Question:

An ATM Network encounters a system posting file error in which cardholders have duplicate PIN transactions post to their bank account and ATM deposits that did not post.

Due to the ATM network error, if a cardholder subsequently contacts the Bank and states their account was charged twice for a POS/PIN transaction and/or they did not receive credit for an ATM deposit does the cardholder's inquiry require the financial institution to have dispute form completed by the cardholder whenever they contact the financial institution regardless as to whether or not the ATM network will send a corrected file during overnight posting?

First, Reg E never requires that a customer submit a claim in writing. The Bank may elect to require written confirmation as it can withhold provisional credit if it doesn't receive written confirmation by the 10th business day. However, since the bank has already identified what happened and has taken steps to address with its vendor, this comment from 1005.11(b) may be of interest to you.

5. Discovery of error by institution. The error resolution procedures of this section apply when a notice of error is received from the consumer, and not when the financial institution itself discovers and corrects an error.

Remember that as part of your corrective action you must credit customers for lost interest due to late ATM deposits and refund any overdraft fees, minimum balance fees, etc. that they incurred as a result of the late deposit or duplicate postings. You may have a lot of manual work ahead of you depending on how your core handles backdated transactions.

Yes, we require written confirmation and certainly not looking forward to all the work ahead.

Thank You for the quick response!

So we require a written notification. Bank was contacted verbally 10 business days ago. At this time there is no written notification received. From what I am reading in the regulation and now above, it does not seem that we are required to complete the provisional credit. We are sending the customer a letter stating we cannot process the dispute and are requiring 1, the notification in writing and 2, a copy of the agreement that they say they were overcharged by the vendor.

So we did try to investigate the claim, evidenced by reaching out to FISERV, but unable to complete the investigation due to due to lack of information.

Does anyone see any compliance issues with this approach.

I would not be putting in you are denying the claim because they failed to notify you in writing. That is not a requirement, other than to receive provisional credit.

And you still must investigate the dispute in the required timeframe.

Right we are not denying the claim but asking for more information and we investigated to the point that we could. So far all we have is a verbal notification that they were overcharged by so and so $$$. We have nothing else to go by at this point. No supporting information and FISERV also is advising s they cannot go further without the information requested.

Either way though, I guess we are safe in not giving the credit because we did not get the written request. Would you say that is correct?

You are still required to investigate - even if FISERV won't. So - if you can't investigate then, my opinion, you must refund the monies to the customer. It's a Catch 22; however the regulation is fairly clear. The bank just can't leave the file hanging out there waiting.

Thanks.

I agree with what the others have said. Reg E requires you to investigate and does not require a written notification for you to do so. FISERV's requirement for a signed statement is between and you FISERV. Their refusal to proceed cannot negatively impact your customer.