如今銀行卡的使用日益廣泛，而與此相關(guān)的經(jīng)濟(jì)犯罪也常有發(fā)生。在本期的《無限播客》中，我們就來看看這樣一個案例：當(dāng)銀行卡和身份證都在持卡人手上時，犯罪嫌疑人竟能利用漏洞，按照正規(guī)的銀行業(yè)務(wù)辦理程序盜取了卡里的款項。這究竟是如何發(fā)生的呢？造成的經(jīng)濟(jì)損失，是由銀行還是持卡人承擔(dān)呢？面對隨時可能發(fā)生的財產(chǎn)危險，我們又有什么辦法預(yù)防呢？

Host： Zhou Yuanhong is from Central Chinas Hunan Province. He and his wife Lu Jing were unemployed workers for many years before they came to Shanghai to start their own business. Small as their business was， it has started making quite a bit of money in recent years thanks to the Zhou couples hard efforts. The Zhou couple said their business had been going very smoothly until recently， when something absurd happened to them.

Reporter： One afternoon in March， 2013， one of the clients called to tell Zhou Yuanhong that he had 1）remitted the amount due into his bank card. Delighted， the Zhou couple immediately checked their bank account balance by phone. What they heard on the automatic voicemail shocked them and left them 2）flabbergasted. Lu： The voicemail said that our bank card had been 3）nullified. We were shocked. How could it be that our bank card had been 4）struck off？ I had been carrying the card and our ID cards in my own wallet. Both my husband and I had been busying ourselves with our work and neither of us had done anything to have the bank card 5）deregistered.

Reporter： Unable to believe what the voicemail had told them on the phone， the Zhou couple went to a nearby bank right away to double check.

Host： Zhou Yuanhongs bank card had been stopped and the amount of 160，000 yuan had disappeared into thin air. Zhous wife said she had been carrying the bank card and their ID cards in her own purse. There could be no mistake on their part to cause this. Could it be that s o m e t h i n g w e n t wrong with the banks checking system？ Wasting no time， Zhou Yuanhong rushed to the issuing bank and asked the clerk to help check the source of the problem.

Reporter： The bank clerk told Zhou Yuanhong that someone had indeed had his bank card deregistered. But who had done so without the card owners knowledge？ At Zhou Yuanhongs request， the bank sorted out their worksheet record for deregistration of the bank card.

Lu： The bank card is here， so are the ID cards， but the money is gone. How could this be explained？

Reporter： According to the banks record， Zhou Yuanhongs band card had indeed been struck off and deregistered 6）on the grounds that the cards 7）magnetic strip had been damaged. According to the bank clerk， the bank card was deregistered 8）in accordance with all the relevant rules and due diligence procedures， except that the person who called himself Zhou Yuanhong and requested such deregistration the other day was a different person.

Zhou： That was what the bank said. The suspect had used a fake version of an older type of identification card. He also had a bank card 9）forged with the same number as mine. Using these tricks， he had fooled the banks clerks.

Reporter： With the bank card struck off， the balance was transferred to the suspects new account.

Zhou： The faked card had no magnet. When he had a new card issued， it became quite easy for him to take away my money. He took the money in two installments； the first 50，000 yuan was taken over the bank counter； the second 110，000 yuan was taken from anther place.

Host： Overnight， Zhou Yuanhongs hard earned money was all gone. The Zhou couple was completely unable to deal with such a bad luck. Sympathetic to their misfortune， the banker suggested that theyd better call the police.

Zhous wife said the bank was supposed to be a safe place where they could put away their money without worry or care. However， the suspect， by using fake ID and bank cards， had managed to strike off the real card and steal their money without difficulty. Since it all happened over the bank counter and through the banks system，

the Zhou couple held that the bank must be held responsible for their loss.

Reporter： The bank， however， claimed that everything they did was in strict compliance with the relevant rules and procedures.

According to the bank， deregistering a card requires the provision of an ID card， bank card and password. They did not nullify the card until all requirements were met and all necessary means and documents had been provided. Yet strict and 10）prudent as the procedure was， the fact remained that the suspect had fooled the bank and stolen the money from the victims account. Where was the leak hole？ Zhou Yuanhong said the bank had actually failed to abide by the set procedures and process.

Zhou Yuanhong said the banks failure to 11）spot the fake ID card and 12）counterfeit bank card was the direct cause for his loss of money. The bank should therefore be 13）irrevocably held 14）accountable for his loss. The bank， on the other hand， insisted that the loss was mainly Zhou Yuanhongs own fault.

