You Be The Judge! :-( | Page 2 | Tangerine Bank | Discussion forum

User230 said
…

Tangerine should protect their clients from scams regardless of if the business owner was using a personal or business account at their bank.

It did not surprise me that Tangerine did not contact the handbag business owner. Leaving a customer worried and upset, so much so and for so long that they go to the media, is not good customer service.

If I was scammed, I would not expect my bank to bail on me like Tangerine seemed to do. Only to support the customer after being shamed in the media.
…

I agree.

Some banks have people who know the rules, like the Royal Bank did in Hedge fund manager 'disappears' after bank mistakenly wired $1.5 million into his account.

Credit Suisse wired someone $1.5 million in error. Royal Bank refused to return the funds to Credit Suisse because Royal Bank customer refused the recall. Royal Bank customer then takes off with the money!

What LK quoted about deposits only applies if the deposit can be returned.

A deposited cheque can be returned by the bank it is drawn on. A "pull" request can be returned by the bank it is directed to.

That simply doesn't apply to "push" requests like incoming direct deposits or incoming wire transfers.

Once an Interac e-transfer is claimed, the funds cannot be taken back within the banking system. One needs to pursue the recipient outside the banking system.

Loonie said
I'm not sure I'm following all these details closely enough, but am wondering if the fact that the purchaser specified EFT payment was a tip-off that they were not on the level.
A transaction in this amount could easily have been handled by Interac transfer and could not have been rescinded. A professional scammer would be aware of what works best for them.
Do I have this right?

It would be suspicious for a Canadian buyer. I don't know of any Canadian financial institution that offers personal banking clients the service to originate a direct deposit or "push" to someone else's bank account.

But, the buyer was in South Korea. One wouldn't be able to send an Interac e-transfer unless the person had a Canadian bank account.

Norman1 said

smayer97 said

Unfortunately, that is NOT correct, at least in the case of Interac e-Transfers, which is a beast unto itself and distinct from wire transfers and direct deposits (though many of the reversal rules are similar).

One example is if the sending account was discovered to be compromised due to no fault of the actual account holder, the fund transfer can be reversed by the bank.

Articles and news reports have been made documenting this very case.
…

That's actually not the case.

An Interac e-transfer that has been claimed cannot be reversed. That's why there are Go Public stories like RBC customer out of pocket after fraud: What you need to know….

Had it been possible for Interac e-transfers to be reversed, there would be no reason for RBC not to return the full $1,734 back to the sender in the story.

It doesn't matter if the Interac e-transfer sender's account was hacked. Should the sender's bank decide to reimburse, then the sender's bank eats the loss. That's why the sending bank will refuse in many cases.  

Sorry but you missed the point I made and misunderstood. I have done research on this... so let's clarify:
- if you SEND an e-transfer in error (wrong amount, to the wrong person, etc) and it gets claimed, it CANNOT be reversed AT THE REQUEST OF THE SENDING PERSON.
- if an e-transfer is SENT and is intercepted, as is the case in the example articles supplied above, it CANNOT be reversed AT THE REQUEST OF THE SENDING PERSON.
- if an e-transfer is RECEIVED, it CAN be reversed by the bank if the received e-transfer was determined to be due to a breach from the SENDING account due to no fault of the owner of the SENDING account.

The last case is also a caution to NEVER use another e-transfer to send back money to due what might appear to be an errorneaous e-transfer. Instead, call the bank and have the RECEIVED e-transfer REVERSED.

Case in point, if the receiver is sent MORE money than what is expected for a transaction, the sender may ask for the difference back via another e-transfer (a common tactic by scammers). You will be sending them REAL money but later when the bank reverses the scammers fraudulent e-transfer, you will be out the money you received PLUS the money you sent.

So there are 3 scenarios when an e-transfer CAN be reversed:
1. By the BANK because the bank detects a fraudulent e-transfer, e.g. an account NOT belonging to the sender was used to perform a transfer (as in the above examples in the articles). This is at their discretion but there is usually a reason when a bank will do this.
2. By the RECEIVER: ANY e-transfer CAN be reversed ONLY by contacting the bank directly to have them process the reversal.
3. By the SENDER, IF and ONLY IF the receiver has not claimed e-transfer. This can be done either by cancelling the e-transfer via the bank online or by calling the bank.
NOTE: If the receiver has automatic deposit turned on, this is ONLY possible if the bank system has not yet processed the e-transfer (it can take up to 30 mins due to timing cycles of the Interac process).

So again, as I said before, the bank and Interac urge customers to be confident that the sender is not only trustworthy but the account they are sending from is actually theirs, to reduce the chance of a reversal of a fraudulent transaction.

Be informed about how Interac e-transfers work and their vulnerabilities. Don't be ignorant and think these cannot happen.

For smaller in frequent amounts, it may be worth the risk to not worry but the larger the amount(s) the more caution is warranted.

P.S. All info above has been verified with the bank.

