A:
1 Answer
rank
1
|
Under the legal theory of premises liability, customers have sued banks for failing to protect them from assault at ATM's. While in the past banks had no duty to provide security against such crimes, such a duty has been recognized in a number of cases in recent years. In such a case, a judge or jury would determine if there were past attacks, and if a likelihood of a crime was foreseeable. If so, they may hold that the bank had a duty to protect people using that machine, and find the bank liable.
more
|
sgblaw.com
Related Videos
Add your answer...
Top Answerers
1.
2.
3.
Top Askers
1.
2.
3.
Top Supporters
1.
2.
3.
Can someone attacked after withdrawing money from an automated teller machine (ATM) and hold the bank responsible for the attack?
Related Questions
- Under the legal theory of premises liability, customers have sued banks for failing to protect them from ...
- More courts are beginning to recognize a bank's duty to protect those who use their ATMs, especially if there ...
- A. Yes. There is one DirectCash ATM located on the main level next to the Aerodrome Security office.
- There are various transactions that fall under the umbrella term "electronic funds transfer." Automated ...
- A. You ask for a Bancomat card and they give you a form. For your spouse to get a bancomat card (two cards ...