3 ms·
It isn't. Law and regulation are interpreted by intent, not by a google search (also see official interpretation 2(m)-4 there)
by snotrockets 4y ago
It isn't. Law and regulation are interpreted by intent, not by a google search (also see official interpretation 2(m)-4 there)
- ceejayoz 4y ago> Law and regulation are interpreted by intent Nothing in Regulation E indicates an intent to cover intentional transfers by the account holder to scammers. Quote something specific if you disagree. > also see official interpretation 2(m)-4 there None of those scenarios match "I willingly sent money to something that turned out to be a scam". At all. Each example in that interpretation is that of an unintentional transfer - bank employees doing it, stolen devices, being under duress.