{"took":246,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":25,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21123091","_score":28.697662,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"This dispute involves unauthorized charges totaling {$21000.00} by XXXX XXXX, significantly exceeding the agreed and authorized amount of {$5100.00}. \nThe merchant explicitly confirmed that the account was paid in full as of XX/XX/XXXX ( see Exhibit B ), yet continued to process additional charges thereafter without authorization ( see Exhibit C bank statements ). \nFurther, the merchant admitted that these charges were not valid transactions, describing them as authorization holds, and confirmed that a refund would be issued. To date, no refund has been provided despite repeated follow-ups ( see Exhibit A ). \n\nKey Findings The original and only authorized agreement totaled {$5100.00} The merchant confirmed the account was paid in full on XX/XX/XXXX Charges continued after the paid in full confirmation without authorization The merchant acknowledged the charges were not valid transactions, characterizing them as authorization holds The merchant committed to issuing a refund, which has not been fulfilled Total unauthorized charges escalated to {$21000.00} Timeline Summary XX/XX/XXXX : Initial engagement ; deposit made under a flexible date arrangement XXXX XXXX : No finalized travel dates ; discrepancies and concerns raised with the vendor XX/XX/XXXX : Merchant confirms account is paid in full XX/XX/XXXX : Unauthorized charges totaling {$21000.00} withdrawn from checking account ending in XXXX XX/XX/XXXX : Merchant acknowledges charges as invalid authorization holds and confirms refund will be issued XXXX XXXX : Multiple attempts to resolve with both the vendor and Wells Fargo ; no refund received and the dispute was misclassified and not properly investigated Exhibits Exhibit A : Merchant email acknowledging charges as authorization holds and confirming refund Exhibit B : Merchant confirmation of paid in full status ( XX/XX/XXXX ) Exhibit C : Bank statements documenting charges totaling {$21000.00} Exhibit D : Wells Fargo denial letter stating no discrepancy found Dispute Handling Concern I attempted to resolve this matter through my bank ; however, the dispute was misclassified or not properly classified, as confirmed by a representative, and was not fully investigated. As a result, the claim was denied without a complete evaluation of the submitted evidence.\n\nLegal Basis Under the Fair Credit Billing Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1666 ) and applicable dispute resolution regulations, this matter constitutes a billing error, including : Charges for goods or services not delivered as agreed Unauthorized charges exceeding the agreed amount Charges processed after the account was confirmed paid in full Additionally : The charges represent a breach of the agreed payment terms, as the authorized total was {$5100.00} No formal contract was provided authorizing additional charges beyond this amount The merchants continued billing after confirming paid in full constitutes material misrepresentation The merchants acknowledgment that the charges were invalid and commitment to refund serves as an admission that the transactions are not legitimate Under applicable card network rules, valid charges require clear authorization and delivery of services as agreed, neither of which has been demonstrated. \nThe burden of proof rests with the merchant to provide evidence of authorization for these charges, which has not been met. \n\nConclusion & Request The evidence clearly establishes : Charges processed without authorization Billing continued after contractual fulfillment ( paid in full ) Merchant admission of invalid charges Failure to honor a confirmed refund commitment Based on these facts, immediate reversal of {$21000.00} is warranted.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-10T09:48:46.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"92064","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21123091","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2026-04-10T08:35:27.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Key <em>Findings</em> The original and only <em>authorized</em> agreement totaled {$5100.00} The merchant <em>confirmed</em> the account was paid in full on XX/XX/XXXX <em>Charges</em> continued after the paid in full confirmation without authorization The merchant acknowledged the <em>charges</em> were not valid transactions, characterizing them as authorization holds The merchant committed to <em>issuing</em> a <em>refund</em>, which has not been fulfilled Total <em>unauthorized</em> <em>charges</em> escalated to {$21000.00} Timeline Summary XX/XX/XXXX : Initial engagement"]},"sort":[28.697662,"21123091"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21434548","_score":27.888262,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint regarding PayPals handling of unauthorized charges and a denied dispute without proper investigation or evidence. \n\nI identified transactions processed through PayPal