Lost in transactions: Widow’s family accuses Westpac of negligence over mysterious withdrawals
- Replies 36
In a world where trust and reliability in financial institutions are paramount, recent headlines have highlighted a troubling trend of vulnerability and exploitation.
The intersection of personal finances and institutional responsibility has come under scrutiny as stories emerge of individuals facing unexpected challenges navigating their banking affairs.
These incidents serve as poignant reminders of the importance of safeguarding vulnerable members of society and upholding the principles of ethical and transparent financial practices.
The tragic tale of an 89-year-old widow with dementia who withdrew a staggering $305,000 in cash before her death left her family reeling, not only from the loss but from what they perceive as a grave misstep by Westpac staff.
The family's grief is compounded by their belief that the bank failed to safeguard their vulnerable loved one, leading to a situation that they claim borders on elder abuse.
The woman, who had been a loyal client of a Westpac branch on the North Island of New Zealand, made over 70 teller-assisted cash withdrawals from September 2017 until her death in July 2020.
These transactions amounted to a considerable sum of money, which her family said largely vanished without a trace.
The daughter of the deceased, who had been appointed as her mum’s power of attorney, had informed the bank of her mother's dementia and vulnerability in February 2020.
In response, Westpac added a note to the widow's file indicating her status as a ‘vulnerable customer’, cautioning staff to ‘take care with any large or unusual transactions’.
However, despite this warning, the elderly woman was still able to withdraw $50,000 in five separate transactions in the months leading up to her death.
The daughter's shock was palpable when she discovered the extent of the withdrawals, particularly as her mum had no significant expenses that would justify such large sums of cash.
According to her, the widow had paid off her home and car, and there were no hefty utility bills or credit card payments to account for the money.
‘What the hell did they think she was spending the money on?’ the daughter questioned.
She recalled that she noticed ‘something was off’ about her mum’s behaviour in the months preceding her passing, noting her irritability and remarks about ‘people fleecing her for money’.
Family members attempted to ascertain the complete sum of cash the widow withdrew, suspecting that over $200,000 had simply ‘disappeared’.
‘I can't prove it, but the money is missing. And the $23,000 she withdrew three weeks before she died, that was gone from her house,’ the daughter lamented.
The daughter, concerned about her mother's financial activity, meticulously reviewed her bank statements. To her astonishment, she uncovered that her mother had withdrawn upwards of $200,000 in cash over the final 18 months of her life.
Among the transactions, the largest in-branch withdrawal amounted to $24,000 in May 2019.
Recalling her final visit to the bank with her mother, the daughter recounted witnessing a teller handing over an envelope containing $23,000, despite her mother not carrying a handbag.
Although unaware of the exact sum at the time, she vividly remembered the teller remarking on the substantial nature of the withdrawal.
‘They let her walk out without a handbag with a Westpac envelope stuffed with cash. It was probably like 8cm thick,’ she recalled.
The daughter confronted bank personnel regarding the string of substantial cash withdrawals, asserting that they admitted to being ‘too scared’ to inquire why the pensioner required such funds.
Allegedly, they speculated that the mum ‘maybe wanted to purchase a mobility scooter’ with the cash.
Concerned about potential elder abuse, the family reached out to the authorities, highlighting the pensioner's modest lifestyle and the absence of any noticeable personal expenditures.
Subsequently, an investigation was initiated, and a person of interest was interrogated; however, it was ultimately terminated due to the inability to establish any link between the individual and the withdrawn funds, as the cash could not be traced.
In response to the perceived negligence, the family lodged a formal complaint against the Australian-owned bank, accusing it of failing to fulfil its duty of care toward a vulnerable and elderly customer.
The complaint alleged that Westpac tellers neglected to scrutinise the cash withdrawals despite the presence of a warning flag denoting the customer's vulnerability in her file.
Additionally, the family lodged a complaint with the Banking Ombudsman.
In a correspondence dated May, Westpac described the deceased pensioner as ‘very well respected’ within the branch.
