Client states he authorized a transaction using his debit card with Walmart that was unsuccessful on its end, but reflects as settled and deducted from his account. Walmart could not provide him with a receipt and refused to let him take the merchandise.

We initiated a merchant dispute (non-Reg E) since he'd authorized the transaction but hadn't received the merchandise.

He is arguing with us and states it is Reg E because it was incorrectly debited from his account when the transaction failed at Walmart, and he didn't get a receipt and Reg E defines an error as EFTs not identified under 1005.9 (didn't get a receipt).

(1) Types of transfers or inquiries covered. The term “error” means:
(ii) An incorrect electronic fund transfer to or from the consumer's account;
(vi) An electronic fund transfer not identified in accordance with § 1005.9

I've never had a claim like this before - any thoughts?

I get these fairly often and take them as Reg E and provide provisional credit. I view them as an "incorrect electronic fund transfer to or from the consumer's account." The consumer is being told that the transaction did not process. I do the same with duplicate payments when a member is told the "transaction didn't go through.

1. Failure of the merchant to provide a receipt is not a Reg E error under 1005.9. See the commentary:

Receipts not furnished due to inadvertent error. If a receipt is not provided to the consumer because of a bona fide unintentional error, such as when a terminal runs out of paper or the mechanism jams, no violation results if the financial institution maintains procedures reasonably adapted to avoid such occurrences.

2. The "unidentified transaction" error in 1005.11 refers to how a transaction is identified on the perioid statement in 1005.9(b). The transaction was properly identified as Wal-Mart on the periodic statement, so again, this does not meet the definition of an error. Again the commentary helps us out.

Information obtained from others. While financial institutions must maintain reasonable procedures to ensure the integrity of data obtained from another institution, a merchant, or other third parties, verification of each transfer that appears on the periodic statement is not required.


He authorized the charge and was charged the correct amount. The fact that Wal-Mart failed to give the customer the merchandise is a error on their side, not the bank's side. You are correct to attempt to assist the customer through the chargeback process, but this is not a Reg E error.

Thank you BrianC! My goal is to learn something new every day.