Answer:
Think about what your customer's liability for those transactions would have been if she had entered her claim in April. You would have figured out first if the transactions were unauthorized. Assuming that they were, you would have had to figure out when she realized her access card was missing and then started the $50/$500 calculation. Let's assume her card was not missing (or she was not aware of it). You would have had to figure out when the statement showing the February transactions was delivered and then determined the date sixty days after that delivery. Transactions occurring on or before that 60th day would not be your customer's liability; those occurring after the 60th day would be your customer's responsibility
.Those rules do not change if the claim is made later. The bank was notified on April 9 of the transactions, so any unauthorized transaction made after that date would arguably be the bank's responsibility even if the customer didn't lodge a formal claim.
Think of it this way: Would the bank have been able to prevent any of those unauthorized transfers if the claim had been entered on April 9? No. Under Section 205.6, your customer's liability for those transactions doesn't change just because notice is delayed for several months.
First published on BankersOnline.com 11/24/08
print
share