Zhou： The bank showed me the 15）surveillance video 16）footage and pointed out that the suspect knew the correct pin number. He said the deregistration couldnt have been carried out without his entering the correct pin number. They said that since the suspect had known my pin number， which I had failed to keep safe， all the blame could be attributed to me. If I told the pin number to you， would you be able to withdraw the money？ Of course not. You wouldnt be able to get the money if just one of the following three was missing： ID card， the original bank card and the pin number.

Reporter： In response to this question， the bank explained that t h e y h a d n o I D card verification equipment， nor could they distinguish the genuineness of a card with its magnetic strip damaged. Under such circumstances， the pin number was the only thing they could rely on for the safe identification of the bank cards owner.

Zhou Yuanhong said the bank must be held irrevocably accountable for the loss of his money. It was the banks failure to spot the fakeness in the ID card and the bank card the suspect had presented that had resulted in the loss.

Zhou： I went to the bank to demand a solution. I had expected that they would as least offer me some compensation. The bank， however， seemed to turn a deaf ear to my request. They even refused to answer my phone call and insisted on 17）postponing everything till the police broke the case.

Host： The bank insisted that it was Zhou Yuanhongs failure to keep his pin number safe that had resulted in the incident. Zhou Yuanhong， on the other hand， blamed the bank for their 18）omissions in checking and control that gave the suspect access to his money. Now the suspect had run away with Zhou Yuanhongs money. Could anything be done to 19）retrieve Zhou Yuanhongs loss？ Or must he accept the desolate situation so long as the suspect remained 20）at large？

Reporter： Zhou Yuanhong said that although he had gone to talk with the bank time and again， the bank didnt show the slightest intent of assuming any responsibility for his loss. To protect his own interest， Zhou Yuanhong filed a lawsuit against the bank.

During the court session， Zhou Yuanhong held that it was the banks omission in checking and control that had caused his loss of money. Evidence indicated that the bank was indeed responsible for some omissions while checking and reviewing the documents required for 21）implementing the deregistration.

According to the judge， the bank would have been able to 22）differentiate the fake card from the real one had it been prudent enough. The fake one had quite a few 23）defects in comparison with the real one. So the court held that the bank was at fault for 24）inadequate efforts.

The court also acknowledged， however， that 25）disclosure of the pin number was another key factor in the loss of the money.

After hearing the case， the court held that the 26）defendant had failed to spot the fake ID and bank cards and thus 27）violated its due diligence obligation. On the other hand， with the customer having accepted the bank rule that 28）transactions be effectively made with the correct pin number entered， in order to take away the money， the 29）plaintiff could therefore be 30）deemed partially responsible for the loss. The court decided that the bank should pay 30% or 48，000 yuan in compensation for the plaintiffs losses.

Since the suspect was still at large， no one has any idea yet how he had faked Zhou Yuanhongs ID and bank cards and where he got the pin number.

H o s t ： W i t h b a n k cards more and more widely used these days， disputes between banks and bankcard holders are also arising more and more frequently. Ascribing the accountabilities and dividing the responsibilities between the bank and its customers has become a difficult issue now facing courts.

Legal experts say that bank cards， while providing people with facilities and conveniences， may also entail risks. The issuing bank and card holders shall have to be aware of such risks and take adequate 31）precautions against them.

Legal expert： For instance， most bankcards have a magnetic stripe. Its advisable to upgrade them to chip cards. More technical measures shall be taken for protection of bank information and prevention of bank account theft and use of counterfeit bank cards.

Secondly， in a time of instant access to information， more efforts shall be made for the protection of personal information. The state shall better 32）safeguard towards public security. Individuals shall pay more attention to keep their personal information safe.

On the other hand， the bank shall step up its due diligence efforts， 33）streamline and 34）optimize its rules and procedures so as to fully perform the obligations it bears towards the customers.

