Debbie Brooks and Martha Tingstrom lived together. Tingstrom handled their finances. For five years, Brooks did not look at any statements concerning her accounts. When she finally reviewed the statements, she discovered that Tingstrom had taken $85,500 from Brooks’s checking account with Transamerica Financial Advisors. Tingstrom had forged Brooks’s name on six checks paid between one and two years earlier. Another year passed before Brooks filed a suit against Transamerica. Who is most likely to suffer the loss for the checks paid with Brooks’s forged signature? Why? [Brooks v. Transamerica Financial Advisors, 57 So.3d 1153 (La.App. 2 Cir. 2011)]

Debbie Brooks is the one who will suffer the loss for the checks paid with Brook's forged signature because Brooks was supposed to be checking the statement regarding her accounts frequently . By that, she could have discovered that Tingstrom had taken $85,000 from her checking account with Transamerica Financial Advisors and hence be able to sue her.

After Debbies Brooks discovered what Martha had done, she should have have stopped the transaction immediately but instead another year passed before she filed a suit against Transamerica. Hence, she will be one who will suffer from the forged signature.