The bank asserted that its employees did not perceive the woman to have any ‘vulnerabilities’ and did not view any of the withdrawals as suspicious.
The correspondence clarified that the mother's pattern of withdrawing money was customary, as it aligned with her banking habits and financial management practices.
Furthermore, the bank stated that its staff shared the same perspective as the daughter, who indicated that her mother was not someone who warranted interrogation regarding her finances.
Westpac stated that its staff had inquired about the motive behind the woman's cash withdrawals on ‘several occasions’ and characterised the woman as ‘confident and savvy with money’.
According to Westpac’s statement, ‘She was very private about her finances, which was acknowledged by her daughter…and our staff ultimately acted on her instructions in processing the withdrawals.’
The bank stated that tellers began asking additional questions regarding cash withdrawals after February 2020, following the implementation of the ‘extra care’ code on the woman's account at the daughter's request.
In March, the elderly woman made three withdrawals totalling $25,000 and informed staff that she required the cash due to COVID-19 lockdowns.
Additionally, during her final withdrawal of $23,000, staff inquired about the large sum, and she explained that she needed it as she was uncertain when she would next visit the branch.
Staff indicated they felt ‘comfortable’ in providing the cash in an envelope as the woman was accompanied by her daughter.
As financial institutions grapple with the complexities of safeguarding their vulnerable clients, harrowing tales emerge, underscoring the pressing need for greater protection measures.
According to the ACCC's Scamwatch, in 2023, Australians aged 65 and over reported more than 72,000 scams, with victims losing almost $121 million.
This was exemplified by another heart-wrenching experience of a 95-year-old grandmother who fell victim to a devastating scam, leaving her stripped of her life savings and grappling with feelings of betrayal and humiliation.
Such narratives serve as poignant reminders of the imperative to fortify safeguards and advocate for the well-being of our elderly population in an increasingly complex financial landscape.
Have you or someone you know faced similar challenges with a financial institution? How do you think banks should handle situations involving vulnerable seniors? We invite you to share your thoughts and experiences on this matter in the comments below.
The intersection of personal finances and institutional responsibility has come under scrutiny as stories emerge of individuals facing unexpected challenges navigating their banking affairs.
These incidents serve as poignant reminders of the importance of safeguarding vulnerable members of society and upholding the principles of ethical and transparent financial practices.
The tragic tale of an 89-year-old widow with dementia who withdrew a staggering $305,000 in cash before her death left her family reeling, not only from the loss but from what they perceive as a grave misstep by Westpac staff.
The family's grief is compounded by their belief that the bank failed to safeguard their vulnerable loved one, leading to a situation that they claim borders on elder abuse.
An elderly widow with dementia withdrew over $300,000 from her Westpac account before passing away, without clear justification for the large cash amounts. Credits: Shutterstock
The woman, who had been a loyal client of a Westpac branch on the North Island of New Zealand, made over 70 teller-assisted cash withdrawals from September 2017 until her death in July 2020.
These transactions amounted to a considerable sum of money, which her family said largely vanished without a trace.
The daughter of the deceased, who had been appointed as her mum’s power of attorney, had informed the bank of her mother's dementia and vulnerability in February 2020.
In response, Westpac added a note to the widow's file indicating her status as a ‘vulnerable customer’, cautioning staff to ‘take care with any large or unusual transactions’.
However, despite this warning, the elderly woman was still able to withdraw $50,000 in five separate transactions in the months leading up to her death.
The daughter's shock was palpable when she discovered the extent of the withdrawals, particularly as her mum had no significant expenses that would justify such large sums of cash.
According to her, the widow had paid off her home and car, and there were no hefty utility bills or credit card payments to account for the money.
‘What the hell did they think she was spending the money on?’ the daughter questioned.
She recalled that she noticed ‘something was off’ about her mum’s behaviour in the months preceding her passing, noting her irritability and remarks about ‘people fleecing her for money’.
