We have a customer who has filled out the EFT claim form claiming that a POS item that is showing that the PIN was used is an unauthorized/fraudulent transaction. Operations talked to him and asked if the card was stolen. He said no and that there were no other items on the statement aside from this one to indicate that the card was compromised. Is there something in Reg E that limits our liability when the PIN is used and the customer has no explanation was to it could have been compromised?
What do I need to know before I allow an estate account Internet Banking access? The accounts have been opened properly and the representative will only be allowed to transfer funds between the two accounts titled the same.
Currently our bank requires our customers to download the e-statement sign up sheet online to demonstrate their capability to download and read their future e-statements. This extra step sometimes deters customers from signing up. Can we simply add wording onto the e-statement agreement stating something along the lines of- customer acknowledges their ability to read and download the e-statement? Everything I have read doesn't seem to clarify what customers can do to demonstrate their ability to access the e-statement.
Do you know how other Financial Institutions are handling Over Dispense disputes (ATM)? We are under the impression it is a Reg E claim.
ATM disputes fall under Reg E. For example: when a customer's account is debited twice and he only requested a withdrawal once from the ATM? Is there a best practice?