Ecobank sued by Future Trading Company over damages on money transfer

Through EA Attorneys, the company accuses the bank of making the money transaction through electronic banking without its approval, dailynews.co.tz reports. As a result, the company, which is the plaintiff in the matter, suffered damages and failed to meet its financial obligations. In the written statement of defence (WSD), however, the Bank, the defendant, through Crest Attorneys, has vehemently denied the demands, alleging that the money sent to one Bashir K General Dealers based in South Africa was within the knowledge of the plaintiff and was indeed authorised by him.

The commercial dispute filed before the High Court’s Commercial Division is before Judge Augustine Mwarija. It has been set for hearing on May 15, as the filing of the pleadings in the matter has been completed. Plaint of the suit shows that the company operates an account at the Bank’s Uhuru Branch. It is alleged that in February, 2014 the plaintiff company received a call from the defendant bank’s officer, Ms Stella Malekia, requesting the company to be connected with electronic banking services. The plaintiff is claimed to have promised to visit the bank in future for discussion on the request. But on March 10, last year, the plaintiff allegedly received an alert message on one transaction that he did not understand. Then, he requested the balance of his account and the plaintiff allegedly discovered that there was missing amount.

Having visited that branch, the plaintiff was surprised to find that some 66,240,000/- had been withdrawn and upon inquiry he was informed by the defendant that the money had been transferred to a South African recipient by way of telegraphic transfer from an order of his e-mail. It is claimed further that upon such discovery, the plaintiff reported the matter to the defendant’s Customer Relationship Manager, who allegedly said what happened could probably be internal error and assured the plaintiff that the money could not get lost or debited without his authority. On 19 March, 2014, bank officials allegedly telephoned the plaintiff as a way of followed up on the missing funds and made a promise that they would give him feedback on the way forward, but nothing went on thereafter. The plaintiff claims that the bank’s unlawful acts of withdrawing his money and delaying refunding the same has cause him to fail to meet his financial obligations.