Family members attempted to ascertain the complete sum of cash the widow withdrew, suspecting that over $200,000 had simply ‘disappeared’.
‘I can't prove it, but the money is missing. And the $23,000 she withdrew three weeks before she died, that was gone from her house,’ the daughter lamented.
The daughter, concerned about her mother's financial activity, meticulously reviewed her bank statements. To her astonishment, she uncovered that her mother had withdrawn upwards of $200,000 in cash over the final 18 months of her life.
Among the transactions, the largest in-branch withdrawal amounted to $24,000 in May 2019.
Recalling her final visit to the bank with her mother, the daughter recounted witnessing a teller handing over an envelope containing $23,000, despite her mother not carrying a handbag.
Although unaware of the exact sum at the time, she vividly remembered the teller remarking on the substantial nature of the withdrawal.
‘They let her walk out without a handbag with a Westpac envelope stuffed with cash. It was probably like 8cm thick,’ she recalled.
The daughter confronted bank personnel regarding the string of substantial cash withdrawals, asserting that they admitted to being ‘too scared’ to inquire why the pensioner required such funds.
Allegedly, they speculated that the mum ‘maybe wanted to purchase a mobility scooter’ with the cash.
Concerned about potential elder abuse, the family reached out to the authorities, highlighting the pensioner's modest lifestyle and the absence of any noticeable personal expenditures.
Subsequently, an investigation was initiated, and a person of interest was interrogated; however, it was ultimately terminated due to the inability to establish any link between the individual and the withdrawn funds, as the cash could not be traced.
In response to the perceived negligence, the family lodged a formal complaint against the Australian-owned bank, accusing it of failing to fulfil its duty of care toward a vulnerable and elderly customer.
The complaint alleged that Westpac tellers neglected to scrutinise the cash withdrawals despite the presence of a warning flag denoting the customer's vulnerability in her file.
Additionally, the family lodged a complaint with the Banking Ombudsman.
In a correspondence dated May, Westpac described the deceased pensioner as ‘very well respected’ within the branch.
The bank asserted that its employees did not perceive the woman to have any ‘vulnerabilities’ and did not view any of the withdrawals as suspicious.
The correspondence clarified that the mother's pattern of withdrawing money was customary, as it aligned with her banking habits and financial management practices.
Furthermore, the bank stated that its staff shared the same perspective as the daughter, who indicated that her mother was not someone who warranted interrogation regarding her finances.
Westpac stated that its staff had inquired about the motive behind the woman's cash withdrawals on ‘several occasions’ and characterised the woman as ‘confident and savvy with money’.
According to Westpac’s statement, ‘She was very private about her finances, which was acknowledged by her daughter…and our staff ultimately acted on her instructions in processing the withdrawals.’
The bank stated that tellers began asking additional questions regarding cash withdrawals after February 2020, following the implementation of the ‘extra care’ code on the woman's account at the daughter's request.
In March, the elderly woman made three withdrawals totalling $25,000 and informed staff that she required the cash due to COVID-19 lockdowns.
Additionally, during her final withdrawal of $23,000, staff inquired about the large sum, and she explained that she needed it as she was uncertain when she would next visit the branch.
Staff indicated they felt ‘comfortable’ in providing the cash in an envelope as the woman was accompanied by her daughter.
As financial institutions grapple with the complexities of safeguarding their vulnerable clients, harrowing tales emerge, underscoring the pressing need for greater protection measures.
According to the ACCC's Scamwatch, in 2023, Australians aged 65 and over reported more than 72,000 scams, with victims losing almost $121 million.
This was exemplified by another heart-wrenching experience of a 95-year-old grandmother who fell victim to a devastating scam, leaving her stripped of her life savings and grappling with feelings of betrayal and humiliation.
Such narratives serve as poignant reminders of the imperative to fortify safeguards and advocate for the well-being of our elderly population in an increasingly complex financial landscape.
.png){kind=icon}
