• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Home
  • Multi-AI Governance Blog
    • Responsible AI Blog
    • Digital Factics Blog
    • Legacy Local SEO
  • HAIA
    • SMART
  • Factics
  • Checkpoint-Based Governance
    • What Is an Agent?
  • RECCLIN
  • CAIPR
  • HEQ/AIS
    • AIS pilot data test
  • AI Policy
    • ISO AI Governance Comment

Basil C. Puglisi

Artificial Intelligence (AI) & Digital Marketing Since 2009

  • About Me
    • My Story
      • Appearances for Speaking
  • The Minds That Bend The Machine
  • Governing AI
  • Digital Factics X
  • Digital Factics Instagram
  • AI – Artificial Intelligence
    • Ethical AI – Disclosure
    • AI Literacy & Education
    • AI Learning
      • AI Course Descriptions

Electronic Fund Transfer Act

The Liability Counter-Pressure Reaches the Banks: AI Agent Risk Is Being Assigned to Consumers

November 5, 2026 by Basil C. Puglisi Leave a Comment

Diagram of three sets of terms that assign AI agent errors to the customer, with four sources of counter-pressure above them

Agent providers and two major banks now assign an AI agent’s errors to the customer.

The article reads the Instinct terms, the Chase Digital Services Agreement, and Wells Fargo’s Section 15, which takes effect November 24, 2026, against the federal law that limits what such terms can settle. It sets Lead Bank’s proposed waterfall and the OCC’s November 4 examiner resource beside them, and names the five records that will decide where the first contested loss stays.

Filed Under: AI Artificial Intelligence, AI Policy Regulation, AI Risk, Multi-AI Governance, Policy & Research, Thought Leadership Tagged With: agentic AI, AI agent liability, AI agents, AI Governance, AI risk, AI Risk Economy, AIDA, Checkpoint-Based Governance, consumer banking, Electronic Fund Transfer Act, JPMorgan Chase, Lead Bank, OCC, Regulation E, Wells Fargo

Primary Sidebar

Subscribe via Email

Join 9,585 other subscribers
iDBasil C. Puglisi on ORCID

How to Learn About AI

The Minds That Bend the Machine by Basil C. Puglisi, MPA. Book promotion exploring artificial intelligence, bias, power, and humanity. Releases November 6, 2026.

Buy the eBook on Amazon

This is an banner ad for the book Governing AI When Capability Exceeds Control
Buy the book Digital Factics on Amazon

Advanced Site Search

Responsible AI (#AIgenerated by Agents)

When an Agent Acts, Who Confirms Before the Kernel Lets It Through? #AIg

Sysdig AI Defense generally available on November 4 puts allow, confirm, or block in front of every agent action, traces each agent to an accountable human, and keeps audit records of who signed off. Conduktor and Google Cloud land the same week on human approval and sandboxed containment.

Bank Examiners Get a New Question: Is the Human Approval More Than a Click? #AIg

The OCC’s new supervisory framework for bank use of super intelligence tells examiners to test whether a human approval is more than a nominal click, flags a named reviewer without practical authority as a risk, and lets the degree of human oversight shape the risk tier.

New Suits Against OpenAI Ask Courts to Put an Outside Reviewer Over ChatGPT Releases #AIg

Two lawsuits filed in late October ask courts to put an outside reviewer between OpenAI and its next release: a court-approved evaluator in Texas and a five-year independent monitor in the Wan case. A third suit asks for automatic escalation. The requests show what injured parties will ask any chatbot company to prove.

NIST’s Agent Identity Tenets Warn That Human Review Can Turn Into Habit #AIg

NIST’s ten design tenets for agent identity management put most controls in infrastructure and send risky actions to human review. Tenet 05 warns that frequent escalation can turn approval into habit, and leaves who rules, and what record that ruling leaves, to each organization.

India’s Telecom Regulator Would Require a Designated Officer’s Approval Before Any AI System Is Used #AIg

TRAI’s draft guidelines on responsible AI in telecom would require a designated officer to approve every AI system before use and make operators accountable for vendor-built AI. They say less about who rules on outputs once a system is running. Comments are due November 27.

Only a Quarter of UK Workers Always Verify AI Answers. Who Decides Which Ones Count? #AIg

O’Reilly found that only 24% of UK employees always verify AI-generated answers, and 39% of those using them have acted on one that proved wrong. Perceptyx and RGP point to the missing piece: deciding which AI outputs need a named person’s ruling.

New AI Certificates for Doctors and Teachers Teach Checking. Do They Certify It? #AIg

Google launched an AI certificate for healthcare professionals that takes under five hours and carries up to 5.0 CME credits, and Scale and UMSL launched a 12-hour microcredential for teachers. Both teach evaluation of AI output. A European teacher framework asks for evidence of it, and employers can too.

More Posts from this Category

#SMAC #SocialMediaWeek

Basil Social Media Week

Legacy Print:

Digital Factics: Twitter

© 2009–2026 Basil C. Puglisi, Creator of Factics™ and the HAIA Ecosystem