[codesections]

> From banking law about 10 years back now, I would expect that the bank would be on the hook for Deborah's transfers in the first story. … I would have taken that case if I were a plaintiff's lawyer.

I disagree, for two reasons. First, an outside-view argument: lawyers who currently practice in that field apparently disagree:

> Deborah reached out to more than thirty attorneys. Only one called her back. Deborah’s eldest brother consulted another, who called her situation “a terminal case.” “There’s no life here,” he said. Her claim was dying, if not already dead.

Second, on the merits: most of the fraud protections have requirements that the defrauded customer notify the bank promptly (either after the fraudulent transfer or after the next bank statement). See, e.g. [0]. It looks like that didn't happen here.

[0] https://www.consumerfinance.gov/rules-policy/regulations/100...