BDO Case File/Ref No BSPCMS-2020-CG76JC9JQUV - Appeal to Teresita & Henry SY of BDO Unibank to refund unauthorized transactions from a stolen ATM debit card, Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) to review the investigation conducted by BDO and obtain copies of reports and House of Representatives to pass House Bill No. 7731 “An Act Limiting the Liability of a Cardholder for Unauthorized Transactions in Cases of Loss, Fraud or Theft of Credit or Debit Cards, Amending for the Purpose of Republic Act No. 10870”

For the past 23 months, my sister has been liaising with BDO Unibank and BSP in regards to unauthorized transactions made from her stolen ATM debit card. The bank has been one-sided and dismissive of the case, rejecting her claim without outlining how and what sort of investigations were made nor providing sufficient documents to support their decision. She requested a review of CCTV footage where ATM withdrawals were made  but it did not happen, she queried whether BDO had contacted merchants were Point-of-Sale (POS) transactions were made and compared signatures on the receipts against her specimen signature on the bank’s file but this was ignored. BDO even made a false claim that the transactions were made within the proximity of her home address. Obviously, the bank had not done due diligence as transactions were made in Manila and Quezon City, while my sister is residing in Las Pinas City, which is more than 23+ kilometres from Manila and 37+ kilometres from Quezon City. Please note that this incident happened during the ECQ lockdown hence limited public transports were available nor do we own a car, so it is impossible for my sister to travel between Las Pinas, Manila and Quezon City overnight as opposed to what the bank is insinuating that she has made all the transactions herself. More so, BDO has failed to alert her of the transactions that exceeded her normal threshold which is in line with BSP-Supervised Financial Institution (BSFI) Manual.

Disputed Transactions:

• 10 July 2020 @ 20:27:43 - $0.00 -BPI Espana - Sampaloc, Manila 
• 10 July 2020 @ 20:28:05 - Withdrawal of Php 10,000.00 - BPI Espana - Sampaloc, Manila
• 10 July 2020 @ 20:28:45 - Withdrawal of Php 10,000.00 - BPI Espana - Sampaloc, Manila
• 10 July 2020 @ 20:29:27 - Withdrawal of Php 10,000.00 - BPI Espana - Sampaloc, Manila
• 10 July 2020 @ 20:30:10 - Withdrawal of Php 10,000.00 - BPI Espana - Sampaloc, Manila
• 10 July 2020 @ 20:30:51  - Withdrawal of Php 10,000.00 - BPI Espana - Sampaloc, Manila
• 11 July 2020 @ 05:20:37 - Withdrawal of Php 10,000.00 - BPI Timog - Quezon City
• 11 July 2020 @ 05:21:23 - Withdrawal of Php 10,000.00 - BPI Timog - Quezon City
• 11 July 2020 @ 05:22:06 - Withdrawal of Php 10,000.00 - BPI Timog - Quezon City
• 11 July 2020 @ 05:22:52 - Withdrawal of Php 10,000.00 - BPI Timog - Quezon City
• 11 July 2020 @ 05:23:44 - Withdrawal of Php 10,000.00 - BPI Timog - Quezon City
• 11 July 2020 @ 07:31:20 - POS transaction for Php 12,111.25 - Fisherfoods Supermarket - Quezon City
• 11 July 2020 @ 08:04:02 - POS transaction for Php 14,544.15 - Metrobank Card Corp Makati
• 11 July 2020 @ 8:24:16 - POS transaction for Php 14,114.00 - Mercury Drug - Quezon City
• 11 July 2020 @ 10:41:53 - POS transaction for Php 15,757.35 - SM Hypermarket - Eton Centros
• 11 July 2022 @ 11:52:28 - POS transaction for Php 14,990.00 - Hello Plus Gadgets SM City North Edsa
• 11 July 2020 @ 12:24:50 - POS transaction for Php 24,980.00 - Metrobank Card Corp Makati City
• 11 July 2020 @ 13:19:00 - POS transaction for Php 3,099.00 - GNC - Robinsons Magnolia 

My sister is a front-liner working at least 12 hours a day as an emergency nurse at Pope John Paul Hospital in Las Pinas City. On July 10, 2020 during the peak of Covid-19 pandemic, her wallet was stolen from the staff’s locker while she was on duty at the said hospital between 6:00 am to 6:00 pm. There wasn't a need for her to use money nor her wallet on that day hence she only discovered that the wallet containing ATM debit card and several ID cards has gone missing the next day of July 11, 2022 when she needed to withdrew cash to pay for electricity bill. She searched through her bag and even messaged our mother to check at home if in case she left it there but the wallet was nowhere to be found.  At around 4:00 pm, she called BDO Unibank customer hotline to request to put a block on her ATM card in which she was advised that various transactions were made overnight amounting to $199,575.75. 

