DBS should pay medical bills of customers who have resulting health conditions

A professor wrote in to the newspapers. He clarified that the money is not lost by the customers of DBS but by the bank. He wrote that it is not correct to say that the bank reimburses the customers; the losses incurred are the bank's losses not the customers' losses because the customers have lent the money to the bank and it is therefore the bank's responsiblity to return the money to the customers whether or not someone else had stolen the money from the bank.

E.g. If you lend your friend $50, and your friend got robbed, your friend would still need to return the $50 to you. He won't be saying, "That $50 note that got stolen belongs to you, therefore you got robbed, not me."

In this latest news headline "DBS compensates $1m to ATM fraud victims", I think it's not correct either. When I think of compensation, I would think it's some extra cash to compensate customers for emotional distress and for the trouble of having to call them bank and keep checking their bank account balances.

It was distressing enough for me to see my Stinkel bill with $100+ incorrectly charged items. If my bank balance shows an unauthorised withdrawal of $2000, I would flip!

If someone suffered a heart attack after checking his bank account, would DBS be responsible to pay his medical bills? There's no such thing as claiming compensation for causing merely "emotional distress" in Singapore but I think DBS should pay medical bills of customers who have resulting health conditions as a result of the incident.


jerry's said...

Hey.. Were you at the army market hawker centre on 15 Jan(Sun)?

David said...


If someone could prove that a harmful health condition was made worse by a DBS mistake, then DBS should be responsible for medical cost.

How likely would SG courts be willing to enforce such a judgement?


Anonymous said...

I agree with what you just said. Bank's clients shouldn't be seen as the ones who lost their money.


Anonymous said...

You are right! Headline is so wrong ! Sharp of you to
Point out