主持人：周遠(yuǎn)宏（音譯）來自華中地區(qū)的湖南省。他和妻子盧靜（音譯）來上海創(chuàng)業(yè)之前已經(jīng)下崗多年。雖然生意規(guī)模不大，但在周氏夫婦的努力經(jīng)營下，近年來賺了不少錢。周氏夫婦說他們的生意一直很順利，直到最近，一件蹊蹺的事情發(fā)生在他們身上。

記者：2013年3月的一天下午，一位客戶給周遠(yuǎn)宏打電話，告知已經(jīng)將欠款匯到他的銀行卡上。高興之余，夫妻倆立刻撥打了銀行電話進(jìn)行查詢。然而（通過電話）自動語音系統(tǒng)（查詢的結(jié)果）把他們嚇到了，讓他們大吃一驚。

盧：語音說我們的銀行卡已無效。我們感到很奇怪，銀行卡怎么會被注銷了呢？我一直把卡和我們的身份證放在錢包里。我和丈夫都忙于工作，我們都沒有去銷卡。

記者：對電話查詢的結(jié)果難以相信的周氏夫婦立即到附近的銀行再次進(jìn)行查詢。

主持人：周遠(yuǎn)宏的銀行卡被人注銷了，卡里的1 6萬元也不翼而飛。周的妻子說銀行卡和身份證一直在自己的錢包里，對此他們沒有過錯，是不是銀行的查詢系統(tǒng)出了問題呢？事不宜遲，周遠(yuǎn)宏趕緊跑到當(dāng)時辦卡的銀行網(wǎng)點，向工作人員求助，想要查到問題的根源。

記者：銀行工作人員告訴周遠(yuǎn)宏，確實有人辦理過他這張卡的注銷業(yè)務(wù)。但是誰背著卡主做出這樣的事呢？在周遠(yuǎn)宏的要求下，銀行調(diào)取了這張卡被注銷時的工作記錄。

盧：卡在這里，身份證也在這里，錢沒了，這怎么解釋呢？

記者：在銀行的工作記錄上，周遠(yuǎn)宏的這張銀行卡確實已被注銷，而注銷的理由是磁條損壞。

據(jù)銀行工作人員說，這張卡的注銷業(yè)務(wù)辦理時符合銀行相關(guān)規(guī)定和程序，除了今天這位“周遠(yuǎn)宏”和那天來辦理注銷業(yè)務(wù)自稱是“周遠(yuǎn)宏”的那位不是同一個人。

周：銀行說，犯罪嫌疑人使用偽造的一代身份證，同時持有一張和我卡號相同的假銀行卡，使用這些伎倆蒙混過關(guān)了。

記者：銀行卡被注銷后，卡上的余額被犯罪嫌疑人轉(zhuǎn)移到新卡上。

周：偽造的卡沒有磁性。他換了張新卡后，取走我的錢就輕而易舉了。他分兩筆取走了錢，第一筆5萬在銀行柜臺提取，第二筆11萬在其他地方提取。

主持人：一夜之間，周遠(yuǎn)宏辛苦攢下的積蓄被人一掏而空。周氏夫婦無論如何都無法接受這樣的厄運。銀行工作人員同情他們的遭遇，建議他們報警。

周的妻子說他們把錢存進(jìn)銀行，因為這原本是個安全的地方，他們應(yīng)該放心。然而，犯罪嫌疑人卻憑借偽造身份證和假銀行卡，成功地注銷了真卡，毫無難度地盜取了他們的錢。由于這事發(fā)生在銀行柜臺和通過銀行系統(tǒng)辦理的，周氏夫婦認(rèn)為銀行應(yīng)該對他們的損失負(fù)責(zé)。

記者：然而銀行聲稱他們所做的一切都是嚴(yán)格按照相關(guān)規(guī)定和程序操作的。

按照銀行的操作流程，辦理銀行卡注銷業(yè)務(wù)需要提供身份證、銀行卡和密碼，不符合這些條件和無法提供全部必要文件是無法銷卡的。盡管辦理程序嚴(yán)格且審查謹(jǐn)慎，事實卻是疑犯仍蒙混過關(guān)，將受害人賬戶的錢都盜取了。漏洞在哪里？周遠(yuǎn)宏說是銀行沒有嚴(yán)格遵守流程操作造成的。

周遠(yuǎn)宏說銀行沒有正確鑒別出假身份證和偽造銀行卡是造成他損失的直接原因，因此銀行毫無疑問負(fù)有不可推卸的責(zé)任。而另一方面，銀行堅持周遠(yuǎn)宏是造成損失的主要過錯方。

