I was utterly gobsmacked to read in the Gruaniad (opens in new tab)that the main UK banks are furious with the government's request to monitor customers' accounts for evidence of fraud arising from the loss of 25 million child benefit records from the HMRC.
The paper quoted (opens in new tab) one senior banking executive (are you sure about the b in his job title? -Ed) as saying it was "unrealistic to expect banks to monitor that many accounts for suspicious movements."
Incredibly, the banks are claiming they don't have enough resources to monitor more than half their accounts for fraud.
So where does this leave the average punter as regards fraud if the banks say they can't monitor every account for fraud? It doesn't exactly inspire confidence.
One executive with a big five bank said that his financial institution employs around 1,000 workers in fraud detection and hasn't the facilities to ask its call centre/branch staff to watch out for "this and that."
"You need specialist training to identify suspicious transactions," he told the paper.
So where does this fit in with all the corporate spiel (opens in new tab) that APACS and others have been giving us about Chip & PIN?
When the chips (fx: groan -Ed) are really down, it's only then that we discover the truth about what the banks are up to on the anti-fraud front...