KUALA LUMPUR: Banks operating in Singapore are now required to block accounts which see suspicious transactions involving more than S$25,000 ( RM82,377) .
The Straits Times reported that the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) made an announcement yesterday about the the move.
It is part of banks' real-time fraud surveillance to further prevent customers from having big amounts of money removed without their knowledge.
A bank account is considered rapidly drained if more than half the balance of at least S$50,000 is transfered out cumulatively in a span of a day.
It is among the new moves to prevent phishing scams that could undermine confidence in Singapore's digital banking and payment systems.
"This was spelt out under the finalised Shared Responsibility Framework (SRF) for phishing scams, unveiled on Oct 24.
"The SRF complements existing moves that have been made to counter scams. For instance, major retail banks have been restricting access to their apps if customers have downloaded apps from untrustworthy installers or apps with risky permission settings, to counter malware-related scams," the newspaper reported.
Banks in the republic have six months from Dec 16, the date the SRF kicks in, to enforce this this new practice.
The finalised SRF dictates how financial institutes and telecommunication companies need to share the pay outs to victims who suffer losses from certain types of phishing scams, if these organisations fail to perform their duties.
This is aimed at preventing hassles faced by consumers when they seek reimbursement.
Currently, the onus is on consumers to provide proof that their losses were not due to their own negligence.
MAS financial supervision deputy managing director
Ho Hern Shin said:
"Overall, banks have to fulfil five key duties, and telcos three key ones, under the SRF. If these organisations do what is necessary under the framework, consumers will bear the full losses.
"With the addition of a new fraud surveillance duty, some retail customers may experience more inconvenience when conducting larger-value transactions.
"This additional friction is necessary to protect customers against large unauthorised transactions."
The finalises SRF is a result of a two-month consultation among industry players at the end of last year and almost a year of deliberation by MAS and the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA).
"It is not meant to be a catch-all fraud reimbursement framework. For instance, it does not offer coverage in the case of payments arising from investment or love scams, or fraudulent transactions due to hacking, identity theft or the downloading of malware."
The Straits Times said the scope of the SRF covers phishing scams on digital platforms such as a fake website accessed through a link. A company which is impersonated in these scams must be based in Singapore or offer services to residents in Singapore.
It also includes cases of scammers who pretend to be from legitimate companies and send e-mails or short message service (SMS) texts claiming account-related issues, to trick victims into clicking a link to a fake website to enter a person's account details.
Also included are scammers claiming to be from financial institutions offering deals like high interest rates on fixed deposits and free mobile phones, to trick victims into clicking on a link to a fake website to enter account credentials.
Others are cases of scammers who pretend to be from legitimate companies and those pretending to be from financial institutions and offer deals such as high interest rates on fixed deposits and free item to lure people into clicking links on fake websites.
The the SRF pay out method, investigators will have to firstly examine whether a financial services provider and telecommunication company have fulfilled their duties.
Singapore is the first country to include telcos in a fraud reimbursement framework.
MAS and IMDA said banks and payment services providers are custodians of consumer funds and are vital gatekeepers against money being misappropriated by scammers; and they said that telcos are the infrastructure providers for SMS texts often used by banks to communicate with consumers.
First in line to be examined in this measure are banks and payment services providers such as e-wallet companies. If they fail in any of their duties, they will be fully liable for the losses.
"Banks' other duties include imposing a 12-hour cooling-off period to prevent large sums from being transferred from an account to a third party if a scammer has phished a person's credentials and activated a digital security token.
The 12-hour cooling-off period will also apply to logins to an e-wallet on a new device.
Under the new requirement, banks and payment services providers will need to send real-time alerts to consumers for high-risk activities, including any change in a account's contact details, increase in transaction limits and adding a new payee; or when there is a login to an e-wallet account on a new device.
Statistics showed that scam victims in Singapore lost more than $385.6 million in the first six months of this year
due to e-commerce, job and phishing scams.
Out of that amount, losses due to phishing scams were S$13.3 million in the first six months of this year, which is a S$7.3 million increase in the same period last year.
The highest amount of losses in such scams was the $660.7 million lost in such cases in 2022.
All four telcommunication companies in Singapore had said in a joint statement yesterday that they fulfilled their duties outlined in the SRF. They also said they complied with scam prevention measures such as governing SM card registration and allowing subscribers to block international calls and SMS.
Association of Banks in Singapore director Ong-Ang Ai Boon said that even beyond the SRF, banks have imposed their r respective discretionary goodwill frameworks, to support scam victims.
"Such discretionary reimbursements will be considered on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the overall circumstances of each case," she told the Straits Times.
She added that factors considered include the sophistication of scams and victims' financial situation.
"In cases where the scam was completely outside the customer's control or responsibility, banks would consider making goodwill payments up to the full amount of the loss."