Posted on 09/06/2022 3:04:58 AM PDT by zeestephen
It took seven months for the Matt Damon-endorsed Crypto.com to realize that it accidentally sent AU$10.5 million dollars (about USD$7.1 million at todays exchange rate) to a woman in Australia, instead of the 100 Australian dollar refund she requested...Court documents show that in May 2021 an employee for the Singapore-based trading platform mistakenly entered an account number into the payment amount field.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
Oops!!
It took them seven months to discover. It’s Australia so I don’t now their laws. But that’s a long time to let this go.
It wasn’t her money, so she spent it.
So it took seven months for Crypto.com to realize that it was missing AU$10.5 million dollars. Sounds to me like those folks need better accountants.
Rgis will no doubt be a lesson in ethics... if this broad went on a shopping spree, paying it back is gonna hurt. she should have been honest and contacted someone!!
This will no doubt be a lesson in ethics... if this broad went on a shopping spree, paying it back is gonna hurt. she should have been honest and contacted someone!!
Not ethical perhaps, but it would net her a quick $100K+/-.
Has she heard from the ATO (Australian Taxation Office)? If not, then that’s sure to happen soon!
“an employee for the Singapore-based trading platform mistakenly entered an account number into the payment amount field”
You would think in this day and age human manual input error like that would have been idiot proofed out of the system.
Matt Damon should easily win this case. Collecting on it, will be a impossible if she spent a lot of it.
Sounds like the intelligence level staffed at the doctors affice since obammma daz.
And if it was the other way around, you are often crap out of luck if you entered the wrong amount when wiring money.
Is Matt a party to this case? How so?
I would think this Australian woman could give a great endorsement of the platform and the customer service. Zowweeee!!!!
You would think but if anything, such systems and controls are regressing. I deal with multiple processes where the checks and balances are nonexistent because the process owners don't have the mental capacity to grasp what might go wrong.
The buyers and managers of the system are ignorant and simply rubber stamp whatever the developer rolls out.
Hmm-m-m-m ... if the money was deposited electronically, there is a trail that can be followed to get the money back. Now if the money arrived at her mailbox, hopefully she had the wit to deposit it in a Caribbean bank where money goes to hide.
She may not even have spent it but when crypto crashed the “money went with it”. I’m wondering how she can pay it back if that is the case.
I filed a claim with my bank and they reimbursed me for it.
Thats crazy.
I did software development and testing at the user interface level for a time and usually something this critical would have been identified and addressed WAY before the product went live.
I can think of several feature functions just off the top of my head that could have been built into the software, any one of which would have kept this from happening.
Matt Damon must be pissed! Lol!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.