How long do we have to give a customer credit on an ATM dispute done in the US?
REG E- If provisional credit was provided to a customer and the merchant later credits the customer, is there a 5 business day window before provisional can be reversed?
We issue MasterCard debit cards. If a customer disputes a transaction where a PIN was used per Reg E and MasterCard, can we assess the $50.00 dollar liability? Card wasn't lost or stolen.
One of my members is disputing a transaction made with her debit card. The transaction came out of her account twice. Only the first transaction was authorized. I am being told that since it was not fraud it does not fall under Reg E guidelines. I believe they are wrong but I need proof. Please help.
My question is in regards to Reg E Liability and Provisional Credit.
My customer is disputing multiple charges (total of $212.77), and is liable for $50.
When do I enforce her liability? When giving her provisional credit, do I only give her PC for $162.77? Or do I give PC for the entire amount, and then when the investigation is done, do I then withdraw $50 as her liability?
If a REG E claim is represented by terminal owner, are they required to give us contact info that we can give to our customer so they can further dispute with terminal owner? Or are they only required to supply us valid documentation as to why they have denied our chargeback?
The BOL infovault [Reg E Error Resolution Timeframes from 07/21/08] stated that overall notification requirements of MasterCard are the same as Reg E & Visa with the exception that Visa requires provisional credit within 5 business days while MC and Reg E require provisional credit by the 10th business days. Is the MC requirement still the 10th business day?
June 15, 2011 titled Debit Cards - Error Resolution Problems Solved. In that training, there were slides on cancelled recurring transactions that stated that these types of transactions were not covered by Reg E. Could you please provide the reference in Reg E where it supports that a transaction that occurs after the recurring transaction is cancelled is not considered unauthorized and therefore not covered by the regulation.
We have a customer who went online and provided his card number for a service and after the fact felt that it was a fraudulent website. Since he did in fact authorize the transaction I believe that this would not fall under Reg E error resolution process. What are your thoughts on this?
Reg E - crediting interest in error resolution: Part 1005.11(c)(2) = Forty-five day period. If the financial institution is unable to complete its investigation within 10 business days, the institution may take up to 45 days from receipt of a notice of error to investigate and determine whether an error occurred, provided the institution does the following: (i) Provisionally credits the consumer's account in the amount of the alleged error (including interest where applicable) within 10 business days of receiving the error notice. Examiners have never criticized this before, but we haven't been crediting interest back on the amount of the dispute. Does everyone really do that? The interest is only mentioned in the 45-day rule, so if we give credit within first 10 business days then no interest credit required?