Big or small, all bank accounts are susceptible to hijacking and fraudulent wire transfers. Banks ordinarily bear the risk of loss for unauthorized wire transfers. Two independent frameworks exist to govern these transfers: the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (“EFTA”) for consumer accounts, and Article 4A of the Uniform Commercial Code (“UCC”) for business accounts.
While the EFTA will ordinarily shield consumers from having to pay for most unauthorized charges as long as they provide notice to their bank, UCC §4A-202 shifts the risk of loss to the customer if the bank can show that (1) a commercially reasonable security procedure was in place and (2) the bank accepted the payment order in good faith and in compliance with the security procedure and any other written agreement or customer instruction.
The commercial reasonability of a security procedure is a question of law, and courts will consider several factors, including:
- Customer instructions expressed to the bank
- The bank’s understanding of the customer’s situation, including the size, type, and frequency of payment orders ordinarily issued
- Alternative security procedures offered to the customer
- Security procedures in general use by similarly situated banks and customers.
In addition, a security procedure will be found commercially reasonable if the customer selected it after refusing a security procedure that was commercially reasonable for the customer’s needs.