Financial Protection Versus Self-Determination, Perspectives from Fraud Victims on a Financial Account Temporary Hold Policy

Background and Purpose: A temporary financial account hold, also termed an authorization hold, is a non-permanent, provisional restriction on transferring funds out of a bank or brokerage account. This policy may be enacted as a consumer protection mechanism to prevent accountholders, especially older adults, from further financial exploitation. To date, there has been no research on the emotional and material impact of temporary account holds on older adults who are at risk of financial exploitation. Our study fills this gap in the literature by offering victims’ perspectives on the impact of temporary account holds and their impact on self-determination, as well as implications for consumer protection. Victims’ stories of financial exploitation and their attitudes toward perpetrators will also be discussed.

Methods: Twelve interviews with cognitively intact elder financial exploitation victims or their authorized representatives (n=13) were analyzed using a combination of inductive and deductive approaches. Following open coding, deductive coding was applied using the refined coding framework to systematically organize and categorize the data. Broad themes were identified through an iterative process of review and discussion by the research team.

Results:

Sample characteristics: The mean age of financial exploitation victims is 75, with the mean loss amount of $52,690, ranging from $3,500 to $240,000. Of the study participants, 54% (n=7) identified as male, and 46% (n=6) were female. All of them identified themselves as non-Hispanic White.

Key findings: Victims of financial exploitation experience complex and conflicting emotions toward the perpetrator. For example, participants expressed both positive and negative emotions (e.g., love, trust, anger, embarrassment, and shame). Although most understood the purpose of temporary financial holds as a protective measure, some viewed these interventions as an infringement on their financial autonomy. Many also expressed feelings of being unclear/confused about interventions, such as the purpose and length of the hold. This negatively affected their relationships with financial institutions and in some cases, investigators. Others experienced financial hassles during the hold, such as trouble paying bills and covering needed expenses.

Implications:

This study suggests two policy recommendations for professionals in the banking and consumer protection fields. 1) Financial institutions and adult protective services should adopt person-centered approaches that prioritize transparency and ensure that victims have access to some funds while ensuring their accounts are safe from predators. Emotional support is also needed following victimization. 2) Providing victims with education about financial exploitation, scam tactics, and protective measures can empower them to regain a sense of control and reduce feelings of vulnerability.