She went to BDO Las Pinas City which is the closest branch from home on July 13, 2020 and was given list of withdrawals & POS transactions, then filled up a transaction dispute form. She also went to police station to obtain a Police Report, as well as to notary public for the Affidavit of Loss.

July 15, 2020 when she received a text message from BDO advising that the disputed transactions were not valid for reimbursement, no further explanation as to why they were invalidated.

July 17, 2020 she went to BDO Caloocan branch where her account was opened 10+ years ago to personally report and dispute the unauthorized transactions. She has given them copies of Police Report and Affidavit of Loss and requested a review of the CCTV footage were ATM withdrawals were made. The bank advised her that they will forward the request to BDO head office.

BDO has been very slack in dealing with her concern as she never received any update from them, unless she followed-up. They even finalised this matter on September 8, 2020 advising that the bank was rejecting her claim because transactions were PIN validated and were made prior to the reporting of lost card. 

She appealed to the bank on multiple occasions and escalated the matter to Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) Consumers Affairs who have been very accommodating of her appeal. However, BSP advised that their assistance is limited to the facilitation of communication between consumer concerns and the bank. 

We are pursuing this matter as we know that her claim is legitimate and because the bank had not done thorough investigation of the case: 

• She has requested for the CCTV to be reviewed but was advised multiple times that they were waiting confirmation from BPI where withdrawals were made on when viewing can be scheduled. The bank then rejected her claim as they advised on their one-page letter dated September 7, 2021 signed by Vivian Ilagan – Senior Manager of Fraud Management Unit that “Based on the reports available to us, the disputed ATM withdrawals were made using the card that was issued to you and were completed using the nominated PIN. Record showed no signs of suspicious behaviour such as incorrect PIN tries or change in PIN. The withdrawals were also made at an ATM terminal within the proximity of your home address where previous valid withdrawals were being done.

CCTV footage and still photos from the ATM machine are supplemental information only to assist in identifying the person who made the transactions. This will not in any way affect or change the resolution that the Bank has provided to you. We would like to reiterate that the transactions cannot be completed without the presence of the physical card and the PIN". 

My sister challenged the above decision on a nine-page letter with relevant documents to support her arguments below: 

1) “Based on the reports available to us, the disputed ATM withdrawals were made using the card that was issued to you and were completed using the nominated PIN. Record showed no signs of suspicious behaviour such as incorrect Pin tries or change in PIN". 

Response: After over a year of dealing with this matter, you have sent me a one-page letter with no other documents provided to support your decision. As a customer and complainant, I demand a copy of the report mentioned where you have based your decision. 

The ATM withdrawals were completed using the nominated PIN because my UMID ID which was stolen along with my ATM debit card has my date of birth which happens to be my PIN number, which is the same PIN number I had since I opened the account. How do you then classify fraudulent online transactions when an email or account is hacked? Do you also decline the claim because they were password completed considering the account has been hacked? You probably need to review and update your policy regarding this matter. 

(2)"The withdrawals were also made at an ATM terminal within the proximity of your home address where previous valid withdrawals were being done". 

Response: The withdrawals were made at ATM terminals in Manila and Quezon City, approximately 23+ kms & 37+ kms respectively from where I live. My home address is Blk 11 Lot 10 Marang St. Golden Acres Subd. Talon 5, Las Pinas City as stated on the police report and affidavit of loss previously submitted to your office. Even your letter is addressed to my current home address in Las Pinas. Also, see below copy of my BIR ID with my current address. The bank account was opened at Caloocan branch 10+ years ago when I was completing my nursing degree at Fatima College in Valenzuela and boarding in Caloocan City. I moved to Las Pinas City in 2016. 

