Skip to content
BOL Conferences
Thread Options
#531470 - 04/13/06 02:36 PM Reg E Investigations
Gotwood Offline
Platinum Poster
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 715
I'm asking multiple questions here, so I'd appreciate any input on any of these.

Our front line personnel are supposed to get all the information they can from a consumer when completing a dispute form. On occassions, the research department needs to contact the consumer to ask additional questions. (1) If the customer does not return phone calls or provide us with addtional information, is that justification enough to deny a claim?

(2) Also, is the "written confirmation" just a signature, or can we require them to answer certain questions?

We are seeing an increase in the number of fraudulent disputes (by the customer), particularly with internet claims. For example, they say they clicked on a pop up ad to get a free DVD. They (consumer) claims there was nothing in them telling them they would have to agree to sign up for a 6-month trial of a product/magazine, etc and all they had to do was pay $3.95 for shipping and handling. I've clicked into these ads before and the fine print & confusing language does say you will agree to sign up for a trial period. Trying to find the actual merchant is a scavanger hunt. (3) How do you handle these situations?

Return to Top
eBanking / Technology
#531471 - 04/13/06 03:41 PM Re: Reg E Investigations
Bankster Offline
Gold Star
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 440
Midwest
We required the customer to write a statement explaining the transfer that occured was not authorized by them and any other circumstances that surround it. Basically everything the customer voices to us, we have them write in a statement along with their signature.
_________________________
It's karma, baby.

Return to Top
#531472 - 04/14/06 01:31 PM Re: Reg E Investigations
Banking Bard Offline
100 Club
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 191
Kentucky
You cannot take the lack of return calls or information itself as reason to deny the claim.

However, accepting the offer with that fine print is granting authorization. Just because the customer didn't read it doesn't remove that authorization. If your research shows that the fine print was there, and the customer doesn't return calls to give you more information to refute that, then you should be able to deny the claim on the basis that it was authorized.
_________________________
The above is my opinion, and is frequently valued at USD 2ยข or less.

Return to Top
#531473 - 04/14/06 04:40 PM Re: Reg E Investigations
Andy_Z Offline
10K Club
Andy_Z
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 27,748
On the Net
(1) If the customer does not return phone calls or provide us with additional information, is that justification enough to deny a claim?

A-1) No. You make your decision based on the information you have. Realistically, I'd return your call if I was due money. What might be keeping them from doing this? For this reason, you should be diligent and may consider re-opening the claim. But if you asked what you thought was needed, then needed more and got no response, it isn't reason for denial but leans me toward that decision, in many cases.

(2) Also, is the "written confirmation" just a signature, or can we require them to answer certain questions?

A-2) Generally I think of the confirmation as what is necessary to initiate the claim, ID the consumer, the account and what/why they believe there is an error. If you ask for more and they give it, great. But it isn't a requirement, at all, unless they want provisional. What this is meant NOT to do is to require police reports, Notarized affidavits, etc. You can't make them go through hoop after hoop to exercise a right they already have under the Act.
_________________________
AndyZ CRCM
My opinions are not necessarily my employers.
R+R-R=R+R
Rules and Regs minus Relationships equals Resentment and Rebellion. John Maxwell

Return to Top
#531474 - 04/18/06 07:41 PM Re: Reg E Investigations
Compliancer Offline
Gold Star
Compliancer
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 334
San Francisco, CA
Andy is correct about the initiation of a claim. All the customer has to do is allege the error to the satisfaction that you can identify customer, the transaction (not the amount - you must assume the entire amount unless you are specifically advised of a different amount) and the error that has occurred. Verbal communication of this information must be accepted as adequate notice so long as it occurs within the required timeframe outlined in Reg. E. The fact you may need more info/doc, say for a Chargeback or for a Fraud package, is irrelevent under the view of Reg. E. The onus to investigate the dispute falls on your shoulders, period.

