Bank of China – Fake term deposits: Platform source review

Bank of China – Fake term deposits appears in a source record attributed to Financial Markets Authority. The identity, jurisdiction and finding below define the scope of this review.

The identity in the source

Recorded name

Bank of China – Fake term deposits

Source authority

Financial Markets Authority

Source jurisdiction

New Zealand

Recorded category

Unregistered/Unlicensed entity offering financial products or services

Source validation date

2023-12-13

Source modification date

2023-12-13

Additional source context

A scam offering fake term deposits using the name of Bank of China (New Zealand) is targeting New Zealanders.Scammers are sending out highly professional-looking product disclosure statements featuring Bank of China’s name, logo, address and registration details.Bank of China has confirmed it is not connected with these term deposits which offer rates which are slightly higher than what is advertised on their website.People are being contacted by phone after putting details into deposit comparison websites. The FMA continues to warn about the dangers of these comparison websites – they are used by criminals to harvest information.Bank of China (New Zealand) Limited will not make unsolicited investment offers, such as term deposits through phone call or email (although they may email or call you if you have a bank account with them).We recommend investors contact the relevant bank or financial institution through verified channels for confirmation before investing any money.Entity name: Bank of China – Fake term depositsEmail: Harry.stevens@boc-capital.com, Complaints@boc-capital.comPhone: 09 951 9530

Read the primary authority source

Read the finding in context

The recorded category is reproduced above. Read the linked authority’s finding in its own terms. An authorization warning, restriction or other regulatory notice does not by itself establish every allegation about an entity or prove a particular person’s loss.

Match the record to your experience

Compare the complete website or profile address, payment destination and communications you used. A similar name is not enough to identify the same operator. Retain original messages, payment references and dates so that any differences remain visible.

Follow the evidence and payment route

CryptoDac investigates cryptocurrency fraud, traces digital assets and develops evidence to pursue appropriate lawful recovery routes. For a matter relating to Bank of China – Fake term deposits, the starting questions are which identity presented the service, how payments were sent, which records support the sequence and which relevant platform or authority may be able to act.

A useful chronology separates amounts actually sent from displayed balances or advertised returns. Public transaction records can show movement between addresses, while ownership and legal responsibility may require further evidence. Recovery strategy depends on the facts and the actions of the relevant parties.

Preserve what can support a review

Keep exact website addresses, dated correspondence, transaction IDs, network details and the original records of payment and withdrawal requests. Describe uncertainty honestly. Do not send seed phrases, private keys, passwords or one-time codes.

Dates and source scope

Source dates are labelled separately above. The publication date on this article records its CryptoDac release and is not a claim that CryptoDac published the authority’s warning on its original date. Source records may change; consult the linked authority for its current notice and distinguish its jurisdiction from other countries.

Source and investigation methodology · Request a correction · Return to Scam Brokers