Cek tipu, siapa tanggung kesilapannya???

shachihata33

Nak tanya problem sket eh....Kalau seorang teller bank, dia luluskan cek
tipu, bila owner cek dpt tau psl hal ni, dan tuntut ganti rugi, siapa
yang kene tanggung salah tu??..Teller bank ke, org yg menipu tu ke, or pihak bank???

Mcm ni, kenalan shachi keje sbg teller bank.....Die ade luluskan cek sorg pompuan
ni...Pompuan tu pulak, die curi cek bos die, dan die sign sendiri....Kenalan
Shachi xperasan sign tu berbeza, then die lepaskan cek tu...Pastu bos
pompuan tu minta ganti rugi....pompuan tu kne buang keje....Masa ni kenalan shachi
lepas....Tapi tibe2 pompuan tu pecah masuk opis lama die dan die curi cek lagi
pastu sign sekali lagi...Entah mcm mane da nasib, kenalan shachi ni yg uruskan cek tu
lagi...pastu die kene syak bersubahat dgn pompuan tu...So skrg akaun pompuan tu kene tutup pastu kawan shachi ni kene byr semua ganti rugi....Dlm hal ni shachi nk tau,
kes2 mcm ni mmg lepas cmtu je ke??..Pompuan tu mmg lepas and org lain kene
tanggung kesalahan die...Cmne erk??..Pening sgt shachi pk...Kdg2 xpecaye kt kwn
shachi ni....Tp xlojik die nk bersubahat...Ade sape2 leh jwb tak????

[ Last edited by  shachihata33 at 21-7-2007 07:09 AM ]

dah ada sebarang laporan polis ke belum?

kalau takde, memang la lepas

melayucyber

Pengajaran kepada semua teller...next time tengok betul2 signature tu sebelum approve

ni adalah petikan dari satu kes supreme court yg diputuskan pd tahun 1992..

Principles governing liability of the appellant.
(a) The appellant, as a banker, was absolutely liable. On the other hand, the respondent was not under any duty to ensure that its cheques were not forged by its employee, and therefore there could not be an estoppel operating against it.

(b) At common law, the liability of a banker is founded on the tort of conversion, which is a tort of strict liability. A banker who pays out on a forged instrument drawn on his customer's account is absolutely liable to make good the loss. The forged instrument is a nullity and a banker has no authority, actual or implied, from his customer to act on it.

(c) Section 24 of the Bills of Exchange Act 1949 , which codifies the common law, creates a limited exception in favour of a banker. Section 24 protects a banker by recourse to the doctrine of estoppel. A customer cannot recover if he has represented to his banker that the forged signature is effective and that the instrument is accordingly good for payment.

(d) At common law, a customer owes his banker only two duties. The first is to refrain from drawing a cheque in such a manner as may facilitate fraud or forgery. The second is a duty to inform the bank of any forgery of a cheque purportedly drawn on the account as soon as the customer becomes aware of it. There does not exist, at common law, a further duty on the part of a customer to take precautions in the general course of his business to prevent forgeries on the part of his servants. Neither is there at common law, in the absence of a contract to the contrary, a duty imposed upon the customer to inspect his periodical bank statements to ensure that his account is being properly maintained by the bank.

(e) The decision of the Privy Council in Tai Hing Cotton Mill v. Liu Chong Hing Bank Ltd. should be followed. In that case it was held that there was no basis for the 'wider duty' or the 'narrower duty' as either an implied term of the contract between banker and customer or as a duty of care in tort, and that in the absence of any duty there could not be an estoppel. It is important generally, and more so in matters of commercial law, that there should be uniformity in the common law of the Commonwealth. This is good judicial policy and provides for consistency.