However, that does not mean you cannot begin your investigation anyway. Order the draft, call the merchant, or attempt the Chargeback even if you are lacking required info/doc, whichever you think best applies to the situation at hand. On the chance you receive any NEW information that SUBSTANTIALLY addresses the dispute, send it to the consumer along with a letter that states you will assume the transaction to be valid unless you hear back by X date (be reasonable in your timeframe). If the customer still does not respond to that information, you can then close the dispute and re-debit the account.

One warning - all of these action, including any re-debit you attempt, must take place within the applicable 45- or 90-day window of resolution allowed to you under Reg. E.
_________________________
My opinions do not necessarily reflect those of all the voices in my head.

Return to Top
#531475 - 04/19/06 11:33 PM Re: Reg E Investigations
Search_Me Offline
Power Poster
Search_Me
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,433
In my Strappy Heeled Sandals!
I have a question... about the statement made... "contact the merchant"... is this something your bank does or is this required?

I only ask because when I first started working with the UET, an auditor reviewed my work and said that I was doing way to much foot work(I was calling the merchants etc). She said that I should just take the customer's word and have them fill out all the papers and such that are required.. and give them provisional credit within the 10 day frame unless I had found information within our own banking records that indicted that the customer was not giving us all the correct information...such as debits hitting their account for several months, etc.

Just wondering if I was given the wrong information?

Thanks
_________________________
She who dies with the most shoes WINS! grin

Return to Top
#531476 - 04/25/06 08:05 PM Re: Reg E Investigations
Compliancer Offline
Gold Star
Compliancer
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 334
San Francisco, CA
If you cannot identify the required elements for the disputed transaction, then you are allowed to contact the customer since a proper dispute has not been initiated. However, if you have been provided the minimal information I mentioned previously, then yes, you should "just take the customer's word". You can contact the customer for more information, even if you have those required elements, but you cannot render a judgement on the dispute due to a lack of, or insufficient, response, since any additional information is not required under Reg. E. You don't even have to contact the merchant but the only other recourse is to write off the amount.

It would be best to use the pre-formatted Visa and MasterCard dispute forms contained in their respective operating manuals. Your agents should be educated on what Reg. E. requires so that they do not deny a proper claim upfront; but it would allow them to ask the types of questions it seems you need later. You can then look into pursuing the dispute under the appplicable association violation. In most, but not all, instances using these automated processes is much more efficient than doing the work manually (calling the merchant).
_________________________
My opinions do not necessarily reflect those of all the voices in my head.

Return to Top
#531477 - 04/26/06 11:24 AM Re: Reg E Investigations
Andy_Z Offline
10K Club
Andy_Z
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 27,748
On the Net
Sidebar, David, have you checked your private messages?
_________________________
AndyZ CRCM
My opinions are not necessarily my employers.
R+R-R=R+R
Rules and Regs minus Relationships equals Resentment and Rebellion. John Maxwell

Return to Top
#531478 - 08/23/06 07:30 PM Re: Reg E Investigations
M&M Offline
Platinum Poster
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 530
Midwest
For a signature based unauthorized EFT, if we've asked for a signed document and one is not returned, I know we do not have to provide provisional credit or follow 206.11. However, I'm being told by our processing group that without anything signed, they cannot submit the item as a chargeback, and that they cannot obtain any additional documentation. Thus, all they have is bank records. Based on those records, I'm not sure we have a firm stance that the transaction was authorized or unauthorized. In these instances, I don't believe we can deny based on lack of signature to pursue a chargeback. So, do we take the loss? Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Thanks.

Return to Top
#531479 - 09/06/06 03:52 PM Re: Reg E Investigations
Andy_Z Offline
10K Club
Andy_Z
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 27,748
On the Net
You'd look at any other evidence if the transaction was authorized or not. Does the customer shop there? Are they disputing the charge or the amount of the charge? Were they somewhere else that day?

My bottom line would be that if I didn't have cooperation from the customer wanting their money back, I'd say I am on the fence and leaning toward "authorized" as nothing indicates otherwise.
_________________________
AndyZ CRCM
My opinions are not necessarily my employers.
R+R-R=R+R
Rules and Regs minus Relationships equals Resentment and Rebellion. John Maxwell

Return to Top

Moderator:  Andy_Z