Error
  • JUser::_load: Unable to load user with id: 67

Featured Articles

Analysts expect ARM to do well next year

Analysts expect ARM to do well next year

British chip designer ARM could cash in on the mobile industry's rush to transition to 64-bit operating systems and hardware.

More...
Huawei and Xiaomi outpace Lenovo, LG in smartphone market

Huawei and Xiaomi outpace Lenovo, LG in smartphone market

Samsung has lost smartphone market share, ending the quarter on a low note and Xiaomi appears to be the big winner.

More...
Intel Broadwell 15W coming to CES

Intel Broadwell 15W coming to CES

It looks like Intel will be showing off its 14nm processors, codenames Broadwell, in a couple of weeks at CES 2015.

More...
Gainward GTX 980 Phantom reviewed

Gainward GTX 980 Phantom reviewed

Today we’ll be taking a closer look at the recently introduced Gainward GTX 980 4GB with the company’s trademark Phantom cooler.

More...
Zotac ZBOX Sphere OI520 barebones vs Sphere Plus review

Zotac ZBOX Sphere OI520 barebones vs Sphere Plus review

Zotac has been in the nettop and mini-PC space for more than four years now and it has managed to carve…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Friday, 02 January 2009 13:13

Computer glitch costs Chinese bank dearly

Written by

Image

A golden opportunity, almost


Someone
at the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China is not a happy camper these days. Due to a computer glitch last week, the bank offered a bid price for gold of 848 yuan per gram, nearly six times more than the actual going rate.

Greedy traders pounced on the offer, although it lasted just 23 minutes, and the Beijing Times thinks these 23 minutes cost the bank 10 million yuan, or $1.46 million. However, the traders' luck didn't last long, as on Saturday the bank posted a statement on its website claiming that its gold trading system had gone ape, and kindly asking users to return the windfall. Under the agreement signed by the users of the bank's gold trading platform, the bank has a right to ask for reimbursement, or at least it thinks it does.

However, on Monday, several differing points of view were offered by numerous lawyers, which isn't much of a surprise as we are, after all, talking about lawyers. Some pointed out the bank had no legal basis for seizing the money, as the clients didn't cheat it intentionally, and should shut up and take the loss caused by its own negligence. Others however, claim the profits constituted "unjust enrichment" and hat to be returned to the bank.

More here.

 

E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments