We have a customer who placed in writing that they were aware of a particular unauthorized transaction which posted to their account on may 5th. Since they did not report the incident until 2 weeks after, it allowed for 7 other fraudulent debit card transactions to post to their account. Customer has filed a dispute for all trans? Based on the customer liability disclosure, isn't the customer responsible for up to $500 for not informing us of the incident when he initially found out about it.
If we are going to refund the total amount less $500 due to the aforementioned, what is your advise on the information that needs to be stated in the letter that we produce for them?

Vidaxi - Did the dispute include the "loss or theft of an access device"? From my understanding, if the dispute doesn't involve the "loss or theft of an access device" you are looking at the 60 day time frames related to the periodic statements.

Borrowed the language below from John Burnett in the linked thread.

"If the transaction was not authorized and either (1) it was not a card transaction or (2) it was a card transaction but not completed with an accepted access device or (3) done with the consumer's authorized access device but the consumer was not aware of the loss or theft of the access device, and it occurred before the end of that 60-day period (it would have to if it's the only unauthorized transaction), the bank has the privilege of absorbing the loss."

https://www.bankersonline.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/1836504/Regulation_E_Consumer_Liabilit[b][/b]

If the card was always in the customers possession, there was no loss or theft of the card, does the above statement still apply? If the card was cloned and used to process unauthorized transactions and the customer was aware of the first unauthorized transaction but did not report it until 2 weeks later allowing for multiple transactions to post, are we still liable for the entire amount or does the $500 customer liability fall into this scenario.