Abstract：
The common way of quasi-possession creditor paid off is to pretend the true creditor to withdraw deposits. The bank card issuers, who can't identify the forged bank card with identification duty. Paying to forged bank cardholders wouldn't be regarded as paying the quasi creditor off without exemptions from civil liabilities. This means that cardholders can still perform claims according to deposit contracts, while bank card issuers must bear all the losses of forged bank card transactions. Judicial departments of China and the legislations of other countries have chosen the strict liability imputation principle with defense of contributory negligence of loss allocation system, the reason is that only claims of tort law can cognize subjective faults. Bank card issuers, however, are the least cost avoiders in the accidents of pretending the true creditor to withdraw deposits, and it will be the most effective choice if bank card issuers bear the losses of forged bank card transactions based on the strict liability imputation principle. The difference of loss allocation of forged bank card transactions caused by the choice of claim basis thus also will be eliminated.
2018, Issue (5): 131-143 DOI: 
