I'm having a difficult time understanding the error resolution requirements for instances where a remittance transfer is not made available to the recipient by the date disclosed to the sender.

(c)(2)(ii)(A) & (B) address the issue, but the way I'm reading them we'd need to refund the amount transferred or an amount appropriate to resolve the error, and additionally we'd need to refund all fees. That seems like an enormous penalty for a minor error so I'm pretty sure my interpretation isn't right, but I'm not sure what I'm missing. Can anyone offer some clarification?

Let me rephrase my question as a hypothetical scenario based on my current interpretation of the regulation.

Customer A comes in and wants to send $5,000 to Peru. We process the wire and disclose as required. The disclosure says the funds will be available to the recipient in 5 days. As it turns out, the funds don't become available to the recipient for 7 days. Customer A complains and files an error notice. We investigate and confirm the funds were made available two days after our disclosure said they'd be available. In order to resolve the error, we now have to give Customer A $5,000 + fees out of our own pocket even though the recipient did end up with the transfer, but 2 days later than we disclosed?

One of the options is to make available to the designated recipient at no additional charge an amount appropriate to resolve the error. If there is no harm to the recipient due to the delayed receipt, I think that no remittance to the recipient is need to resolve the matter. However, if the recipient incurred damages due to the delay (a drop in the exchange rate, a penalty for a late rent payment, something else), a small payment might be called for. Arriving at what that amount is will be a challenge, I suppose.

Of course, a refund of the fee you charged to the Sender is also called for in this circumstance.

I hasten to add that the Bureau did not even address such a circumstance in its Commentary. My response reflects what I believe to be a fair resolution of such a situation. An examiner might not read things that way.

Thanks for your help John. I think what you've described is reasonable and defensible should an examiner question it.

And I can assure you that my bank (and others I'd assume) would shut down our international wire operation before we start providing full refunds in cases where the recipient did end up receiving the funds, albeit later than disclosed.

Do to this, we are debating how many days to disclose, we are thinking of at least 7 days. The disclosure does say that they may receive the funds earlier. I'm with you, we should stop doing these types of wires. We have to comply just because we did more than 250, but we are small community bank.