Customer deposited a large amount of cash on Monday for example... Tuesday the customer goes to buy a car using the apple cash app. Multiple transactions post all for 500. After the 5th transaction, our fraud centered contacted the customer, to which she confirmed all the transactions were valid. Customer states there were so many because it kept declining. Asked if the customer was able to use an alternate means of payment for the car, which they replied they did not buy the car... I am assuming we are out the money, but is there something in Reg E I may be missing?

She confirmed they were valid and now she is claiming she did not do it? I am not following.

Have to agree with Randy here. If she verified that she authorized these transactions, these are not covered under Reg E. Your agreement with Visa or MC may require you to assist your customer (merchandise not received), but you aren't bound by Reg E timeframes nor will you have to provide provisional credit.

Couple of possible occurances as to what happened here:

1. Your customer was scammed because the "person" selling the car claimed not to receive the funds when they actually did. Cash app is a person to person transfer platform so there will be no chargeback rights for non-receipt of services/merchandise. Cash app provided the requested service by sending the transfers and the customer authorized them so no Reg E protection or V/MC chargeback rights. The customer is out the money.

2. Cash app has limits and occasionally will block transactions is considers to be suspicious. In these instances it still obtains an authorization for each attempted transaction, but it will not settle so the authorization holds may fall off in a few days and your customer will be fine.

Regardless of which of the above is correct, there is nothing the bank must or can do.

Customer contacts Cash App using a phone number she googled and found on the Internet. She was attempting to retract funds sent to an incorrect recipient. The individuals who 'helped' her actually defrauded her of almost $600 using two fraudulent transactions that she did 'approve' after they told her the debits wouldn't hit her account. I'm not well versed on these types of transactions - but since the app is tied to her debit card would this be considered a Reg E dispute? I'm leaning toward it not being one since she wasn't actually using the debit card.

Thoughts?

1. Did she authorize the debit(s)?
2. Was she charged the amount she authorized?

If the answer to both is, "Yes" then the transactions do not meet the definition of an "unauthorized" or "incorrect" EFT.

Unfortunately for her - yes she did. The people at Cash App (not the real ones) told her in order to 'fix' her problem she had to download another app. They tricked her into authorizing two payments for a total of around $600. While, obviously, I don't want the bank to be out the funds - I feel badly for her.

Thanks Brian for your response!

I have had the same thing happen to a cardholder, although I didn't know it until yesterday. Disputed 3 transactions as unauthorized in early August. I got a response back from Cash App yesterday which included name, email address and cell phone of the transactions, so I called the phone number Cash App supplied and it was the joint owner of the account. He told me he was having trouble with his Cash App so he googled a phone number and called it. It turned out to be the same type of fake representative as above.

My problem is that 1) the dispute is already in process as unauthorized, 2) he told me that he and the account owner are no longer married although he is still on the account and has a debit card, 3) the charges posted to the ex-wife's card (which is what Cash App was set up with. I revoked provisional credit on one transaction because it happened 24 hours before he talked to the fraudster and it matched previous transaction names and amounts. I did not revoke provisional credit on the other two. Do I have a case to revoke the provisional credit on those two transactions?

See the two questions in my post above. If the joint owner sent the payments to the fake representative using cash app, the charges are authorized and the correct amount is charged. Not a Reg E error.

Thank you Brian. I did not know if the circumstances would change the "authorization," given the fact that the ex-wife's card was used. I only have his statement from yesterday that they are no longer married.

In my opinion it doesn't matter if they are married or not. If he is still a joint owner on the account - that's the important part.

Agree with Skittles.

Skittles opinion is certainly valued here, but opinions aside, being a co-owner on an account carries with it certain rights and ownership of all the funds in the account is one of those rights. A joint account is "joint and several." He may have no ethical right to spend funds in an account he and she have agreed is his estranged or ex-wifes, but that matters not. There is no claim against a co-owner, that's for civil court.

Thank you all! I just wish that we could have the circumstances/stories up front instead of after the fact. Revoking provisional credit is my least favorite thing in the whole world to do (well at work it's my least favorite thing).