Page 9 - 630578_IBAT-Jan-Feb2018

STEP ONE - MAKE THE CALL

Edith Snow
May we reject an agent under a 817-676-3316
Q durable POA with whom we have
charged off accounts? James Walsh
Yes, that will likely fit one of the rea- 281-794-0065
A sons, which includes a past “mate-
rial” loss. That reason, plus a number of Celena Ivanitch
others, can be used to reject. If the rea- 512-787-2164
son is due to past SAR filings, a request
from law enforcement, or a policy adopt- Richard Grimes
ed to comply with laws or regulatory 469-543-9337
directives applicable to that person, then
the rejection notice must be made under
penalties of perjury and merely needs to
state that it is based on a statutory rea-
son under Section 751.206(2) or (3). For
more details on this issue, see the POA
guidance on the IBAT web page.

One of our elderly, wealthy male
Q deposit customers has come to the
bank to make a wire transfer to his fian-
cée in Ukraine. She needs the money to
come to the U.S. to marry him. We really
believe that our customer is competent, Conclusion Karen M. Neeley, in the Austin office
but we are also pretty sure that this is a of Kennedy Sutherland LLP, is widely
scam. What can we do to protect him? Banking law is not dull! Money (and recognized throughout the Texas financial
love) leads people to act in strange and
First, check the age of the custom- wonderful ways. But probably someone, institution community in the areas of
A er. If he is 65 or older, he is “elderly” somewhere has tried it out before. Just regulatory and compliance law. Contact
under Texas law and thereby vulnerable! let me check my archives…  her at [email protected].
Next, it appears that this wire request
fits within the definition of “financial
IBAT
exploitation” in the new Texas elder
TIB
1/4 pg
abuse law. That very broad definition
color
includes an act of a person to obtain
Jan/Feb.
control of property, through deception
or fraud or undue influence, in order to
deprive the elderly person of the owner-
ship or possession of the property.
Under the new law, the bank can put a
hold on the transaction for ten business
days. That should give adequate time
for the bank to contact a “trusted” third
party reasonably associated with the cus-
tomer. This is now clearly permitted by
the law. But be prepared for the custom-
er to be really annoyed and to possibly
move his money!

Member

January/February 2018 9