Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bank of America has lost Zelle transfers for many customers

old.reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 377 posts

Re: Bank of America has lost Zelle transfers for many customers

#251

Post by ceejayoz »

snotrockets wrote: post #245
ceejayoz wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sending money to a scammer tends to be an authorized transfer; you made it yourself, intentionally. The Zelle page you said itself states "Because you authorized the payment, you may not be able to get your money back." I would not hang my hat on a Regulation E complaint in this scenario.

Zelle can write that water are dry, it will not make it so. The customer intended to authorize a non-scammy transfer, but was scammed into authorizing himself into a fraud. As such, regulation E holds. And if there's something bank fears is someone reminding their regulator the bank may not be following regulation to the letter. It has been made very clear that regulation E is meant to held banks responsible for misu…

> As such, regulation E holds.

I've cited the exact wording of Regulation E to you elsewhere; it's pretty clear this scenario is not an unauthorized transfer.

Re: Bank of America has lost Zelle transfers for many customers

#252

Post by pkaye »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #220
pkaye wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does Texas has so many reported burglaries though? https://www.statista.com/statistics/232539/burglaries-report...

1: The data is obviously completely bogus unless you believe there were only 11 burglaries in Florida in all of 2021. You can't draw anything from it. 2: Texas is the second most populous state, so total # has little value. You need the per capita number to understand whether their might be some deterrence happening. Unfortunately the Statista data is garbage, so it isn't worth calculating.

So where is a good source of data?

Re: Bank of America has lost Zelle transfers for many customers

#253

Post by Loughla »

xattt wrote: post #233
browningstreet wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work for a bank in the US, and not one of the names you hear associated with scandals all the time. The level of redundancy and HA built into our everything is why our jobs are so boring and slow. We also use a core banking platform that lots of other banks use and it's properly engineered for the kind of enterprise performance we'd all expect. There are certainly problems in banking, but the FDIC protections are a…

I’ll be the 10th man and add to the nihilism. Consumer protections are there not for the consumer, but to create some sort of artificial social stability through recourse and take the wind out of any social uprising.

I'm confused by your nihilism. If the outcome is that I can get my money back (and I would argue that 250k covers a VAST majority of people, and then some), isn't that a fair trade for me not killing and eating a banker?

Re: Bank of America has lost Zelle transfers for many customers

#254

Post by snotrockets »

Karunamon wrote: post #227
ceejayoz wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sending money to a scammer tends to be an authorized transfer; you made it yourself, intentionally. The Zelle page you said itself states "Because you authorized the payment, you may not be able to get your money back." I would not hang my hat on a Regulation E complaint in this scenario.

I think you are both sort of correct. The pertinent bit of regulation E[1] appears to hinge on how the fraudulent transfer was done. It looks like if you as the authorized person transfer money to somebody because you were scammed into doing so, then the regulation does not apply. However, if you were scammed into giving up your, say, debit card number or password, and this was used to to initiate transfers, the regu…

The intent (which is how law and regulation are interpreted), as expressed in the regulator comments on the regulation (e.g. 2(m)-4 at the link above), was to make sure the cost, to consumer, of using electronic services, is the same as having a human do the task.

Just imagine calling, or going to the bank to make a similar transfer to a scammy zelle one. I assure you the person you'd be speaking to would have to ask you some very pointed questions about that transfer, and not out of the goodness of their hearts.

banks try to replace humans with software to reduce their costs; reg E basically is "you're only allowed to harm your own workforce doing so, not your customers"

Re: Bank of America has lost Zelle transfers for many customers

#255

Post by Spoom »

nomagicbullet wrote: post #178
eclipxe wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's fairly common, most banks have "overdraft protection" that works exactly how you described.

It is not exactly the same thing. The commenter you are responding to is looking to avoid overdraft, not having an insurance on overdraft. I'd agree with the idea of avoiding overdraft entirely unless a customer signs up for it. I don't want transactions I can't afford to go through. I manage my accounts quite closely. For me such situation would be 99% an unintended transaction that I would like to cancel. By lettin…

I turned overdraft coverage off at my bank. You can turn it on and off on-demand through their website. If your bank won't let you do this, consider another bank.

Re: Bank of America has lost Zelle transfers for many customers

#256

Post by hojjat12000 »

dcist wrote: post #147

I got scammed by a Zelle transfer when someone used my phone (without my authorization). I didn't even know I had Zelle but it's built into the BofA app. I lost $3,000. BofA refused to refund any of the transfer or reverse it. Total trash feature. I didn't sign up for it. I don't want it. BofA signed me up for it. I'm changing banks because of it.

My girlfriend also lost 3000. Somehow money was sent from her phone to someone in Texas. We contacted chase and they said "you did it" so no refunds. But we didn't! She works from home and there is no other IP other than her phone in her Chase account. So how did this happen? We filed a complaint with the Police and tried to figure out what we can do through other channels. Turns out nobody cares!

Re: Bank of America has lost Zelle transfers for many customers

#257

Post by snotrockets »

ceejayoz wrote: post #251
snotrockets wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zelle can write that water are dry, it will not make it so. The customer intended to authorize a non-scammy transfer, but was scammed into authorizing himself into a fraud. As such, regulation E holds. And if there's something bank fears is someone reminding their regulator the bank may not be following regulation to the letter. It has been made very clear that regulation E is meant to held banks responsible for misu…

> As such, regulation E holds. I've cited the exact wording of Regulation E to you elsewhere; it's pretty clear this scenario is not an unauthorized transfer.

It isn't. Law and regulation are interpreted by intent, not by a google search (also see official interpretation 2(m)-4 there)

Re: Bank of America has lost Zelle transfers for many customers

#259

Post by Night_Thastus »

gr4yb34rd wrote: post #8

praise that brave reddit moderator for rushing in there to lock down the thread and remove any content that might hurt BoA's feelings.

The problem is that most of the time, threads like that quickly devolve. They go from intelligent, thoughtful conversation about an issue to people ranting, throwing insults, personal attacks, etc. Or just armchair financial experts giving terrible advice. (Par for the course with that particular subreddit)

Money can quickly become a heated discussion. I'd assume behind that thread is a wall of much worse comments that had to be removed. Removing them all gets exhausting, and sometimes it's better to just lock the thread and move on.

I really don't think they care one way or the other about BoA.

Re: Bank of America has lost Zelle transfers for many customers

#260

Post by snotrockets »

DennisP wrote: post #242
snotrockets wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't true. All bank transfers and reversible. Some easier then other, but none are no-recurse, regardless what a low tier customer service agent insists. It may require more effort, and maybe someone above their pay grade, but it is possible. And Zelle itself, like all electronic bank transfers in the US, is subject to regulation E, which puts the responsibility for unauthorized transfers on the banks (minus $5…

Wire transfers aren't reversible if you're not quick enough to do it before the money transfers out of the country. Home purchases and business wires have both seen over a billion dollars in wire fraud annually, just in the US. https://www.rocketmortgage.com/learn/mortgage-wire-fraud https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesbusinesscouncil/2022/08/3...

Wire transfers are also reversible. It may not be easy or cheap to do so, but it is possible (the Citigroup $500mm mispayment is a great example: the error was done August 2020, and Citigroup are still working to undo it, at an expense to them. I'm certain it'll take them a few more months, and God only knows how many more billable hours at the very least).
Post reply on HN