kesimpulannya,

• bank bertanggungan. kalau bank degil taknak bayar, jadi macam kes kat atas nu;
• clerk yg forged tu memang salah tapi tu kes jenayah...
• bila bank bertanggungan, dia akan cari teller mana yg proses payment. aku dpt bayangkan bos kawan ko tu kata..':@ apesal ko tak double cek dgn account holder, ha??!! :@ . skrg ko bayar berape yg dah ko proses tu. tak bleh bayar selepuk, potong gaji!!!:@ '
• takpe dia lepas kat dunia, kat akhirat nnti dia kena menjawab..suh kawan ko bnykkan bersabarla ye..buat smyg tahajud tetiap malam..

cheers.. (kesian kat kawan ko tu)

shachihata33

Originally posted by agelgold at 20-7-2007 09:50 AM
dah ada sebarang laporan polis ke belum?

kalau takde, memang la lepas

1st kes die xbuat..sbb mls nk bising2...
2nd kes ni die baru buat...n die xnk byr...

shachihata33

Originally posted by melayucyber at 20-7-2007 10:08 AM
Pengajaran kepada semua teller...next time tengok betul2 signature tu sebelum approve

tp melayucyber, kwn shachi ckp kan, kt bank die gne sistem lame.
nk cek signature tu kne bukak drower...cari lah signature asli tu...
cari satu2 form2 kt situ...bukan letak kt dlm komp...bile sorg dtg, msk details,
terus keluar kt pc...die bkn cmtu....die ckp mmg semua teller pn same mcm die..
mls nk bgn check satu2..cari dlm drower tu...tp dah nsib kwn shachi, dpt kat
budak yg sama...


[ Last edited by  shachihata33 at 21-7-2007 07:16 AM ]

shachihata33

Originally posted by nerofreak at 20-7-2007 03:03 PM

• bank bertanggungan. kalau bank degil taknak bayar, jadi macam kes kat atas nu;
• clerk yg forged tu memang salah tapi tu kes jenayah...
• bila bank bertanggungan, dia akan cari teller mana yg proses payment. aku dpt bayangkan bos kawan ko tu kata..':@ apesal ko tak double cek dgn account holder, ha??!! :@ . skrg ko bayar berape yg dah ko proses tu. tak bleh bayar selepuk, potong gaji!!!:@ '
• takpedia lepas kat dunia, kat akhirat nnti dia kena menjawab..suh kawan kobnykkan bersabarla ye..buat smyg tahajud tetiap malam..

cheers.. (kesian kat kawan ko tu)

thanks nerofreak....lega sket shachi dgr...sian sgt kt kwn shachi nie...
dah lah 1st n 2nd manager die x back-up die lgsg....
pastu siap ugut, klu xnk byr, nnt kne DI..(blacklist, potong gaji, tukar department lain ke, dsb..)
yg penting mmg kne toucher abis la nnt....manager due ekor tu lgsg xnk wat pape...
main suruh byr je..dah lah mintak die byr, kire settle kes lalu jln blkg....
xnk pn die wat report kt HQ...

Tp yg shachi pelik tu kan?, knp budak yg buat tu mse mula, xkne apa2 tindakan?
just kne buang keje je...tp x pulak mintak die yg gantirugu...
ni main suruh teller tu je...

ReuK

pada pendapat n sedikit pengalaman aku lah,

kompeni takleh mintak duit dari pekerja, against Labour law rasanyer. Apa2 kesilapan yg dibuat oleh pekerja adalah disebabkan tak cukup training oleh majikan.

Lagi pong selepas kes pertama apa preventive action yg majikan buat utk elak dari berulang? Kalau xda maka bawak jer gi mahkamah.

Cuba bawak bincang ngn pejabat buruh. Kalau dia kata ada harapan alamatnya mmg menanglah kawan tu. Tapi kalau diorg kata susah sket maka susah sketlah jwpnnyer.

kita tunggu jwpn dari pakar undang2 ya

shachihata33

Thanks Reuk...Shachi risau sgt skrn nie...
Stkt ni kwn shachi da buat laporan polis....Isnin ni die ade
appoiment ngn Insp. Bukit Aman...
Mintak2 la ada perkembangan terbaru n keputusan yg baik..

wira_wirawan

Kalau fraud yg melibatkan signature ni...mmg staff yg lepaskan cek as good for payment tu bersalah..

kalau fraud..melibatkan alteration payee name, word & figure...ada harapan lepas.

