New York CNN  —  Americans instantly zip billions of dollars a day to each other on Zelle and other payment apps to do everything from pay the babysitter to split restaurant bills. The speed and convenience of these payment platforms have simultaneously made them insanely popular and a magnet for con artists posing as dog breeders, ticket sellers, government agencies or other legitimate services. Consumers reported losing $210 million to fraudsters on payment apps and services in 2023 alone, 62% more than two years ago, according to federal data. Bank transfer or payment fraud losses spiked by nearly 150% over that span to $1.9 billion. Yet it’s often very difficult for consumers to retrieve money sent to bad guys. The big banks that run Zelle in particular “rarely” reimburse customers duped by scammers, according to a recent Senate investigation. So Democrats in Congress are introducing new legislation that would seek to crack down on payment scams by closing loopholes in existing law. It faces potential banking industry opposition and uncertain prospects of passing a Republican-controlled House. The bills, sponsored by Rep. Maxine Waters in the House and Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Elizabeth Warren in their chamber, would protect consumers who are defrauded when they make payments to scam artists on Zelle, Venmo and other platforms. The Senate bill was introduced Thursday and the House bill is set to be introduced later on Friday, the bill’s supporters say. ‘Recipe for disaster’ The legislation would apply to all peer-to-peer platforms, though the focus of recent hearings and reports has been Zelle, the biggest player in the fast-growing space. “Right now, most Zelle transactions are instantaneous and irreversible – which is a recipe for disaster,” Blumenthal told CNN in a phone interview. “Zelle and the big banks who own it know that this speed and convenience make consumers a target for con artists who dupe them out of hard-earned money.” Consumers and small businesses sent $806 billion of payments on Zelle last year alone, 28% more than in 2022. Zelle said Americans sent an average of more than $100 million an hour on the platform by the end of last year. Yet just 12% of consumers last year were reimbursed for Zelle payments disputed as scams, according to the investigation released last week by the Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, which is chaired by Blumenthal. JPMorgan, Wells Fargo and Bank of America rejected a combined total of $560 million of scam disputes between 2021 and 2023, the report found. Scamming victims out of luck One problem is that existing law does not explicitly require banks to reimburse customers who authorize transactions induced by bad actors. That means customers duped into sending money to con artists are often out of luck. For instance, Zelle says that while customers hurt by unauthorized activity are “typically” able to get their money back, victims of scams may not. “Even if you were tricked or persuaded into authorizing a payment for a good or service someone said they were going to provide, but they didn’t fulfill it, this would be considered a scam,” Zelle says on its website. “Because you authorized the payment, you may not be able to get your money back.” Ariana Duval, a rising senior at North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University, received an email this spring with an opportunity to participate in a research project. The scammer posed as an actual research professor at Duval’s school, someone her friends had worked before. Ultimately, the fraudsters convinced Duval, a 21-year-old majoring in fashion merchandise and design, to transfer $2,400 over Zelle to buy research supplies. They even emailed her a mobile check to cover the expenses – a check that turned out to be bogus. “I felt really stupid. Normally, I look at myself as someone who is levelheaded, but in this case I fell for it,” Duval told CNN in a phone interview. Duval, who testified before Congress, tried and failed to get Zelle to refund her the money she lost during the scheme, which also claimed other students as victims. “It was scary. And it can happen at any point to anyone,” Duval said. The Electronic Fund Transfer Act of 1978 (EFTA) only protects customers from unauthorized transfers, such as when a credit card is stolen. The new legislation would seek to close loopholes in the EFTA, protecting consumers from liability when they are defrauded into authorizing a transfer to scammers. The bill would also eliminate an exemption for bank wire transfers and allow the banks of victims to get reimbursed by the banks receiving the fraudulent funds. CNN has reached out to Zelle for comment. While Zelle doesn’t offer payment protection, some of its rivals do. For instance, both Venmo and PayPal have purchase protection options for when customers send money to sellers they don’t know. Zelle refund policy During a hearing last week, Zelle’s backers defended the platform and stated that more than 99.9% of all transactions are completed without any reports of fraud or scams. Cameron Fowler, CEO of Zelle owner Early Warning Services (EWS), told lawmakers in prepared remarks that reports of fraud and scam payments processed on the platform fell last year even as overall transactions surged. “EWS remains steadfastly committed to protecting Zelle users from fraud and scams, through an extensive array of highly effective fraud and scam countermeasures,” Fowler said. Under pressure from lawmakers, last year banks on Zelle began refunding some victims of imposter scams. Fowler said Zelle requires reimbursements for the victims of “qualifying imposter scams where the consumer was duped into sending money to a criminal posing as a government agency, financial institution or service provider.” Blumenthal, the Connecticut Democrat said he’s “very hopeful” his bill will get bipartisan support because “there is nothing red or blue about this.” However, he acknowledges big banks may try to kill it. “I’m pretty clear-eyed about the industry’s position,” Blumenthal said. “The right thing to do would be to support this legislation, but I don’t anticipate a favorable response.”