It is understandable, reversing transactions happens all the time. But if the first receiving bank does not have the money anymore, i.e. the transfer was then transferred out to another bank, how do you hold the first receiving bank liable to return the funds while they didn't practically do anything wrong (And they don't have it anymore to return it back).
In some cases, there may be a domino effect or chain reaction, in which each bank that is involved can recover the money by getting it back from the next bank. For a complete answer, you would have to read the federal regulations governing ACH transfers, or talk to someone who works in that department at a bank (not a teller in the lobby). But in some cases, a bank may be stuck with a loss, even if they did nothing wrong. Federal regs in the USA provide some pretty strong fraud protection for customers at financial institutions, and the financial institutions do assume some degree of risk. And they have commercial insurance policies (not FDIC or SIPC) to cover large losses. I'm going to give you an example involving a paper check. Suppose I sell an antique desk at a garage sale, and I am naive enough to accept a personal check as payment from someone I do not know. Now assume that the check is fraudulent. Note that I am not talking about a stop payment or NSF check, but rather outright fraud, e.g., the guy buying my antique desk broke into someone's car and stole their checkbook, or he printed bogus checks using his computer. Now I deposit the check into my bank account. Under federal regulations, my bank has to make the funds available for me to withdraw within 1 to 3 business days, in most cases. If it is a very large check, the bank can put a hold on the funds for a longer period of time. And there are other exceptions to the rules. But in general, the bank has to let me withdraw the money in a couple days. It could be several weeks before the other bank informs my bank that the check was fraudulent. The regs may allow for up to 90 days. The victim--the person upon whose account the check was drawn--will get their money back. When my bank learns that the check was stolen or fake, they will debit my account, and send the money back to the other bank. This could very easily result in a negative balance in my account. It could cause some other check that I wrote to bounce. I am a victim, too. But I am the first party who assumes the risk of a bad check. I am out the money. If I can find the guy who gave me the bad check, I can sue him, or have him arrested for fraud, or both. But I may never recover the money. If he doesn't have it, a lawsuit is a waste of time. He may go to jail, and I may never get my money back. Your question seems to be: What if I close my account and disappear a couple days after withdrawing the money from my account, and my bank doesn't find out that the check was bogus until three weeks later? Answer: My bank still has to return the money to the other bank, so they can return it to the guy whose checkbook was stolen. My bank now has to try to collect that money from me, even if I have closed my account. My bank may have to eat the loss. That's how the system works in the USA. It may be different in other countries. This example involves a paper check, and a fact pattern that is a little different from what happened at Robinhood. But the basic concept is the same. Customers are protected from losses in most types of fraudulent transactions. Financial institutions--banks and brokerages--bear the risk. BMK
The first receiving bank is responsible for ANY wired deposit, even if the transferred money is gone. Any bank of financial institution that facilitates a fraud (even "unknowingly"...) must be held responsible, period!
Maybe these "investigators" (yeah right) were in it, too. Don't tell me this idea never crossed your mind....
I wonder what your opinion would be if they transit the money through your account (sort of how Bitfinex did) and you are held responsible. Another possibility about investigators is maybe when it gets hard to track the money they just decide it's not worth it calling every bank and scanning millions of transactions and go "trail went cold".