Finance, Investments National Banks not doing fraud detection on checks, nobody cares

[sponge_bob_128]

Jurisdiction

California

I have pretty definitive proof that the National Banks are doing zero check image fraud detection for at least lower amount checks (less than $1000 and probably less than $1500). With the magic of "mobile deposit" and ATM check scanning, this opens up a huge opening for fraudsters. Writing an X for the signature, overwriting amounts, pasting signatures on checks at various angles and positions (waste of time, just scribble something) will happily fly through the banking system. Consumers who don't catch the fraud within 30 days from the bank statement date, eat the losses. Woe to the elderly caught in such schemes as they come from a time when check processing was taken more seriously and not "crapified". There is currently a check fraud "epidemic", but nobody seems to care, at least not the regulatory bodies (OCC, etc.) as there seems to be zero requirements or pressures on the national banks to do fraud detection. Furthermore, the banks will not even bother to investigate such fraud at even a minimal level leaving the legwork to overburdened law enforcement. I suspect this is a known problem with the regulatory bodies basically "regulatory captured" and the massive banks too politically powerful to touch (at least without massive legal and political effort).

 

[Zigner]

Do you have an actual legal question about a matter that you are involved with?

 

[sponge_bob_128]

Do you have an actual legal question about a matter that you are involved with?

Last line. But basically, legally the top National Banks are pretty much untouchable, right?
And this is basic knowledge to the average consumer protection lawyer? This is especially with respect to "negligence" and "unconscionable contracts/agreements" with low financial level consumers as these standard operating procedures all have a green light from the regulatory bodies and it is the fuduciary duty to the Bank's stockholders to save costs by doing nothing wrt. fraud and pass the losses to the consumer.

 

[Zigner]

Last line.

No, your last line was a statement, not a question. Do you have a legal question about a legal matter that you are directly involved with at this moment? This is not the place to stand on a soapbox.

 

[Zigner]

Quoting the original post for posterity.

I have pretty definitive proof that the National Banks are doing zero check image fraud detection for at least lower amount checks (less than $1000 and probably less than $1500). With the magic of "mobile deposit" and ATM check scanning, this opens up a huge opening for fraudsters. Writing an X for the signature, overwriting amounts, pasting signatures on checks at various angles and positions (waste of time, just scribble something) will happily fly through the banking system. Consumers who don't catch the fraud within 30 days from the bank statement date, eat the losses. Woe to the elderly caught in such schemes as they come from a time when check processing was taken more seriously and not "crapified". There is currently a check fraud "epidemic", but nobody seems to care, at least not the regulatory bodies (OCC, etc.) as there seems to be zero requirements or pressures on the national banks to do fraud detection. Furthermore, the banks will not even bother to investigate such fraud at even a minimal level leaving the legwork to overburdened law enforcement. I suspect this is a known problem with the regulatory bodies basically "regulatory captured" and the massive banks too politically powerful to touch (at least without massive legal and political effort).

 

[army judge]

In the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, no one person or legal entity is ABOVE the laws of the land.

As an example, former president Donald J. Trump is living testament to the previous sentence.

Even the "village idiot" understands that ALL banks, even THE BIGGEST BANKS, aren't immune from prosecution, should they break our laws or ignore ANY of them.

However, unless a person or legal entity has been PROVEN GUILTY before a court of law, everyone of us is CLOAKED IN THE PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE, according to our system of jurisprudence and our outstanding, glorious Constitution.

Recent Examples to emphasize the point:

In 2014:
Will the $17B Bank of America penalty deter individuals from breaking the law?

In 2015:
The Rise of Bank Prosecutions

In 2016:
The Feds Are Finally Going After Wall Street's Bad Actors in a Serious Way. It's Not Enough.

In 2022:
Wells Fargo ordered to pay $3.7 billion for 'illegal activity' including unjust foreclosures and vehicle repossessions | CNN Business

Lawsuit accusing 10 banks of rigging $23 trillion U.S. Treasury market is dismissed

US Bank fined $37.5 million after workers opened fake accounts to meet sales goals

Just a few recent examples.

 

[adjusterjack]

This is not the place to stand on a soapbox.

Definitely not.

This soapbox is locked.