周：銀行給我看了監(jiān)控錄像，指出犯罪嫌疑人知道正確的卡密碼。如果沒有輸入正確的密碼，是不可能銷卡成功的。他們說因為疑犯知道我的密碼，我沒有保管好自己的密碼，所以我該負(fù)全責(zé)。如果我把密碼告訴你，你能取走錢嗎？當(dāng)然不能。想要取走錢，身份證、原始銀行卡和密碼三者缺一不可。

記者：對于這個疑問，銀行解釋說他們并沒有查驗身份證真?zhèn)蔚南嚓P(guān)設(shè)備，而對于已經(jīng)消磁或者損壞的銀行卡，他們也是無法辨別真?zhèn)?。在這種情況下，密碼成為他們識別卡主身份的唯一手段。周遠(yuǎn)宏說對

于自己存款被盜一事，銀行有不可推卸的責(zé)任。銀行無法辨別犯罪嫌疑人所使用的身份證和銀行卡真?zhèn)问窃斐勺约贺敭a(chǎn)損失的主要原因。周：我去銀行要求他們給個解決方案。我還期望他們或多或少能給我點賠償。然而銀行對我的要求充耳不聞。他們甚至拒絕接聽我的電話，堅持拖延等警方破案再解決。

主持人：銀行堅持是周遠(yuǎn)宏沒有保管好密碼導(dǎo)致了這次事件。而另一方面，周遠(yuǎn)宏指責(zé)銀行疏忽審查給了犯罪嫌疑人盜取錢財?shù)目沙酥畽C(jī)。如今犯罪嫌疑人卷款潛逃。有什么能挽回周遠(yuǎn)宏的損失呢？還是只要犯罪嫌疑人卻逍遙法外，他就必須自認(rèn)倒霉呢？

記者：周遠(yuǎn)宏說盡管他多次與銀行交涉，但是銀行并沒有任何要為他的損失承擔(dān)責(zé)任的意思。為了保障自己的權(quán)益，周遠(yuǎn)宏將銀行一紙告上了法庭。

庭審中，周遠(yuǎn)宏認(rèn)為，銀行在辦理業(yè)務(wù)時，審核不嚴(yán)格是造成自己損失的主要原因。證據(jù)顯示，當(dāng)天銀行在辦理業(yè)務(wù)時，的確在注銷銀行卡的資料審核上存在一些疏漏。

法庭認(rèn)為，如果銀行足夠?qū)徤?，就可以識別這個卡是偽造的，假卡和真卡之間有不少區(qū)別。所以法庭認(rèn)為，銀行在這方面具有過錯。

然而法庭同時也承認(rèn)，密碼泄露問題也是錢財損失的另一關(guān)鍵因素。

經(jīng)過對案件的審理，法院認(rèn)為，被告未能對經(jīng)過變造的銀行卡和偽造的身份證予以識別，違反了謹(jǐn)慎審查義務(wù)。另外，銀行卡憑密碼交易系通行規(guī)則，并為持卡人所接受，在取款人輸入正確密碼取走款項的情況下，原告也應(yīng)承擔(dān)部分責(zé)任。故法院判決該銀行賠償原告30%的資金損失，共計人民48000元。

由于至今犯罪嫌疑人仍未落網(wǎng)，沒人知道周遠(yuǎn)宏的身份證和銀行卡是如何被復(fù)制的，密碼又是如何泄露的。

主持人：如今銀行卡的使用日漸普遍，而由于銀行卡所引發(fā)的，個人和銀行之間的糾紛也越來越頻繁發(fā)生，在面對這樣的案件時，如何做好責(zé)任劃分，以及責(zé)任承擔(dān)的比例問題，一直是法院判案中的難題。

法律專家提醒，銀行卡在給人們帶來便利的同時，也存在著一定的風(fēng)險。而面對銀行卡使用中可能存在的風(fēng)險，開卡銀行和持卡人都應(yīng)該采取充分的防范措施。

法律專家：比如說現(xiàn)在我們大部分銀行卡都是磁條卡，升級成芯片卡很有必要。運用更多的科技手段保護(hù)銀行信息和解決防范銀行卡被冒用盜用。

第二個方面呢，在信息化時代，要進(jìn)一步加強(qiáng)對個人信息安全的保護(hù)。除了國家提供更好的公共安全保護(hù)之外，個人也要更注意保護(hù)自己的信息。

從銀行來說，要加強(qiáng)安全審查，精簡和優(yōu)化制度和流程，最大程度地履行保護(hù)客戶（信息安全）的責(zé)任。