Check my recent valid withdrawals and transactions and you will see that most of them were made within Las Pinas City area (get your facts right!).

(3) The third paragraph of your letter states “CCTV footage and still photos from the ATM machine are supplemental information only to assist in identifying the person who made the transactions...” 

Response: I beg to disagree that CCTV footage is only supplemental. It is in fact very vital in identifying the actual person who performed the transactions, as that person stole my identity. I have provided evidences such as letter from employer and attendance timesheet confirming that I was at work in Las Pinas City when the transactions in Quezon City were made. Identifying and interviewing the person will confirm whether that person is known to me or not. The footage should also be collected and forwarded to police to further investigate this offence and to assist them in identifying the person and so charges can be pressed against this person. Furthermore, I was advised in various emails by your team that you were waiting for the CCTV, and now you are dismissing this case without the said footage that we were all waiting for over a year now? The fact that the bank has failed to do this is just further evidence of just how poor and unprofessional the investigation by the bank has been to this point and not to mention that the bank is impeding a police investigation, by not forwarding all the information it has, and footage to police. 

BDO failed to contact other merchants where POS purchases were made. The bank failed to conduct verification of signatures on the POS receipts and compare it against her specimen signature on their file. 

Furthermore, the bank had negligence of not fulfilling its duty to alert my sister of the succeeding transactions that exceeded her usual withdrawals and purchases. Should the bank alerted her in the first instance, then succeeding withdrawals & transactions may have been prevented. BDO failed to comply with Appendix 79 of the BFSI Manual.

After multiple appeals to BSP, my sister received an email from the bank on January 4, 2022 advising her to visit her branch of account to discuss further details and accomplish the documents to facilitate processing of her claim. With excitement, she went to BDO Caloocan the next day January 5, 2022 and was assisted by the branch manager. She was then asked to sign an Affidavit in which upon reading prior to signing, the amount to be reimbursed was only $99,797.00, half of the total disputed amount. She refused to sign and queried on why they were not refunding the full amount. Unfortunately, the branch manager do not have answers for her and was told that it was the instructions from their head office. She was also told that if she sign the document, they will immediately send it to the head office to process money transfer. They emailed the head office twice but no response so she left the bank without signing the affidavit. The email from BDO lacks transparency and was very deceiving as it did not mention that only 50% of the disputed transactions will be refunded.

Later in the afternoon, she then received a call from Mr. Ren Peter Ricafort of BDO Head Office and she asked him as to why they were only refunding 50% of the disputed amount in which she was told that she should not be entitled for any claim but because she is a frontline worker, they have considered her case hence will refund 50%. The reasoning sounds more of an “awa (pity)”. She told him that she has complied with the reporting and submission of relevant documents to support her claim, requested to review CCTV footage to prove that it wasn’t her who made the transactions but was told that CCTV can only be kept for three months. She reiterated that her initial request to review CCTV footage was lodged 18 months ago. 

She then completed a CIR Form to BSP to review the said decision by the bank on January 6, 2022. An email was then received from the bank on February 9, 2022 requesting for another 20 banking days extension to gather all information relevant to my claim. 

On March 9, 2022, she received another letter from the bank signed again by Vivian Ilagan quoting: “We carefully reviewed the facts and circumstances surrounding the Disputed Transactions. Our conclusion is consistent with our earlier findings that the transactions are indeed legitimate. As far as the disputed transactions are concerned, our record shows that the transactions were made prior to the reporting of the lost card which we received on July 11, 2020 at 4:45PM.” 

My sister has addressed the above on multiple occasions. How can the bank expect the customer to report an incident that hasn’t occurred yet??? The bank expected her to report the disputed transactions before it happened??? Unfortunately, she is not Nostradamus who can somehow predict what the future holds. Had she known that someone is going to steal her wallet, she would have done appropriate actions to prevent it.

