A business owner surnamed Wu in Bao’an District recently reported to the Southern Metropolis Daily that her guarantor, who was identified as Chen, borrowed 1 million yuan (US$152,000) from a bank using her name.
A business owner surnamed Wu in Bao’an District recently reported to the Southern Metropolis Daily that her guarantor, who was identified as Chen, borrowed 1 million yuan (US$152,000) from a bank using her name.
Wu and the bank, Guangdong Nanyue Bank, are negotiating over the fraud at the moment, but Chen is under criminal detention for another economic crime he already committed.
Wu was an owner of a glass business in Shenzhen. She experienced financial problems and could not pay her employees in September 2014. So the businesswoman authorized Chen, an acquaintance who worked in a guarantee company at that time, to borrow money from the Nanyue bank.
Chen promised to do so and borrowed 4 million yuan from the bank as a proxy. According to the copy of the loan contract, Wu borrowed 4 million yuan from the bank as a personal operation loan and the duration of the loan lasted from Oct. 23, 2014 until Oct. 23, 2015.
At the end of September 2015, when Wu went to repay the loan, she found that she needed to pay 5 million yuan to the bank. “I was told by the bank’s client manager that I needed to pay 5 million yuan and I thought the extra 1 million yuan might be the interest on the loan,” said Wu.
After Wu repaid the loan, she realized that it was Chen who borrowed another 1 million yuan in her name, before the contract of 4 million yuan was completed.
The client manager of the bank, Li Taiheng, provided a copy of the contract that showed Wu had applied for the loan of 1 million yuan on Sept. 30, 2014.
Wu decided to call the police after she found out it was Chen who was behind the scheme. Chen later returned 540,000 yuan to Wu out of fear of being investigated by the police three months ago.
Despite the money, Wu still insisted on calling the police because of Chen’s economic fraud. Wu also asked the bank to provide evidence to assist the police’s investigation.
Wu also accused the bank of irresponsibly lending money to Chen without handing her the contract or informing her about the extra loan.
However, the bank refused to provide supporting material as a staff member from the bank said as long as the contract was signed by the client, it was empowered with legal validity and the bank did not have the obligation to hand the contract to the client in person if the client authorized others to deal with the loans.
“We are not obligated to provide evidence for any client unless the public security departments ask us to do so,” said the staffer. The bank also said that Wu and Chen had known each other for a long time and Wu had authorized Chen to deal with the loan.
Chen went to the Yuehai Police Station to negotiate with Wu after the businesswoman called the police, but the police station did not file a case because Chen had returned part of the amount to Wu.
A person with inside knowledge said that Chen was under detention by Longhua police for another fraud case that involved more than 400,000 yuan.
标签： 欧陆银行case