How far is a bank liable if you lose your credit card and pin?

“I lost my wallet with my credit card in it and a piece of paper on which I wrote down my new card pin number. Because I was hoping I may still find my wallet, I didn’t immediately stop my bank card. A few hours later somebody used my card to pay for food on the other side of town. I then immediately phoned the bank to stop the card and informed the bank that somebody else had my card and pin. The bank told me in that case the bank would not be liable for my losses. Is this true?”

Generally, when unauthorised transactions have taken place on a bank card, the bank will investigate to ascertain how the transaction had occurred and who was liable for losses incurred. In general most card agreements entered into between a bank and cardholder includes provisions that the cardholder has a contractual obligation to keep the card safe and not disclose the card pin to anyone. The bank also has a contractual obligation to mitigate losses in a case where the cardholder informs them of a fraudulent transaction.

Our courts have found that a cardholder can be liable for losses if the cardholder acts negligently by for example, disclosing the pin. This was determined after taking into account the provisions of the Code of Banking Practice in South Africa read together with the contract concluded between the bank and the cardholder. Exceptions may be where card thieves have obtained the pin by recording the cardholder when using the pin etc. and the Ombudsman for Banking Services indicated in a Card Cloning Bulletin that it cannot reasonably be expected that a cardholder must search for things like hidden cameras. 

Where a card pin was obtained for example by the cardholder storing the pin in a wallet with his card and the card and pin were used to conclude transactions, it will probably stand to good reason that the cardholder was negligent in this respect and the bank would not be liable for the unauthorised transactions, taking into account the contractual terms between the bank and the cardholder. 

Banks do however generally have an obligation to mitigate losses, subject to the circumstances of each case, and if a cardholder for instance informed the bank that the card and pin has been compromised or stolen and the bank fails to stop the card, then the bank could be held liable for losses ensuing.

Each case will however have to be assessed on its merits and the refusal of a bank to accept liability for losses can be challenged by a court or possibly the Ombudsman for Banking Services. In your case the circumstances appear to point towards negligence on your side which will preclude the bank from being liable for the unauthorised transaction on your card.

June 11, 2020
Piecing together the puzzle of cross-border cases

Piecing together the puzzle of cross-border cases

In the matter of IRD Global Limited v The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (504/2023) [2024] ZASCA 109, the SCA reaffirmed what the requirements are for South African Courts to have the necessary jurisdiction to hear matters involving foreign companies and confirmed what would be required to establish jurisdiction when online publications are involved.

Exclusive use areas: Is your new space truly yours?

Exclusive use areas: Is your new space truly yours?

An exclusive use area can be defined as “a part or parts of the common property” in a scheme that is indicated on a sectional plan and designated for the exclusive use of an owner of a section. In simple terms, an exclusive use area refers to those portions in a scheme to which a certain owner has exclusive use rights, such as a garden, parking bay, or balcony. This is in contrast to common property, which is owned and shared by the body corporate.

Sign up to our newsletter

Pin It on Pinterest