The commentary to Reg E, 205.6(b)2 states 'negligence by the consumer cannot be used as the basis for imposing greater liability than is permissible under Reg. E.' Am I imposing greater liability on the consumer by stating in my initial disclosure that 'You will notbe liable for any unauthorized transactions using your Debit Card, when used for point-of-sale transactions, if you can demonstrate that you have exercised reasonable care in safeguarding your card from the risk of loss or theft.'

Yes - no can do.

I agree with Randy. "Reasonable care" is not a defined term and is subjective. Defined it may have some weight (see below.). But you can't say that if the customer doesn't meet your expectations they have greater liability than they would otherwise under "E". Which is, in a way, how your disclosure would read.

Now, if applicable debit card rules require some degree of security to make a claim valid and you enforce those rules, you would be on target so long as you are not making it tougher than Reg. E limits. MC has a requirement, I believe, that reasonable care has to be taken. This is an unclear term but an egregious violation would stand up. This only gets you out of the zero liability, however, not Reg. E.