“Withdraw 40,000 to evaluate the suspect!” Lawyer confronts the bank, and the anti-fraud measures surprisingly require citizens to prove their innocence? Having money to buy Bitcoin but not keeping it in the bank 😤 don’t you all agree! The last days of traditional banks, the rise of the cryptocurrency market
This matter is not simple!
In Dongying, Shandong, lawyer Zhou Xiaoyun went to the Construction Bank to withdraw 40,000 cash, but was aggressively questioned by the teller, "What do you need the money for?" They even claimed it was an "anti-fraud regulation", stating that without an explanation, the withdrawal wouldn't be allowed, and even called the police on the spot!
Lawyer Zhou was furious:
"I’m withdrawing my own money, why should I explain my privacy?"
"What right does the bank have to interrogate me?"
"Even suspects don’t need to prove their innocence, yet the bank forces depositors to do so?"
He reluctantly mentioned private matters, but the system still said there was "no such option", and he had to wait for the anti-fraud center to verify… Lawyer Zhou directly gave up on the withdrawal and turned to expose the matter online!
🔥 The incident quickly escalated, and the leadership of the Construction Bank hastily apologized.
But Lawyer Zhou refused:
"This is not just my issue; it’s a rights dilemma that all depositors might encounter!"
"Anti-fraud measures cannot become a nuisance, and we cannot assume that every ordinary citizen is a suspect!"
Netizens were also outraged:
💬 "Banks only make things difficult for honest people, real scammers just come up with any excuse and get away with it"
💬 "Withdrawing money feels like being on trial, with limits, risk controls, questioning… are we customers or criminals?"
💬 "The anti-fraud hammer falls squarely on ordinary users"
This "withdrawal storm" is no longer just a bank service issue, but a public confrontation over citizens' rights to information, privacy rights, and the boundaries of anti-fraud enforcement.
💡 A reminder:
Anti-fraud measures must not turn into "extrajudicial enforcement"; regulation should not make ordinary citizens pay the price repeatedly.
The bank should wake up:
Don’t let protection turn into infringement.
Don’t let regulations trample on the law.