The bank received an ACH debit entry on October 11, 2019 with a settlement date of October 15, 2019. Monday was a holiday so Saturday, October 12, was a non-processing day on Tuesday's business day. The transaction was memo-posted and the funds were deducted from the customer’s “available balance” on the morning of October 12, 2019. However, it didn't hard post the account until the end of Tuesday's business day. An external auditor cited us for this by mentioning that the memo post was prior the settlement date of October 15, 2019, and it is prohibited by the rules.
When I contacted Fiserv, they mentioned that there was no way around this. Is this really a violation of NACHA Settlement Date rules? If so, any advice on how to avoid this from happening in the future?
Are we required to provide a copy of the NACHA rules to our customers that originate ACH transactions?
Is it a NACHA violation if the bank does not have an accurate signed auto payment authorization form on file? For example, customer has signed a document authorizing the bank to pull payments from account 1234567, but the bank has transposed numbers and is attempting to pull from 1234576.
I have a customer that pays his utility bill by direct debit. He has informed us that he just noticed on his banking (checking) statement that 2 ACH debits are debited from his account monthly by my company, and have been for the past 7 years. He never noticed the second debit because he keeps a large balance in his checking account. Upon review we found that the second monthly debit was a direct debit charge from a different consumer. He claims this is fraud and the debits were unauthorized for 7 years. They want to recover all of the unauthorized funds stating there is no time limit and we should follow the States statue limitations of seven years. Is this correct? I can't find any time limits in any of the NACHA rules.
When returning an item, which deadline rule should apply? 60 calendar days from transaction (NACHA) or 60 days from the Statement date (Reg E)?
Does the following safe harbor also apply to identifying recurring check card debits vs. one time check card debits for the purposes of the customer's right to stop payment? Fed Commentary for Opt in 1005.17 ii. Coding of transactions. A financial institution complies with the rule if it adapts its systems to identify debit card transactions as either one-time or recurring. If it does so, the financial institution may rely on the transaction's coding by merchants, other institutions, and other third parties as a one-time or a preauthorized or recurring debit card transaction.
We use a Processing Agent for our online banking funds transfer to other FIs. We have a situation where our member initiated a funds transfer via our online banking to transfer funds from another FI to us. These transactions processed as usual. Now the other FI is stating it is fraud. We are trying to determine our liability (funds have already been spent and it is past the 60 days). It was our understanding that the processing agent would verify the supplied information for things like name match. Our member's name isn't even CLOSE to the individual that the other FI says the funds came from. Is this 3rd party responsible for not verifying this information or do we in fact have to pay back these funds at our loss?
Is ACH governed like a wire transfer? What electronic transfers methods are NOT regulated?
Is the verbal stop payment on a check still only good for fourteen days? I just want to make sure there haven't been any recent changes.
How to Implement Risk-Based OFAC Monitoring Practices
Five steps to risk assessment; ten practices for monitoring
by Timothy R. White, CAMS