that I did not authorize. I immediately reported the issue to PayPal and opened a dispute. PayPal denied my claim, stating that the transactions were part of a billing agreement that I supposedly set up with the merchant. \n\nTo verify this, I contacted the merchant, XXXXXXXX directly. XXXXXXXX confirmed in writing that : - There is no account associated with my information ( email, phone number, or payment method ) - There are no charges or active memberships tied to me This directly contradicts PayPals claim that a valid billing agreement exists. \n\nI requested that PayPal provide documentation supporting their decision, including the billing agreement ID, date and method of authorization, and the account or email associated with it. PayPal did not provide any of this information and instead issued a denial without proof. \n\nAt this point, PayPal has failed to demonstrate that I authorized these transactions, while the merchant has confirmed that no account or charges exist on their end. \n\nI am requesting that PayPal : - Reopen and properly investigate this dispute - Provide full documentation of the alleged billing agreement - Refund all unauthorized charges - Remove any associated billing agreements from my account PayPals denial without evidence and contradiction with the merchants findings raises serious concerns about their investigation process and consumer protections.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-21T11:59:05.000Z","issue":"Unauthorized transactions or other transaction problem","sub_product":"Mobile or digital wallet","zip_code":"28379","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21434548","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Paypal Holdings, Inc","date_received":"2026-04-21T11:50:24.000Z","state":"NC","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am requesting that PayPal : - Reopen and properly <em>investigate</em> this dispute - Provide full documentation of the alleged billing agreement - <em>Refund</em> all <em>unauthorized</em> <em>charges</em> - Remove any associated billing agreements from my account PayPals denial without evidence and contradiction with the merchants <em>findings</em> raises serious concerns about their <em>investigation</em> process and consumer protections."],"issue":["<em>Unauthorized</em> transactions or other transaction problem"]},"sort":[27.888262,"21434548"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14694249","_score":26.052252,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing a complaint against MoneyLion for failing to fully refund fraudulent charges made on my account despite clear proof that the account was compromised. \n\nI had not used my MoneyLion account since XX/XX/year>. On XX/XX/year>, I contacted them because I was unable to log in or receive reset emails. I discovered that a hacker had changed both my email address and phone number. I spoke to a representative on XX/XX/XXXX, and we confirmed that my account had been compromised. It took several additional days to regain access. \n\nOnce I reviewed my transaction history, I saw multiple unauthorized charges from XXXX through XXXX. MoneyLion refunded some charges from XXXX, acknowledging the fraud but denied XXXX transactions from XX/XX/year> totaling {$500.00}, which took place in XXXX and XXXX XXXX, Florida ( I live in Colorado and was not there ). These included purchases at XXXX and XXXX XXXX \n\nI made it clear that I had no access to the account during this period, and that the email and phone number associated with the account had been hijacked. Despite this, MoneyLion denied my fraud dispute and gave no justification or evidence that I authorized the charges. \n\nThis appears to be a violation of Regulation XXXX ( XXXX CFR XXXX ), which requires banks to reimburse consumers for unauthorized electronic fund transfers unless they can prove the consumer authorized the transactions. They also failed to issue provisional credit or provide a written explanation of their findings. \n\nI am requesting the CFPBs help in reopening the case, recovering my funds, and investigating whether MoneyLion is systematically mishandling fraud claims especially in cases of clear account takeovers. \n\nWhat would you like the company to do to resolve your issue? \n\nI want XXXXoneyLion to reopen my fraud dispute, refund the {$500.00} in unauthorized charges, and comply with Regulation XXXX procedures for investigating and resolving fraud claims.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-16T05:00:30.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"812XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14694249","timely":"No","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"MoneyLion Inc.","date_received":"2025-07-16T04:55:15.000Z","state":"CO","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Despite this, MoneyLion denied my fraud dispute and gave no justification or evidence that I <em>authorized</em> the <em>charges</em>. \n\nThis appears to be a violation of Regulation XXXX ( XXXX CFR XXXX ), which requires banks to reimburse consumers for <em>unauthorized</em> electronic fund transfers unless they can prove the consumer <em>authorized</em> the transactions. They also failed to <em>issue</em> provisional credit or provide a written explanation of their <em>findings</em>."]