How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask socrateaser Your Own Question
socrateaser, Lawyer
Category: Consumer Protection Law
Satisfied Customers: 37821
Experience:  Retired (mostly)
Type Your Consumer Protection Law Question Here...
socrateaser is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Someone stole my debit card number, not the card, and made

This answer was rated:

Someone stole my debit card number, not the card, and made five charges. My bank charge me for those transactions in total just over US$500.00. I caught it in time and the bank had canceled my old card and issued a replacement.

In the mean time, I am asked to fill out a notarized "affidavit of unauthorized use" in detail. Meaning that I had to prove to them that a fraud had occurred and that they will be nice to assist me in proving it.

I ask them why don't you produce the paper with my signature authorizing the transaction, which I know it did not happen, or produce the computer record showing the correct pin number had been entered if the card was used as a debit card.

They told me it doesn't work that way.

My simply question is "Do I have legal ground to demand that 'the bank produce evidence that I authorized the transaction or credit my account.'"?

This falls into the category of "Consumer Rights".

Pu, WeiTa

Under Title 12 CFR §205.6 (Federal Reserve Regulation E), a consumer has two business days to notify the bank of an unauthorized transaction, and if accomplished, the consumer is only liable for the first $50 of losses. Notification by the consumer after two business days makes the consumer liable for the first $500 of loss.


Hope this helps.


Terms and Conditions: By your continuing in this conversation with me, or by your clicking “Accept”, you are expressly agreeing to all of the following: (1) our communication is for entertainment purposes only; (2) you are not consulting me in my professional capacity as an attorney; (3) you do not seek to establish an attorney-client relationship with me, nor do I with you; (4) you will not rely on anything I say and you will obtain appropriate legal counsel via a traditional/office consultation with an attorney licensed to practice in the jurisdiction where your legal issue arises (and you may not use our communication to avoid taxpayer penalties imposed by the U.S. Dept. of Treasury); (5) by communicating with me in this public forum you are irrevocably waiving any right to privacy, confidentiality and attorney-client privilege concerning the matters discussed. You further separately declare that any payment made by you is not consideration for this contract, nor offered for any services rendered by me on your behalf, but rather is made in genuine admiration and respect for my desire to help others. If you do not agree with these terms and conditions, then you must advise me immediately.

Customer: replied 6 years ago.
That wasn't what I asked.
Customer: replied 6 years ago.
Allow me to rephrase.
Why can't I demand that the bank produce evidence, my signature, e.g., proving that I authorized the transactions, without which they shouldn't have legal ground to debit my account.
Instead, I have to prove, with notarized paper work, that I am not the crook.
I understand no one is going to initiate a law suit, not my intent here, for a US$500+ case. But if I did, do I have legal grounds to win?

Simply put, Mr. Bank, produce my signature or give my money back!

I have the eery feeling that I will lose. If I could win, why is there not a class action law suit protecting consumers? That's two questions. Don't have to answer the 2nd one.

In order to demand such evidence, you must sue the bank. Then you can require that the bank produce the evidence under the tools of discovery.


You could sue the bank for negligence, but you will have to prove that the bank failed to use ordinary care in the relase of the funds. Unfortunately, if the funds were stolen from your account, then no amount of ordinary care would have prevented the theft. Which means that you would lose the lawsuit.


The banks are heavily protected by federal law. It's nearly impossible to hold them liable for anything. If you're wondering why, my opinion is that the banks control the government, and have for the past century. Whatever banks want -- they generally get.


Nothing short of a second American Revolution is likely to change that reality.

socrateaser and 3 other Consumer Protection Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 6 years ago.
Unfortunately, that's what I suspected. Capitalism has indeed hijacked democracy.
Thank you.
Pu, WeiTa
You're welcome and good luck.

Related Consumer Protection Law Questions