I'm looking for anyone that has experience with this and how you handle those that turn down the service. Do you require them to sign an acknowledgement stating they will be responsible for all fraudulent transactions that pass through their business account should they decline?
We are seeing a large uptick in fraud and Management would like to institute this process. I worry because it is a paid service that if a depositor declines will be criticized for not treating all accounts in the same manner.

Additionally, has your bank found a way other than positive pay to help limit business transaction losses?

This is a question for your legal counsel. Would such an acknowledgement hold up in court when a large client takes a large loss and then sues you claiming they didn't understand what they were signing?

Or another question. Is a customer who refuses to partner with you in mitigate fraud risk and wants the bank to have all the risk worth keeping as a customer?

As for alternative methods, some automated monitoring products may offer alerts that generate based on gaps in check numbers or transactions of certain predetermined dollar amounts. Some banks still go through the arduous process of comparing signatures for checks over certain dollar thresholds although I think most are turning more towards technology.

Thank you, Legal is definitely involved.

our deposit contract specifically spells out the timeframe a commercial customer has to notify the bank of 1) fraudulent check item and 2) unauthorized ACH. It also states we have products that assist in managing this, but it is the clients responsibility to review and report daily if fraudulent.

Ditto what Happy said and a previous employer I worked for did have a commercial customer sue the bank for requirements of a business account found in our account disclosure. The courts ruled in favor of the bank and its account disclosure wording. We did not take the loss.