Skip to content
BOL Conferences
Learn More - Click Here!

Thread Options
#1528228 - 03/29/11 04:24 PM Reg E Disputes
NM Tiger Offline
Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 79
New Mexico
Husband comes in to dispute transaction made on wife's debit card. Can the bank require that the wife make the dispute. Husband says that he has spoken with wife she said she didn't do it.

Return to Top
Operations Compliance
#1528245 - 03/29/11 04:47 PM Re: Reg E Disputes NM Tiger
mzachau, CRCM Offline
Gold Star
mzachau, CRCM
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 470
San Francisco
If the husband is not on the account, I would require that the wife notify us verbally or provide written notice of the unauthorized transaction within 10 business days (we always require written notice). If you do not receive written notice from the wife within the 10 day period, no provisional credit would be required.

We require notification from an account holder.

Return to Top
#1528255 - 03/29/11 05:04 PM Re: Reg E Disputes mzachau, CRCM
NM Tiger Offline
Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 79
New Mexico
If husband is on the account it just wasn't his card you honor his dispute?

Return to Top
#1528263 - 03/29/11 05:10 PM Re: Reg E Disputes NM Tiger
rlcarey Offline
10K Club
rlcarey
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 83,336
Galveston, TX
mzachau - You might want to check the commentary.


Paragraph 6(b)(5)—Notice to Financial Institution

2. Notice by third party. Notice to a financial institution by a person acting on the consumer's behalf is considered valid under this section.
_________________________
The opinions expressed here should not be construed to be those of my employer: PPDocs.com

Return to Top
#1528296 - 03/29/11 05:34 PM Re: Reg E Disputes rlcarey
mzachau, CRCM Offline
Gold Star
mzachau, CRCM
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 470
San Francisco
Third party notice is considered valid, but what documentation would be collected to validate the person is acting on behalf of the customer?

Under the commentary, it provides an example that the customer is hospitalized and unable to contact or enter the bank. If there are no external reasons as to why the customer cannot make contact themselves, would the commentary still apply?

Return to Top
#1528352 - 03/29/11 06:14 PM Re: Reg E Disputes mzachau, CRCM
BrianC Offline
Power Poster
BrianC
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,710
Illinois
Yes it would still apply. Also, you did not mention if it was a joint account in which case regardless of whose card was used, either account owner can dispute a transaction under Reg E. Although your debit card processor will require a written letter from the cardholder in order for you to file a chargeback, you are still obligated under Reg E to investigate even without the cardholder letter.
In the event you are unable to obtain a cardholder letter to file a chargeback, you can always file a retrieval request which requires the merchant to provide the same information as a chargeback. The only difference is that the bank does not receive provisional credit the way it does with a chargeback. At least you will receive documentation to make a determination on the dispute. Also if the merchant fails to respond within 30 days of your request, you can file a chargeback without a cardholder letter.
_________________________
Sola Gratia, Sola Fides, Sola Scriptura, Solus Christus, Soli Deo Gloria!
www.tcaregs.com

Return to Top
#1528472 - 03/29/11 08:08 PM Re: Reg E Disputes BrianC
NM Tiger Offline
Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 79
New Mexico
Thank you so very much.

Return to Top
#1528633 - 03/30/11 12:36 PM Re: Reg E Disputes rlcarey
Bob The Banker Offline
Platinum Poster
Bob The Banker
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 958
Originally Posted By: rlcarey
mzachau - You might want to check the commentary.


Paragraph 6(b)(5)—Notice to Financial Institution

2. Notice by third party. Notice to a financial institution by a person acting on the consumer's behalf is considered valid under this section.



But the husband has no legal right to act on his wife's behalf unless he has court papers such as POA.

So are you sure this would even apply in this case?

Return to Top
#1529830 - 03/31/11 07:11 PM Re: Reg E Disputes Bob The Banker
John Burnett Offline
10K Club
John Burnett
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 40,086
Cape Cod
He has a legal right to do so because the regulation says so. The idea is for the notice to get to the bank effectively as quickly as possible, and the commentary is basically saying that a third party can run the errand if that's most convenient, and putting up artificial roadblocks to that notice isn't in the customer's best interest.
_________________________
John S. Burnett
BankersOnline.com
Fighting for Compliance since 1976
Bankers' Threads User #8

Return to Top

Moderator:  Andy_Z, John Burnett