A Non customer did not receive money from the bank's ATM because the transaction was cancelled by the customers bank.

However, the customer told us two weeks later that the account was still debited by the foreign bank.

Is our bank fully responsible as per Reg E and provide provisional credit?

If I am understanding your story correctly... Non customer used your bank's ATM, their bank cancelled transaction. Non customer is calling you and saying their account was debited.

The cardholder should make the dispute with their bank saying they did an ATM transaction and did not receive their funds. That bank would be responsible for provisional credit, investigating and disputing with you. They communicates to you through a dispute process (typically through card processors and/or Visa or MasterCard). You would then have to investigate and respond to the bank.

Not your customer. Not your problem. Send him to the people who gave him a Reg E disclosure that explained how disputed transactions were to be handled.

What Ken said. Much more succinct that me!

Update - after further discussing with the branch - the transaction on the Pulse report said "Authorized and Cancelled - 108 Cash Dispense Error."

Doesn't matter if the ATM imploded, they still have to dispute with their bank.

LOL! Thanks for the good news!

Yes, they need to originate the dispute through their bank.

If your bank did reimburse someone, they could also dispute through their bank and you would have to pay again. Most people are honest and just don't understand how it works. It's simply a matter of education, we don't expect the general public to be experts in our field anymore than we are experts in their fields.

Reviving this thread as I was just researching this issue (which is how I wound up here)...

1005.11(a)(1)(v) speaks to a "consumer's" receipt of an incorrect amount of money from an electronic terminal. Wouldn't a non-customer using your ATM be considered a "consumer" and therefore wouldn't the ATM owning bank have to take the claim from the consumer (if that is who they chose to report it to - obviously they can report to their own FI) if there was a dispense error? I think I am getting too hung up on the word "consumer" as opposed to "customer" in this scenario but it is nagging away at me.

Sec. 1005.11 Procedures for resolving errors.*
(a) Definition of error. (1) Types of transfers or inquiries covered. The term “error” means:
(i) An unauthorized electronic fund transfer;
(ii) An incorrect electronic fund transfer to or from the consumer's account;
(iii) The omission of an electronic fund transfer from a periodic statement;
(iv) A computational or bookkeeping error made by the financial institution relating to an electronic fund transfer;
(v) The consumer's receipt of an incorrect amount of money from an electronic terminal;

Sec. 1005.2 Definitions.*
(e) “Consumer” means a natural person.

The ATM user has to dispute with their bank. What was outlined above (particularly that fun little bit about the ATM imploding) is still accurate. I suggest to our ATM users that they use the receipt to dispute the transaction with their bank.

Correct. The card issuer is the one that handles the EFT claim.

Yep. The ATM owner has no way of knowing how or if the disputed transaction impacted the cardholder's account.