On March 23, 2022 she received an email from BSP advising that as a final recourse to assist in the resolution of her complaints when parties fail to reach a mutually acceptable resolution, her concern may also be referred to the appropriate BSP Department for mediation. As my sister have just given birth to her first child on May 4, 2022 and this matter has consumed and affected several aspects of her life, in particular her mental and emotional state, she advised BSP that she no longer want to exert more effort and time since the bank has been one-sided and dismissive of her claim and decided to accept the previous offer to refund 50% of the disputed transactions.

However, with BDO's continuous dismissal of her claim and being in denial of their negligence, my sister received an email on June 7, 2022 advising that the investigation regarding her concern was already completed and that they regret that they cannot return the disputed amount to her account, not even the recent acceptance of the 50% refund. 

This is such an arrogance and power-tripping behaviour from BDO. While my sister accepts responsibility for having her wallet stolen, we do believe that BDO should also accept responsibility for failing to alert her of relevant transactions that exceeded her normal transactions threshold.

In line with this, we are hereby requesting from Mrs. Teresita Sy-Coson and Mr. Henry Sy to reopen this case and conduct actual investigation such as:

• Viewing of CCTV footage from ATM terminals where withdrawals were made. 
• Proof that the bank contacted retail merchants to obtain copies of the signed receipts from various unauthorised POS transactions and compared signatures against my sister’s signature on file. 
• Relevant documents and reports from BDO to support their decision of rejecting her claim as one-page letter will not suffice. 
• Report of her recent valid transactions prior to this incident to show where her previous withdrawals and purchases were made.

Moreover, I am requesting from Financial Supervision Sector of BSP to exercise its powers to review BDO’s overall procedures and processes regarding this case and obtain copies of reports/documents to support BDO’s consistent rejection of my sister’s claim. It is evident that BDO has failed to comply with the following:

·       Appendix 79 of the BFSI Manual – To enhance payment card security, card holders should be notified promptly via transaction alerts on withdrawals/charges exceeding customer-defined thresholds made on their payment cards. No alert was ever received from BDO regarding the disputed transactions made in less than 24 hours.

·       Section 16 of R.A 1149 – All companies engaged in the business of issuing access devices including banks, financing companies and other financial institutions issuing access devices, as well as all partner merchants, shall conduct initial investigation on any reported access device fraud and furnish real-time reports on the result thereof to the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and the Anti-Cybercrime Group of the Philippine National Police (PNP). We were unable to pursue a case against the perpetrator as no report was submitted by the bank to relevant authorities and BDO advised that CCTV footage is only supplemental in this case which is very untrue as it is vital evidence to prove and identify the person who made the transactions.

Furthermore, I hereby appeal to the House of Representatives to immediately review and pass House Bill No. 7731 introduced by Rep. Mario Vittorrio A. Marino to protect the victims of stolen bank card and identity theft and held merchants liable for failure to observe the due diligence required (failure to notify cardholders of recent transactions and charges; transaction validation requiring cardholders to validate recent charges).

This case is a no brainer nor rocket science and do not even require proper education to comprehend what happened. Based on the bank’s letters, they were insinuating (I used this term because no evidence provided by them to support their decision) that withdrawals were made by my sister since transactions happened in which they believed were “within proximity of her home address”. To reiterate, transactions were made in Manila & Quezon City, while her home address is Las Pinas. Also, transactions in Quezon City were made while she was at work.

This appeal is written with disbelief, disappointment, anger and frustration on how BDO has been dismissive of this case. My sister had provided various documents and evidence to support her claim, while not even a single document was presented by BDO to support their decision of consistent dismissal of her request, without outlining how their investigation was conducted, what were the factors they have actually considered to deny the request as CCTV was definitely not reviewed and signatures on the receipts were not verified. Given the fact BDO’s previous statement was definitely inaccurate claiming that withdrawals and purchases were made within the proximity of my sister’s home address is pretty obvious that due diligence was not conducted by the bank and oversights are evident.

Please help us to get this appeal noticed and heard. It may be a small amount for some of you but my sister have saved this money for many years, only to be spent in less than 24 hours by someone who thinks it is okay to steal other people's hard-earned money.

We do not wish for anyone, especially to an ordinary Filipino citizen to be in this situation as it appears that BDO Unibank keeps ignoring facts and leave its customer helpless and empty-handed.

Hoping to get enough support for this matter to be heard and actioned by relevant institutions and authorities. Thank you.