},"sort":[26.052252,"14694249"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6310766","_score":25.475853,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"This is a complaint to follow up with my previous complaint number XXXX I am adding to that complaint to further explain my frustration with USBank. When you pick a bank out of all the banks you have the expectation that they will respect your privacy and rights as a customer. The Electronic Funds Transfer Act ensures that if the fund transfer is \" unauthorized '' the bank has to correct any errors within one day from confirming the error, this includes refunding the money taken without authorization. It was confirmed to be via phone that the charge is confirmed fraud. Such a large charge should have NEVER been allowed to be removed from my account. The bank recognized it as suspicious activity by immediately locking my account, but never stopping the transfer. USBank should be responsible for always monitoring transactions especially ones they recognized as fraud. Banks show that they care about their customers by not allowing transfers that are considered unusual or suspicious to be authorized. A person committing fraud is not the customer 's fault. The Bank to solve these issues must 1. Promptly investigate the reported errors AND report its findings withing three business days of completing the investigation. I still as I'm writing this complaint have no idea why the bank has both denied my request, while also admitting the transfer was fraudulent. Even if the bank believed the money transferred was authorized by me it is their burden to prove that. I am writing this complaint to further my investigation of this. The bank claims that its out of their hands, but what's actually happening is illegal.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-12-12T07:27:12.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"68106","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6310766","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"U.S. BANCORP","date_received":"2022-12-12T06:35:02.000Z","state":"NE","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The Electronic Funds Transfer Act ensures that if the fund transfer is \" <em>unauthorized</em> '' the bank has to correct any errors within one day from confirming the error, this includes <em>refunding</em> the money taken without authorization. It was <em>confirmed</em> to be via phone that the <em>charge</em> is <em>confirmed</em> fraud. Such a large <em>charge</em> should have NEVER been allowed to be removed from my account. The bank recognized it as suspicious activity by immediately locking my account, but never stopping the transfer."]},"sort":[25.475853,"6310766"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"20490156","_score":25.355888,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint regarding unauthorized transactions on my account with Chime. \n\nOn or about XX/XX/year>, my card information was used without my authorization to make multiple transactions across several online gambling and gaming platforms, including XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, and other similar merchants. These transactions were not made by me, and I did not give permission to any individual to access or use my card.\n\nThere are two separate issues : 1. A set of unauthorized transactions totaling approximately {$150.00}, which I disputed with Chime. This dispute was denied within approximately three days without what appears to be a reasonable or thorough investigation.\n\n2. A second, much larger series of approximately XXXX unauthorized transactions made across these same merchants, which I have also disputed and is currently under review. \n\nI immediately took action upon discovering the unauthorized activity by reporting the transactions to Chime and initiating disputes. I have clearly stated that these charges are fraudulent and unauthorized. \n\nI am concerned that my initial dispute was denied without a proper or reasonable investigation. Given the number of transactions, the involvement of multiple online merchants, and the nature of the activity, this clearly indicates unauthorized access and potential fraud. \n\nI am requesting that Chime conduct a full and fair investigation of all disputed transactions, including contacting the merchants and reviewing any relevant transaction data, device access logs, or account activity. \n\nThese transactions have caused significant financial hardship, and I am seeking a full refund of all unauthorized charges. \n\nI respectfully request that Chime : - Reopen and properly investigate the previously denied dispute - Thoroughly investigate all unauthorized transactions across all listed merchants - Provide documentation of their investigation findings - Issue refunds for all confirmed unauthorized charges I did not authorize these transactions, did not benefit from them, and my account security was clearly compromised. \n\nI am also in the process of filing a police report regarding this unauthorized activity. \n\nThank you for your attention to this matter.