Shandong Pingyin Agricultural and Commercial Bank’s manager disappeared after borrowing over 20 million yuan from more than ten customers, citing the need for “client bridge funds.” The manager’s personal account showed a transaction volume of over 200 million yuan in just over forty days, which did not trigger the bank’s risk control system, leading to widespread suspicion among netizens.
According to reports from Qilu TV and others, Mr. Liu, who does foreign trade business in Jinan, applied for a 4.5 million yuan loan through a manager surnamed Sun at the Pingyin Agricultural and Commercial Bank in 2022. Subsequently, Manager Sun borrowed money from Mr. Liu multiple times under the pretext of the client needing “bridge” funds, and he disappeared in January 2025 after borrowing a total of 6.05 million yuan from Mr. Liu.
Mr. Liu sought help from Pingyin Agricultural and Commercial Bank, but the bank president only responded that Sun was on leave and they could not contact him. It wasn’t until March 2025 that Mr. Liu received a notification from the bank informing him that Manager Sun had been dismissed, and the loans were considered personal actions unrelated to the bank.
Afterwards, Mr. Liu discovered that Sun not only borrowed his money but also borrowed from over ten other people, accumulating a total amount exceeding two million yuan. Mr. Liu revealed that Sun, in order to prove he had no money to repay him, sent him the transaction records of two bank cards. The records showed that from 2022 to 2025, the transactions on these two cards amounted to over five billion yuan over three years, with over two billion yuan in transactions in just over forty days before Sun disappeared in December 2024. These transactions were not used for so-called “bridge” business at the bank, but for high-end consumption, such as spending over 8,000 yuan on a meal, purchasing a BMW and a Tesla, and more.
Recently, Mr. Liu and other victims went to the disciplinary committee of Pingyin Agricultural and Commercial Bank to inquire if there was a thorough investigation, but the committee only replied, “We cannot find any information.”
After the incident was exposed, netizens questioned the actions, “Isn’t this operation too outrageous? The staff member went missing, and the first response was not to report to the police or assess the risks or comfort the victims, but to delay and then simply ‘dismiss’ them.” “Ordinary people are questioned for their 5,000 yuan withdrawals, but this manager took over 20 million yuan without consequences, isn’t this a huge loophole in bank management?” “Why is there no restriction on the transfer limit on his card? Why isn’t the purpose of the funds questioned?”
“It’s a den of thieves.” “I bet they also got a share of the money.” “Bank supervision is definitely inadequate.” “In most countries worldwide, such incidents are the responsibility of the bank, very few places attribute it to individual actions.” “No wonder people say it’s unreliable to keep money in the bank these days.”