Click to return to BOL home page
Banker Store Read A Reg Vendor Connect Career Connect Learning Connect Bankers Information Network

   

















    Site Map

    Our Sponsors

    Home















Compliance Gurus
Lending Gurus
Security Gurus
Marketing Gurus
Technology Gurus
eBanking Gurus

Print Friendly! Email This Article! Discuss NOW!



Possible Red Flag on New Account Opening
by John Burnett, BOL Guru
BIO AND CONTACT INFO

Question: A corporation has two relatively inactive business accounts at the same bank. The president of the corporation goes into a separate branch of the bank and opens a third account. He signs the bank's form resolution and the signature card. The two old accounts, however, have three persons on the signature card. Money from one old account is then transferred into the new account and a large corporate check is deposited into the new account. Then, one of the signers on the old account (who is an equal shareholder in the corporation and co-president) complains that the bank made a mistake by permitting the other "co-president" to open the new account, because he is excluded from access to the funds. He said there was never a shareholder's meeting and the new resolution was never passed by the corporation. To what extent can the bank rely on the resolution submitted? Did the bank have to notify the other co-signers of the new account, or investigate the validity of the resolution? Should a red-flag been raised by the existence of the other two accounts and the fact that they had three signers? Once notified, what should the bank do?

Answer: The bank, in spite of its multiple locations, should be presumed to have a single information database, if you will. I believe the bank should be held to the knowledge of the pre-existing accounts.

The fact that the "resolution" was apparently not signed by the corporate clerk or secretary is another red flag. Accounts should not be opened based on the "say so" of a single officer.

Once the bank had the knowledge that something was amiss, it should have frozen the account in question, and contacted its attorney ASAP.

First published on BankersOnline.com 10/6/03



Home | Compliance | Lending | Operations | Security | Marketing | Technology | eBanking
BOL Archives    Privacy Policy    Important Disclaimer   Recommend This Site !   Contact Us


BankersOnline is a free service made possible by the generous support of our advertisers and sponsors. Advertisers and sponsors are not responsible for site content. Please help us keep BankersOnline FREE to all banking professionals. Support our advertisers and sponsors by clicking through to learn more about their products and services.