Bank akan tengok amaun yg fraud tu..kalau amaun kecil..may be kena warning letter jer..atau nothing happen.

Kalau amaun besar yg tak melebihi limit teller...maybe kena pi DI fisrt..then..depend la kepada bank..

Gemukkkkkkk

wehhh cemana teller boleh approve cek.  diorang punya limit rendah je.  lagipun diorang protected up to RM1000 tak perlu bayar melainkan fraud.  dalam kes ni, majikan kena la buktikan ada fraud.  suruh la dia jumpa union rep kat branch dia dan discuss mende ni.

apa-apa pun, cek tu memang kena di-honour-kan oleh bank.  perempuan tu, mana boleh lepas.  buat laporan polis kerana ini jenayah.  teller tu pulak, kalau dapat buktikan signature hampir sama dengan yang original, no hal punya.  

local bank apa la pakai teknologi manual camni, biar betul wehhh.  cam tak caya je.

shachihata33

Tadi kwn shachi tu kene soal siasat dgn Jabatan Penyiasatan Bank tersebut....
Kire kwn shachi da wat report polis, pastu polis report kt HQ bank tue...
So, esok Pihak Jbtn tu nk dtg kt tmpt kwn shachi keje tue...
diorg nk tgk polis report yg kwn shachi buat, pastu nk tgk cctv...
Hrp2 la kwn shachi xbersalah....Takut sgt klu die kne DI....Tp mslhnya
takut klu 1st ngn 2nd manager tu buat cite lain...Sbb diorg mst takut sbb
xreport kes ni kt HQ awal2....Hurmmmmmm.....Harap2 la kwn shachi xsalah...

Gemukkkkkkk

ahahahahaha tak buat report polis bermakna managers tu tak anggap ianya fraud/kerugian.  oleh itu, tak boleh la paksa staff bayarkan.  

apa gelabah sangat DI ni?  takde union ke?  apsal member kau ni macam tak reti je pasal banking walhal as teller sepatutnya dah tau pasal union ni?

tapi serius la. kuno betul bank tu. nak cari signature kat borang lagi

wira_wirawan

tak ada bezanya...tengok signature kat specimen card atau tgk melalui  sistem...benda yg sama..
kalu tgk card ni... teller perlukan masa lebih la nak mencari dlm drawer tu..

Gemukkkkkkk

terus terang la, dari awal lagi aku dah kurang yakin la bila dengar teller ni kata bank masih guna cara manual ni.  kenapa?  habis tu cemana branches bank tu buat clearing cheques pagi-pagi?  tu belum lagi nak confirmkan cheques yang datang melalui klach.  hah, cemana?

cam tipu je kan?

t@t

be honest la...agak2 korang bank apa yg kuno sgt ni....?

Gemukkkkkkk

jam bank    foreign bank le kot..

shachihata33

tu shachi mmg xtau lah.....tp bile pk2 blk, bahaya gak shachi cite kt sini..
takut klu ada yg tau sume ni, akn ambil kesempatan or belajar
nk menipu gak.......rahsia bank, bahaya nie....tp die dah kene pgl
ngn jbtn penyiasatan bank tersebut....dan mereka akn dtg bank tu
utk check cctv....hrp2 everything is ok...

shachihata33

Originally posted by Gemukkkkkkk at 26-7-2007 08:55 AM
ahahahahaha tak buat report polis bermakna managers tu tak anggap ianya fraud/kerugian.  oleh itu, tak boleh la paksa staff bayarkan.  

apa gelabah sangat DI ni?  takde union ke?  apsal member ...

die tau..sbb tu kali ni die g wat report....ada ramai gak kwn die dr bank lain tlg inform apa2 kt die...sbb teller semua tau hak diorg....