We had a bank come back to us 480 days after an EFT posted (3/1/2003) to our account as a payment towards a credit card advising that it was an unauthorized EFT and requesting we return the money back to them. Are we obligated to return this money back to the bank considering the time that has passed and we are taking a loss as well? The bank is requesting the record of authorization for the TEL entry, is this the tape of our cardholder requesting the payment be taken from the checking account. If this cannot be provided, are we liable for the transaction? Since it is a tape our cardholder giving us auth to take the payment, does this aliviate us from liability? Can I first request from them a copy of their written request/signed affdavit disputing the transaction before providing the record of authorization? Thanks

I agree with NotALawyer. The 2004 edition of the NACHA rules states in the Operating Guidelines portion (Section IV, Subsection F, Part 1 on page OG 183) that "In the event that a consumer claims that he did not authorize the Originator to transmit a TEL entry, the RDFI may transmit a return for the TEL entry to its ACH Operator by the ACH Operator's deposit deadline for the return to be made available to the ODFI no later than the opening of business on the banking day following the sixtieth calendar day following the settlement date of the TEL entry."

So, while you are obligated to honor the RDFI's request that the TEL authorization (which must be kept on file for no less than two years) that is retained by the Originator be sent to the RDFI within ten banking days, this seems to me to be a sideshow to the real issue about accepting a return of the TEL debit from the RDFI. I would maintain that such a return is grossly untimely and you can accept it if you choose but are not obligated within the NACHA framework to do so.

Quote:

---

return is grossly untimely and you can accept it if you choose but are not obligated within the NACHA framework to do so

---

Let's not be too hasty. The NACHA rules allow you to accept this item back "if your customer does not suffer a loss." Additionally, if you or your customer can't prove the item was authorized, then I would take the item back, and let the originator and receiver duke it out. You as the ODFI do not want to be caught in the middle of this.

NOw, there is an issue if the originator no longer has an account with you and you have no one to pass the return back to. In that case, you would dishonor the return and make them take it outside of ACH.

Thank you everyone that responded. We are taking a loss so will not be accepting these.