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-03-22T18:18:50.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Other banking product or service","zip_code":"03301","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"20490156","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Chime Financial Inc","date_received":"2026-03-22T18:07:00.000Z","state":"NH","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem using a debit or ATM card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I respectfully request that Chime : - Reopen and properly <em>investigate</em> the previously denied dispute - Thoroughly <em>investigate</em> all <em>unauthorized</em> transactions across all listed merchants - Provide documentation of their <em>investigation</em> <em>findings</em> - <em>Issue</em> <em>refunds</em> for all <em>confirmed</em> <em>unauthorized</em> <em>charges</em> I did not <em>authorize</em> these transactions, did not benefit from them, and my account security was clearly compromised."]},"sort":[25.355888,"20490156"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18698201","_score":23.556229,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Beginning XXXX, multiple unauthorized card-present gas station transactions occurred in XXXX while I was not in XXXX and did not authorize them. These charges were clustered in location and amount and included foreign currency conversion. A merchant confirmed the transaction could only have occurred at the pump. \n\nI immediately disputed these transactions through PayPals resolution process on XXXX, uploaded documentation, and provided additional information when requested. PayPal denied the disputes, stating there was no evidence of unauthorized activity, while simultaneously flagging my account for fraud, reissuing my debit card multiple times, and restricting access to my funds. \n\nI sent certified written notices to PayPal at both their XXXX XXXX, XXXX  and XXXX  addresses. These notices were ignored. Because PayPal failed to respond or resolve the issue, I filed this CFPB complaint. \n\nWhile this complaint was pending, PayPal refunded one XXXX gas station charge only because it appeared to be a U.S. transaction due to merchant coding. This refund was not the result of a substantive investigation. \n\nPayPal later refunded the same XXXX gas station transactions they had previously denied, using the same factual information I originally submitted in XX/XX/year>. No new evidence was requested or provided. The only change was regulatory escalation. \n\nPayPal also misrepresented the case status. The cases were closed on XXXX, despite PayPal stating it would remain open until XXXX. PayPal continued to represent the case as open after it had already been closed. My app even showed for XXXX day XXXX being estimated resolution date, and after that day it disappeared. \n\nThis conduct demonstrates failure to conduct a good-faith Regulation E investigation, improper burden shifting, contradictory findings, delayed correction, failure to respond to certified notices, and misrepresentation of case status.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-13T22:45:17.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"012XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18698201","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Paypal Holdings, Inc","date_received":"2026-01-13T22:09:51.000Z","state":"MA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Beginning XXXX, multiple <em>unauthorized</em> card-present gas station transactions occurred in XXXX while I was not in XXXX and did not <em>authorize</em> them. These <em>charges</em> were clustered in location and amount and included foreign currency conversion. A merchant <em>confirmed</em> the transaction could only have occurred at the pump. \n\nI immediately disputed these transactions through PayPals resolution process on XXXX, uploaded documentation, and provided additional information when requested."]},"sort":[23.556229,"18698201"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21189654","_score":23.441717,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing a complaint regarding unauthorized transactions on my Flare account and the companys failure to properly handle my dispute in accordance with the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ). \n\nOn XX/XX/year>, I notified Flare of fraudulent/unauthorized charges on my account. I reported the issue promptly after discovering the transactions. At that time, I followed their reporting process and informed them that I did not authorize these charges. \n\nAlthough I did not submit written confirmation within 10 business days, I have since submitted a formal written dispute identifying the unauthorized transactions and requesting reimbursement. \n\nFlare has denied provisional credit, stating it was due to not receiving written notice within 10 business days. However, despite my timely