Lately, I’ve been hearing from older adults who have had their bank accounts or similar financial accounts hacked, promptly discovered a problem and reported the hack, only to find they have to jump through an astounding number of hoops to get control back over their accounts.
The latest behavior I’m seeing is where someone gains access to minimal but nonetheless key information about the true account holder, using that information to change the “mailing address” and other ownership-details. Not surprisingly, the true account holder realizes something has happened because of missing money. But, when they try to recover, by initiating direct communications with the financial institution, the company subjects them to multiple layers of unique questions to require them to prove their identity. Okay — but how did the “bad guys” get access in order to change the account information without going through similar safeguards? Some experts have suggested (a) insider involvement at the level of the financial institution for allowing “easy” changes; or (b) attempts to shift the burden of proof to the account holder for the “fraud.”
I’m wondering whether the “occasional” descriptions I’m hearing reflect a deeper, common problem. My own bank suggested that an important safeguard is actually having a relationship “with” your bank’s officials, through in-person visits where employees “get to know you” on a personal level. But, that kind of safeguard is harder and harder to do, with the steep rise in “remote” banking.
I welcome more thoughts from readers.