Skip to content
Thread Options
#11989 - 04/02/01 09:10 PM ATM Robbery Q and A
Sheryl R Offline
Gold Star
Sheryl R
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 291
Cedar Rapids, IA,
The Security Section has a Question and Answer on ATM Robberies. It states that the bank would not have to reimburse the customer but I was wondering what regulation /code this interpretation is based on. Reg E? Thanks for your help.

Return to Top
Security - PUBLIC
#11990 - 04/03/01 02:24 AM Re: ATM Robbery Q and A
Andy_Z Offline
10K Club
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 27,546
On the Net
I think someone had a wishful lapse. Look at the definition of an unauhorized transfer. This can't be excluded unless the customer is in on it.

From the commentary:
2(m) Unauthorized Electronic Fund Transfer

3. Access device obtained through robbery or fraud. An unauthorized EFT includes a transfer initiated by a person who obtained the access device from the consumer through fraud or robbery.

4. Forced initiation. An EFT at an automated teller machine (ATM) is an unauthorized transfer if the consumer has been induced by force to initiate the transfer.

Andy Zavoina
Opinions stated are not necessarily that of my employer.

My opinions are not necessarily my employers.
Rules and Regs minus Relationships equals Resentment and Rebellion. John Maxwell

Return to Top
#11991 - 04/03/01 03:43 PM Re: ATM Robbery Q and A
RVFlyboy Offline
Power Poster
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,983
Soaring over Georgia
Andy is correct. The bank is obligated to reimburse the customer for all but $50. However, as the Q&A states, I'd recommend reimbursing the $50 also, as the reputation risk issues greatly exceed $50.

Opinions expressed are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.

Jim Bedsole, CRCM, CBA, CFSA, CAFP
My posts - my opinions

Return to Top

Moderator:  Andy_Z