initial report on XX/XX/XXXX, Flare is now requiring me to wait until XX/XX/year> ( nearly 90 days total ) for resolution, without providing meaningful updates on the status of the investigation. \n\nI am concerned that : Flare has not provided provisional credit while the investigation is ongoing Flare has not provided clear updates or transparency regarding the status of my dispute The extended delay appears unreasonable given that I reported the fraud promptly Flare may not be meeting its obligations under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act regarding timely investigation and resolution I am requesting that Flare : Provide a detailed status update of my investigation, including what actions have been taken since XX/XX/XXXX Expedite the investigation and resolve my claim without further unnecessary delay Issue a full refund of all unauthorized transactions if confirmed as fraud Provide written documentation explaining their decision-making process and timeline I have acted in good faith by reporting the fraud promptly and submitting all requested documentation. I am requesting assistance to ensure my rights under federal law are upheld and that this matter is resolved fairly and promptly. \n\nDesired Resolution : Immediate review and escalation of my fraud claim Prompt refund of unauthorized charges Clear written explanation of findings and actions taken Dates of Key Events : Fraud reported : XX/XX/year> Written dispute submitted : XX/XX/year> Estimated resolution date given by Flare : XX/XX/year> Account Type : Debit/Prepaid Account","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-13T16:25:53.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"38106","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21189654","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Netspend Corporation","date_received":"2026-04-13T16:15:28.000Z","state":"TN","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["been taken since XX/XX/XXXX Expedite the <em>investigation</em> and resolve my claim without further unnecessary delay <em>Issue</em> a full <em>refund</em> of all <em>unauthorized</em> transactions if <em>confirmed</em> as fraud Provide written documentation explaining their decision-making process and timeline I have acted in good faith by reporting the fraud promptly and submitting all requested documentation."]},"sort":[23.441717,"21189654"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"19954351","_score":20.344507,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"Company : Capital One Product : Credit Card ending in XXXX Issue : Billing Dispute-Failure to conduct a reasonable investigation ; improper denial based on timing Summary of the Problem : I am filing this complaint regarding Capital Ones handling of a billing dispute involving unauthorized charges from a moving company. I paid the merchant a lump sum amount in full via XXXX for the agreed-upon services. The merchant required a second payment method on file, so I provided my Capital One credit card solely for that purposenot for payment. No additional balance was owed. \nDespite this, multiple charges appeared on my Capital One credit card. The merchant later confirmed to Capital One that I had paid in full via XXXX and refunded several duplicate charges. However, XXXX charges {$570.00} and $ XXXX not refunded. These charges were not authorized beyond the original lumpsum payment. \n\nTimeline and Dispute Handling Concerns : * I filed my dispute within 60 days of the statement date. \n* Capital One acknowledged the dispute and requested documentation. \n* I uploaded all the requested documents multiple times, including written explanations, XXXX proof of payment, and account statements. \n* Capital One informed me that I had until XX/XX/year>, to provide documentation, yet repeatedly denied my inquiries by XX/XX/year>, claiming the matter was now outside the allowable timeframe. \n\nEach time I submitted documents, the case was closed within minutes, without any substantive review or explanation. The case was repeatedly closed and reopened over several months, especially between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/year>, without a proper review of the materials I submitted. On XX/XX/year>, a supervisor stated that the dispute would no longer be reviewed because it was outside the allowable timeframe, despite my timely compliance with all requests. \n\nWhy This Appears to Violate the Fair Credit Billing Act : I complied with every deadline provided by Capital One. Any delay occurred due to Capital Ones internal handling of the case, not my actions. The pattern of closing the dispute within minutes of receiving documentation, followed by denial based on timing, raises serious concerns about whether Capital One conducted a reasonable and good-faith investigation as required under the Fair Credit Billing Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1666 ).\n\nThe FCBA requires creditors to : Review the consumers evidence, conduct a reasonable investigation, and provide a written explanation of findings.