79-year-old woman says dollar bank failed to protect her from being swindled out of millions of dollars

Click here for updates on this story

    SOUTH PARK, Paennsylvania (KDKA) — A South Park woman claims Dollar Bank failed to prevent her from being swindled out of millions of dollars.

In a lawsuit filed against the bank, Mary Clayton claims the bank broke state law.

“Ms. Clayton is a 79-year-old widow who in June of 2019, received a phone call from an individual who identified himself as a DEA agent,” her attorney, John Linkosky, told KDKA money editor Jon Delano on Thursday.

The scam artist told Clayton her identity was stolen and being used by an international drug cartel to launder money.

She was told they needed her help to capture the crooks. And if she failed to help, she would be exposed to both criminal and civil liability.

“Ms. Clayton fell victim to this. She went to Dollar Bank and engaged in a wire transfer with the help of Dollar Bank employees,” Linkosky said.

The complaint alleges bank employees enabled the transfer of $4.3 million from her account into the account of a cryptocurrency trust fund and using an it-bit deposit ID that Dollar Bank got for her,” says Linkosky.

Linkosky says Dollar Bank broke state law.

“Dollar Bank advertised, deceptively, that it would look out for its customers’ identities and its customers’ assets,” said Clayton’s attorney. “If they are faithful to their promise to prioritize customer protection, they got to start asking questions.”

Linkosky says most banks often raise alarms, even on small purchases when made out-of-state, but Dollar Bank made no effort to protect its customer, just the opposite.

“An authorized Dollar Bank employees filled the forms out,” Linkosky said.

In a statement to KDKA, the bank responded, “Dollar Bank was made aware of this specific legal case (Wednesday), and we have opened a full investigation into the matter. It is bank policy not to comment on pending legal matters, and we will have no further comment at this time.”

Besides establishing all the facts, a court will need to determine if the bank engaged in deceptive advertising and what exactly its obligation is to protect its customers.

Please note: This content carries a strict local market embargo. If you share the same market as the contributor of this article, you may not use it on any platform.