It is a useful option as long as one is aware of the caveats, which are not so obvious, especially with the marketing making it sound so secure... and it can be but there are vulnerable points. But whether it is at the same bank or not does not make any difference.

smayer97 said

Sorry but you missed the point I made and misunderstood. I have done research on this... so let's clarify:
…
- if an e-transfer is RECEIVED, it CAN be reversed by the bank if the received e-transfer was determined to be due to a breach from the SENDING account due to no fault of the owner of the SENDING account.
…
So there are 3 scenarios when an e-transfer CAN be reversed:
1. By the BANK because the bank detects a fraudulent e-transfer, e.g. an account NOT belonging to the sender was used to perform a transfer (as in the above examples in the articles). This is at their discretion but there is usually a reason when a bank will do this.
…

So again, as I said before, the bank and Interac urge customers to be confident that the sender is not only trustworthy but the account they are sending from is actually theirs, to reduce the chance of a reversal of a fraudulent transaction.

…
P.S. All info above has been verified with the bank.

Did the bank provide any references to terms & conditions for that scenario #1?

That contradicts section 1.6 of the Interac e-Transfer terms of use, especially 1.6(d):

1.6 Use of the Interac e-Transfer Service:

…

c) When an Interac e-Transfer transaction is sent to you, the sending financial institution will hold the funds for you until you either deposit the transferred funds, the Interac e-Transfer transaction is cancelled, or the Interac e-Transfer transaction expires. You will not earn interest on the funds during the time that the funds are held in a clearing account at one of our participating financial institutions.

d) Once our records show that you have deposited an Interac e-Transfer transaction, the Interac e-Transfer transaction will be final.

…

It doesn't say "will be final" except when the sender is not an authorized user of the bank account that the Interac e-transfer came from.

Norman1 said

smayer97 said

Sorry but you missed the point I made and misunderstood. I have done research on this... so let's clarify:
…
- if an e-transfer is RECEIVED, it CAN be reversed by the bank if the received e-transfer was determined to be due to a breach from the SENDING account due to no fault of the owner of the SENDING account.
…
So there are 3 scenarios when an e-transfer CAN be reversed:
1. By the BANK because the bank detects a fraudulent e-transfer, e.g. an account NOT belonging to the sender was used to perform a transfer (as in the above examples in the articles). This is at their discretion but there is usually a reason when a bank will do this.
…

So again, as I said before, the bank and Interac urge customers to be confident that the sender is not only trustworthy but the account they are sending from is actually theirs, to reduce the chance of a reversal of a fraudulent transaction.

…
P.S. All info above has been verified with the bank.

Did the bank provide any references to terms & conditions for that scenario #1?

That contradicts section 1.6 of the Interac e-Transfer terms of use, especially 1.6(d):

1.6 Use of the Interac e-Transfer Service:

…

c) When an Interac e-Transfer transaction is sent to you, the sending financial institution will hold the funds for you until you either deposit the transferred funds, the Interac e-Transfer transaction is cancelled, or the Interac e-Transfer transaction expires. You will not earn interest on the funds during the time that the funds are held in a clearing account at one of our participating financial institutions.

d) Once our records show that you have deposited an Interac e-Transfer transaction, the Interac e-Transfer transaction will be final.

…

It doesn't say "will be final" except when the sender is not an authorized user of the bank account that the Interac e-transfer came from.  

I agree that there is a problem with the wording. That would be one for the courts...

I'm no lawyer and do not know how fraud plays into the above but what should be obvious is that the banks seem to have taken that position to be able to reverse Interac e-transfers, rightly or wrongly. It certainly warrants further investigation but I think the answer may lie in section 1.6 e):

"...Interac may also decline to complete the Interac e-Transfer transaction because: you have supplied incorrect information; you cannot answer the sender’s question; your personal information cannot be verified; Interac or a participating financial institution suspects that you, or any other party to the transaction is involved in illegal or wrongful activity; or the Interac e-Transfer transaction exceeds a transaction limit. If the Interac e-Transfer transaction cannot be completed, we will automatically notify the sender that it must be cancelled. If the Interac e-Transfer transaction is cancelled for any of the above reasons, your sole remedy for non-payment is against the sender and you will have no claim against Interac. "

There may be other clauses that support this further...

Bottom line is, as it stands now, caveat emptor...

Norman1 said

Bill said
Very informative, re e-transfers.

My kids who send me money just set me up as a Payee and choose option Pay Bills to transfer to me, that seems like a good option for those who bank at the same institution.

That's not an Interac e-transfer. That an intra-bank transfer, like EQ Bank's EQ-to-EQ transfers.  

That depends on how it was set up. That scenario can be set up as either an intra-bank transfer OR an Interac e-Transfer. Not enough info is provided here to confirm either way.

Well, RBC only differentiates them when setting up a payee but lists all of them together (though there is a way to tell them apart from other non-e-transfer payees). Not knowing which bank you were using and how they do it, it was not possible to differentiate.

I just checked the TD online and this is what I found when trying to set up a transfer to another TD customer:

"How do I transfer money to another TD Canada Trust customer?

Transfer funds to another TD Canada Trust Customer

You can transfer funds from your TD Canada Trust personal account to that of another TD Canada Trust customer using Interac e-Transfer®."

NO other option was provided. So it appears that TD uses Interac to perform transfers, even "intra-bank" instead of a true internal transfer, which is very odd...

BTW, RBC DOES allow setting up a TRUE intra-bank transfer... NOT using Interac.