Why can't we hold a customer or member liable for having the PIN with the card?
If an EFT claim is made long after the statement is sent showing the transaction, the rules of investigation don't apply. So why do we investigate any of these claims?
If a cardholder authorized unlimited use of her access device to a 3rd party but did not notify the bank, is she then liable for charges she is claiming to be "unauthorized?" We would also argue that she did not exercise reasonable care to safeguard her device.
The opt-in requirements under 1005.17(b)(1) state that a bank "shall not assess a fee or charge on a consumer's account for paying an ATM or one-time card transaction."
Does the "one-time" term mean that we cannot charge a fee on the first transaction of two or more being paid and then we can charge a fee on the second when the consumer has not opted-in? For example, if a customer has not opted-in and an ATM causes an overdraft into the consumers account and then two EFTs are received and paid on the same day as the ATM for processing, can we charge or not an overdraft fee for any of the EFTs? On subsequent days, if the account is overdrawn by EFTs, can a fee for overdraft be charged?
I have questions pertaining to Reg E, specifically Card Disputes.
1) Can the Bank require that a customer sign a dispute affidavit after they have called to notify the bank of fraudulent activity? If so, how many days do they have to sign it? Can we wait for the signature before starting our investigation?
2) Can the Bank request the customer to resolve the disputed item with the merchant prior to the Bank taking over the investigation?
There has been quite a bit of debit card fraud occurring at the bank with various customers. Should this require a SAR filing regardless of the dollar amount?
We want to promote debit card usage and management wants to have a monthly drawing for a $25 gift card. I think that this is not permitted since it would not allow non-customers to enter and bank customers with debit cards are the only ones who can win - am I correct?
We have seen other banks do this in our area, so management thinks it is just fine.
We received notice from our core processor that we will be charged for a debit card transaction that is not our customer, the card is not on us and the merchant is not a customer. We are disputing this with our core processor but they say we will be charged for the transaction. Why can this transaction not be returned when it wasn't on us? I have no idea how it reached our core processor and was processed for our bank.
Why can't we hold customers liable for carrying their PIN with their card?
If a consumer purchased tires and later claimed they were defective and they filed a Reg E claim, but refused to go back to the merchant, can we deny his claim?