of their accounts or cards, or failed to take reasonable steps to protect their banking.

The woman argued she genuinely believed she was giving the authorisation codes to the bank and there was nothing about the website that should have made her think it was a scam. The ombudsman scheme backed her and the bank agreed to pay the remaining $24,015.

Banking Ombudsman Nicola Sladden says complaints about scams are a feature of the year.

The number rose 43 per cent compared to the previous year, and made up 625 of the 3513 complaints received.

A third of complaints formally investigated were about scams and the average loss was $57,000.

Nicole says scams are becoming more sophisticated. Some people are losing amounts that are in excess of the scheme’s financial limit of $350,000, she says.

"To slow this trend, the banking sector, along with other organisations, must take a more co-ordinated and unified approach to the problem.

"The Singaporeans have shown how beneficial such an approach can be. Their recently established anti-scam centre, made up of representatives from 80 stakeholders, has disrupted scams with great success through skilful intelligence-gathering and the clever use of technology.

“One immediate way to beat some scams would be to introduce confirmation of payee technology. Banks are investing in better systems and security all the time, but this would be a game-changer - as consumers in the United Kingdom know and as consumers in Australia are beginning to discover.

"Authorised push payment fraud - and also accidentally misdirected payments - could be reduced by this technology, which allows a customer to check whether the name of the recipient's account matches the name and account details provided by the customer."

Customers were paid a total of $679,000 in compensation in the year, not including amounts paid to people whose complaint was dealt with by the early resolution service.

In another case, a bank paid a customer $3000 for the stress and inconvenience it caused when it did not disclose how being late with a payment would affect a customer’s credit rating.

The report says the man came to New Zealand on a student visa in 2019 and got a job in the finance sector, and a personal loan. In 2022, he had to return overseas to deal with a family illness.

Before he left, he asked his bank whether he could extend the term of his loan to make the repayments easier. The ombudsman noted that he was correct when he told the bank he had been conscientious about his repayments until that point.

He said he needed to maintain his credit rating for his permanent resident visa application and his job.

The bank said he could only make a hardship application but he said this would affect his credit rating.

The bank then said he could miss his next payment of $280 so that another team at the bank could look at his situation. He did, and was contacted about a repayment plan. He immediately paid $200 and paid the remaining $80 over five months.

But when he returned to New Zealand he discovered his credit rating had fallen because the bank reported the $80 overdue.

The Banking Ombudsman says this should have been explained to him. His credit rating was corrected and he was given $3000.

Banks themselves received 102,705 complaints in the year, up 10 per cent on the previous year.

-Susan Edmonds/Stuff.