\n\nCapital One repeatedly closed the dispute without addressing the evidence I submitted. If Capital One relied solely on merchant statements while disregarding consumersubmitted documentation, this would constitute an unreasonable investigation and a potential violation of federal law.\n\nHarm to the Consumer : * I was charged for services that were already paid in full via XXXX. \nThe merchant acknowledged the XXXX payment and refunded some charges, confirming the error. \n* Capital Ones refusal to review the remaining charges leaves me responsible for unauthorized amounts.\n\n* The account was not past due, and I am actively trying to resolve the matter to protect my credit standing.\n\n* Capital Ones actions create a risk of improper negative credit reporting and financial harm.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-03-04T05:28:13.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"754XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"19954351","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2026-03-04T04:43:14.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Despite this, multiple <em>charges</em> appeared on my Capital One credit card. The merchant later <em>confirmed</em> to Capital One that I had paid in full via XXXX and <em>refunded</em> several duplicate <em>charges</em>. However, XXXX <em>charges</em> {$570.00} and $ XXXX not <em>refunded</em>. These <em>charges</em> were not <em>authorized</em> beyond the original lumpsum payment. \n\nTimeline and Dispute Handling Concerns : * I filed my dispute within 60 days of the statement date. \n* Capital One acknowledged the dispute and requested documentation."],"sub_product":["General-purpose credit card or <em>charge</em> card"]},"sort":[20.344507,"19954351"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21244917","_score":19.07062,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX from BOA 's regulatory complaints department at XXXX XXXX will not return my call * * * * * * * * * * She refuses to address this issue in which I'm the victim of a crime. \n\n\n\nBank of America Customer Advocacy / Executive Resolution RE : Final Demand Fraudulent Charges and Improper Account Handling To Whom It May Concern, I am issuing a final demand regarding fraudulent charges on my account that remain unresolved, despite multiple complaints filed with the Consumer Financial Protection bureau.\n\nThese transactions were not authorized by me, and your prior response failed to demonstrate that a reasonable investigation was conducted or provide evidence of authorization.\n\nAdditionally, on XX/XX/XXXX, Bank of America confirmed to me in writing that my accounts were closed. Despite this, you have continued to assess fees and even issued a new debit card. This is contradictory, unacceptable, and further evidence of improper handling of my account.\n\nUnder applicable federal law, you are required to properly investigate unauthorized transactions and maintain accurate account status. Based on your actions, you have failed to meet these obligations.\n\nI am demanding the following within 10 business days : Immediate reversal of all fraudulent charges Refund of any fees assessed after the account closure notice Written confirmation that the account is properly closed and no further activity will occur If this issue is not corrected within this timeframe, I will proceed with additional regulatory complaints and legal action, including small claims court. \n\nThis is my final attempt to resolve this matter directly.\n\nSee previous complaints and attempts to resolve this matter.\n\nBOA has not produced anything to prove that committed this crime. BOA has not properly considered the evidence in my favor. BOA has not cooperated in returning my calls and emails to inquire about their findings. I will continue to file complaints and take this to small claims court. On or about XX/XX/XXXX I noticed an unauthorized XXXX charge of {$720.00} on my Bank of America debit card. I DID NOT purchase this item, and I have never authorized anyone to use any of my cards. I immediately contacted the fraud department at Bank of America, and they cancelled this transaction debit card and issued the {$720.00} credit. I also, went to the police station and filed a report. Within a few days Bank of America withdrew the {$720.00} credit without considering the police report or any of the evidence I collected to prove the fraud. Then they reinstated the credit and on Friday XXXX I received a letter from Bank of America that their fraud department reached the conclusion that I make this purchase and will soon take {$720.00} out of my account. I did not authorize this transaction, I did not benefit from it, and I did not give permission to anyone to use my card or account. I reported the charge promptly and have cooperated fully with every request. Bank of America has not provided any of the following : A signed receipt A contract Authorization logs An IP address or device-ID Merchant confirmation Delivery confirmation Any proof that I personally approved the charge Under the Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA ) and Regulation Z, the burden of