We have an account that was closed on October 20th. The final statement cut on November 5th. The problem is the owner of this INDIVIDUAL account died in July. We were not aware of his death. When he died he had around $12,000.00 in his checking account. It was an individual account with no pay on death. Since his death someone(we think may be his son)has been going to the ATM and withdrawing $500.00 a day. This person depleted his account. We are trying to determine what our liability will be if an executor of his will comes and claims that they were unauthorized transactions? Will the 60 day period from the last statement be the rule even with the extenuating circumstances?
We don't think that there is a will, but the account owner's mother is aware of this. In fact she was the one who called us and said his son was taking his money. If she was to go through the courts to be appointed the executor, i can see her coming to us with Reg E disputes.

I agree you have a potential problem if his estate claims improper distribution / release of funds.
But, I don't know if there could be Reg E. Claims . . . the owner of the account is who can make a Reg E claim & you now have no owner. Can an estate make a claim on behalf of the individual ? I don't know / haven't heard of that. And even if they can, it was an approved access device that was used & with the PIN - - - how could they prove their claim that the owner had not given authority for the use. BUT - does the authority die with the owner ?? . . . WOW . . . ??
I know that rambling is of no help & I too, will be interested to hear what the GURUs have to say.

Even though the Comments to the definition of "unauthorized electronic fund transfer" (UEFT) say that a grant of authority is evergreen unless the bank is notified, etc., I think a court would quickly decide that such a grant of authority has to terminate on death of the account owner. Then there's the question of who could argue that the account owner gave authority in the first place.

I think that if someone with an interest in the estate were to press a case in court, it would be decided outside the reach of Regulation E.

Yeah, thats exactly what I was trying to say.

I like thinking through these scenarios. I agree with John that either you'll negotiate some settlement or decide it in court if there is a claim and you don't want to pay.

I would opine that the executor becomes the owner and could place a claim. I also believe that the 60 day period applies. Yes, the executor is new, but it isn't your fault that the estate was handled poorly. You could have prevented the debits. That is how I'd handle it.