$1.3 Million Missing from Chase: Should Your Bank Check Your Money?

An 80-year-old retiree saw $1.3 million disappear from her Chase savings account. The bank would not have been able to protect her from an elaborate scam. Now she is one of a growing number of older Americans who are suing big banks for enabling — or at least not preventing — the theft of their savings.

This story raises a question that has no simple answer. And I think it’s worth being honest about that.

The case: $1.3 million gone

According to The American sunthe 80-year-old retiree was lured by an online ad and ended up losing $1.3 million from her Chase accounts. The transactions went through without Chase flagging them as suspicious – despite the fact that they were dramatically out of line to the account holder.

She’s not alone. This is part of a pattern:

According to the The FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint CenterAmericans over 60 reported nearly 150,000 fraud complaints in 2024, totaling $4.9 billion in losses – a 43% increase from the previous year. And those are just the reported cases. The real number may be closer to $61.5 billionbecause elderly fraud is seriously underreported.

The awkward question

This is where things get complicated – and where most articles on the subject are unfair.

The obvious response is: banks should have stopped doing this. Chase should have flagged $1.3 million in unusual transactions from an 80-year-old’s account. And legally speaking, there is a growing consensus that that should indeed be the case.

But here’s the other side of that coin: How much control do you want your bank to have over your money?

More protection and interrogation of your transactions may provide more protection, but people will resent the bank monitoring their money and spending decisions. What do you think?–Steve Rhode

Think about it. If Chase had blocked these trades, the headline would have been different, but the underlying tension would be the same. Because the same system that prevents an 80-year-old from being scammed also prevents a 70-year-old from giving money to a grandchild, buying a holiday home or making a major financial decision without the bank’s approval.

What actually changes: California’s new law

California won’t wait for the banks to figure this out themselves. Senate Bill 278which came into effect on January 1, 2026, now requires:

• Banks and credit unions must ask customers age 65 and older to name a “trusted individual” who can notify them of suspected fraud
• Suspicious transactions over $5,000 must be delayed for at least 3 business days
• Banks are given immunity from liability if they delay a transaction that turns out to be legitimate
• Only applies to transactions with the assistance of a bank employee (no online transfers)

The courts also weigh in

Banks are increasingly being held legally liable for elderly fraud. In a historic statement Lin v. JPMorgan Chase Banka California court ruled banks can be held accountable for financial abuse of the elderly – even if they did not directly participate in the scam.

The court ruled that plaintiffs can meet the standard of “actual knowledge” by showing the bank must have known Abuse occurred based on circumstantial evidence, such as processing seven transfers in three weeks from an account that had never made transfers before.

Several elderly victims have specifically sued Chase, claiming the bank processed clearly suspicious transactions without intervention. The combined losses in ongoing Chase cases exceed $2 million.

How scammers target the elderly

Understanding the tactics helps explain why the losses are so staggering:

• Imitation: Scammers pose as bank fraud departments, government agents, or tech support. Thanks to AI voice cloning, these calls are now almost indistinguishable from real ones.
• Urgency and anxiety: Victims are told that their accounts have been hacked and that they must take immediate action – often by transferring money to a ‘safe’ account.
• Insulation: Scammers explicitly tell victims not to discuss the situation with family, bank employees or law enforcement authorities.
• Gradual escalation: The first transfers are small. Once the victim complies, the amounts grow quickly.
• Online advertisements: Deceptive advertisements target older users with investment schemes, tech support scams, or fake services.

What you can do now

Whether you’re concerned about yourself or an elderly relative, here are concrete steps:

• Name a trusted contact on your bank account. California now requires banks to ask this, but you can do this anywhere. It doesn’t give that person access; it gives the bank someone to call if something seems wrong.
• Set up transaction alerts. Receive notifications for every transfer above a threshold you choose (e.g. $500+).
• Discuss this with family – now, not after a crisis. The conversation is uncomfortable but necessary. Agree on a system: Any transfer over $X gets a family phone call first.
• Use credit cards over debit cards. Credit cards sit between you and scammers. If there is fraud, dispute it with the card company; they do not reach your bank account directly.
• Never act from urgency. Legitimate institutions do not require immediate transfers. Any request that includes “don’t tell anyone” is a scam. Period.
• Report suspected fraud. File complaints with your attorney general, the CFPBand the IC3 of the FBI.

Frequently asked questions

Can you sue your bank if you have been scammed?

Yes, and courts are increasingly siding with the victims. In Lin v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, a California court ruled that banks could be held responsible for financial abuse by the elderly if they should have known there was fraud based on transaction patterns. There are several lawsuits pending against Chase and other major banks. If your bank has been processing clearly suspicious transactions without flagging them, consult an attorney who specializes in consumer finance or elder law.

Should my bank protect me against fraud?

It depends on your state. California now requires banks to monitor and defer suspicious transactions of $5,000 or more for customers age 65 and older under SB 278 (effective January 1, 2026). Other states have different levels of mandatory protection. Federal banking regulators have also issued interagency guidelines on the financial exploitation of the elderly, but these are not as prescriptive as California’s new law.

What should I do if a family member is being financially exploited?

Contact their bank immediately to report suspected fraud. File a report with your state’s Adult Protective Services. Report it to the FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Center at ic3.gov and to the CFPB at consumerfinance.gov/complaint. If large amounts have already been transferred, an attorney who specializes in elder law can help pursue recovery.

How do I protect older parents from financial scams?

Call yourself a trusted contact on their bank accounts. Set transaction alerts for any transfer above a reasonable threshold. Agree with your family that large transactions require a telephone call first. Use credit cards instead of a debit card for everyday expenses to add a layer of fraud protection. And most importantly, talk openly about scam tactics. Awareness is the best defense.

Are banks obliged to reimburse fraud victims?

For unauthorized wire transfers, the Wire Transfer Act may require a refund, depending on how quickly you report it. But for “authorized” transactions where you were tricked into sending money yourself, banks are generally not obligated to refund you — although lawsuits and new state laws like California’s SB 278 are changing this landscape. The key distinction is whether you initiated the transaction, even under false pretenses.

(Source: The American Sun | FBI elder fraud | CPM legal)