Notice: Function _load_textdomain_just_in_time was called incorrectly. Translation loading for the wp-migrate-db domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /srv/app/gotoiba-dev/htdocs/web/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6121
Over two years ago, we returned a remotely created check that our customer reported as unauthorized. Recently, the company that initiated the remotely created check contacted us and provided a signed copy of its agreement with the customer authorizing the check. The company is asking us to return the amount of the check and has threatened litigation. Can we offset the customer’s account for the amount of the check? – IBA Compliance Connection

IBA Compliance Connection

Your go to source for compliance!

Over two years ago, we returned a remotely created check that our customer reported as unauthorized. Recently, the company that initiated the remotely created check contacted us and provided a signed copy of its agreement with the customer authorizing the check. The company is asking us to return the amount of the check and has threatened litigation. Can we offset the customer’s account for the amount of the check?

—

by

First, because the company that initiated the electronic check has threatened litigation against your bank, we highly recommend consulting with bank counsel going forward.

In your discussions with bank counsel, we would note that Illinois law does permit a bank to exercise its right of setoff against a customer’s deposit account in this situation.

Under Illinois law, the right of setoff can arise contractually (when the deposit account agreement provides for a right of set-off) or under the common law when there is “mutuality” of parties (the deposit account is owned by the same party that owes the debt to the bank). We recommend checking your deposit account agreement to see if you are authorized to set off the account when fraudulent activity is suspected. Even if your deposit account agreement is silent on this issue, however, we believe you can exercise your common law right of setoff if the customer is the sole owner on the account and you suspect fraudulent activity.

For resources related to our guidance, please see:

  • Pope v. First of Am., N.A., 699 N.E.2d 178, 180 (3rd Dist. 1998) (This court held that a bank could exercise its contractual right of setoff for customer’s unauthorized withdrawals from another customer’s bank account.)
  • Selby v. DuQuoin State Bank, 223 Ill.App.3d 105, 107 (5th Dist. 1991) (The common law right of setoff requires a mutuality of parties, meaning that the deposit account is owned by the same party that owes the debt, as well as a matured debt.)