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

Featured Articles

Intel plans Haswell refresh in Q2 2014

Intel plans Haswell refresh in Q2 2014

Intel has been executing its tick tock strategy flawlessly since January 2006 and now there is some indication that we might…

More...
Xbox One demoed running GTX card

Xbox One demoed running GTX card

It looks like the Xbox One just cannot catch a break. We have stumbled upon a report claiming that Xbox One…

More...
Haswell Pentium and Core specs surface

Haswell Pentium and Core specs surface

Haswell is out and now we have the complete specs for Intel’s first batch of fourth generation Core parts, as well…

More...
EVGA GTX 770 ACX 2GB previewed

EVGA GTX 770 ACX 2GB previewed

Nvidia is hoping that the Geforce GTX 770 will be a very popular product, and EVGA obviously share this view, as…

More...
Gainward GTX 770 Phantom reviewed

Gainward GTX 770 Phantom reviewed

Gainward has now officially unveiled its custom version of the Geforce GTX 770, the Gainward GTX 770 Phantom. Based on the…

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

To be able to post comments please log-in with Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments