DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

Chase Isn’t Liable for Assistant’s $1M Fraud

Posted on April 6, 2010 by Dissent

We’ve read about a number of lawsuits where businesses sue their banks for money that was siphoned off in wire transfers without the company being aware of the problem. Here’s a court decision out of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals that may impact some cases down the road and serves as a timely reminder to check your statements to ensure that you are not authorizing charges by employees or others that you really don’t intend to authorize. Courthouse News reports:

… From 1999 to 2006, Vanek withdrew between $200 and $700, typically twice a day, from Azur’s credit card. Each transaction carried a finance charge of $4 to about $20.

When Azur discovered the fraudulent scheme, he fired Vanek, closed the account and disputed the charges with Chase, claiming they were never authorized.

A federal judge ruled for Chase, and the Philadelphia-based appeals court affirmed.

Chase has no duty to reimburse Azur for payments he already made, the court ruled, and Azur gave his assistant the “apparent authority” to use his credit card by continuing to make payments without reviewing the bank statements.

“[B]y identifying apparent authority as a limitation on the cardholder’s protections … Congress recognized that the cardholder is oftentimes in the best position to identify fraud committed by its employees,” Judge D. Michael Fisher wrote.

“Here, Azur’s negligent omissions led Chase to reasonably believe that the fraudulent charges were authorized.”

Category: Commentaries and Analyses

Post navigation

← Flawed Assumptions in the Albert Gonzalez Case
Missing investment firm backup tapes contained account info →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare reveals it was also impacted by Cerner/Legacy Oracle cyberattack
  • Hospital cyberattack investigation complete, no formal review needed
  • Largest Ever Seizure of Funds Related to Crypto Confidence Scams
  • IMPACT: 170 patients harmed as a result of Qilin’s ransomware attack on NHS vendor Synnovis
  • DOJ’s Data Security Program: Key Compliance Considerations for Impacted Entities
  • UBS reports data leak after cyber attack on provider, client data unaffected
  • Scania confirms insurance claim data breach in extortion attempt
  • Cybersecurity takes a big hit in new Trump executive order
  • Episource notifying 5.4 million patients of cyberattack in January
  • Investigation of 2024 Helsinki data breach – Report

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • DOJ’s Data Security Program: Key Compliance Considerations for Impacted Entities
  • 23andMe fined £2.31 million for failing to protect UK users’ genetic data
  • DOJ Seeks More Time on Tower Dumps
  • Your household smart products must respect your privacy – including your air fryer
  • Vermont signs Kids Code into law, faces legal challenges
  • Data Categories and Surveillance Pricing: Ferguson’s Nuanced Approach to Privacy Innovation
  • Anne Wojcicki Wins Bidding for 23andMe

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.