In view of the impression of the defendant's representatives of the plaintiff's situation, as stated above, the defendant refused to issue a bank guarantee and cancelled the credit card. I am of the opinion that these measures taken by the defendant in order to protect the plaintiff's funds were reasonable.
- Indeed, a bank that wishes to terminate a contract for payment services must give prior written notice of this. However, I am of the opinion that in our case there were exceptional circumstances that justify the immediate cancellation of the credit card without prior notice, in accordance with section 6(b)(2) of the Payment Services Law. This is because the bank's representatives believed - and rightly - that there was an immediate and real risk to the funds in the plaintiff's bank account in the totality of the circumstances detailed above.
More than once, the court has discussed the duty of care imposed on a bank towards its customers. Among other things, it was held that the bank must handle the customer's funds with skill and caution and ensure that the customer's funds and assets deposited in the bank are not harmed (Civil Appeal 6547/12 Amar v. Bank Leumi Le-Israel in Tax Appeal - Netivot Branch (2015)).
"The bank's obligation to take measures to protect its customers' accounts applies even more strongly with respect to unusual activities in the bank account... When unusual actions occur before its eyes that raise suspicion as to their validity, the bank is obligated to take reasonable measures in order to examine and investigate those actions. ... It seems that this obligation applies even more strongly to elderly or sick customers, and all the more so when suspicion arises regarding their cognitive state. When suspicious activity occurs in the accounts of such customers, the bank can in many cases "prevent the cheapest damage" by conducting the necessary checks in order to ensure that the activity in the account does indeed reflect the customer's wishes.