proof is on the bank to show authorization. They have not done so. Despite multiple disputes and requests for escalation, Bank of America continues to deny my claim while failing to provide the evidence they claim to have relied upon. Each time I ask for documentation used in the decision, I am told either that it is not available or that the merchant provided something but nothing has been provided to me. I am requesting that the CFPB requires Bank of America to : 1. Reopen and reinvestigate my claim 2. Provide all documents used in their denial decision 3. Correctly classify the charge as unauthorized 4. Restore the credit of {$720.00} and remove any related fees 5. Ensure the account is secured with a new card number Bank of Americas handling of this matter violates the intent and requirements of federal consumer protection laws. I am asking the CFPB to intervene, so the matter receives a lawful and fair review.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-14T23:03:51.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"76210","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21244917","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2026-04-14T22:53:00.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Banking errors"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["BOA has not cooperated in returning my calls and emails to inquire about their <em>findings</em>. I will continue to file complaints and take this to small claims court. On or about XX/XX/XXXX I noticed an <em>unauthorized</em> XXXX <em>charge</em> of {$720.00} on my Bank of America debit card. I DID NOT purchase this item, and I have never <em>authorized</em> anyone to use any of my cards."]},"sort":[19.07062,"21244917"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"20118120","_score":18.048544,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"To Whom It May Concern, I am submitting this complaint to request assistance regarding Discover Cards handling of a fraud dispute involving unauthorized transactions on my credit card account. Despite reporting the fraud promptly and providing supporting documentation, Discover has repeatedly closed the claim without adequately investigating the matter or resolving the unauthorized charges.\n\nUnder the Fair Credit Billing Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1666 ) and Regulation Z, consumers are protected from liability for unauthorized credit card transactions and creditors are required to conduct a reasonable investigation when a billing error or fraud claim is reported. In my case, Discover failed to conduct a proper investigation and instead placed the burden on me to obtain information from the merchant.\n\nBackground On XX/XX/XXXX, my Discover credit card was used fraudulently for a purchase with XXXX XXXX for {$90.00} I immediately reported the fraud to Discover and was instructed to discard the card while a replacement would be issued. I also activated the Discover Freeze/Lock feature * * in the mobile application to prevent further unauthorized activity. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I received email notifications from Discover indicating that attempted purchases were blocked because my account was frozen, including two XXXX transactions of {$1400.00} each.\n\nDespite the account being frozen and despite Discover notifying me that the purchases were blocked, the charges were later processed and posted to my account. At that time : * My account was locked/frozen * I had not received the replacement credit card * I had not activated any replacement card * I did not authorize the transactions I immediately contacted Discover to report the transactions as fraud.\n\nDiscovers Investigation Failures Discover opened a fraud claim but repeatedly closed the investigation citing an inability to reach the merchant ( XXXX ). Discover representatives advised that they could not reopen the claim unless I provided additional proof.\n\nThis position is unreasonable and inconsistent with the requirements of the Fair Credit Billing Act. As the creditor, Discover is responsible for investigating unauthorized transactions and communicating with the merchant network.\n\nIn order to assist Discover, I personally contacted XXXX multiple times via their customer support chat. XXXX representatives confirmed the following : * The airline tickets were booked fraudulently.\n\n* The tickets were cancelled and converted to travel bank credit.\n\n* The travel bank account was suspended due to fraud. \n* XXXX communicated the fraud findings and advised that Discover should process the refund.\n\nThese communications are documented in the attached screenshots.\n\nDespite this information, Discover continued to close the fraud case and repost the charges to my account. In a later communication, Discover also stated that someone called claiming to be me and requested that the account be unfrozen. However, Discover could not explain how this individual successfully verified my identity or why no verification alerts were sent to me.\n\nMy contact information has never changed, and I received no calls, verification codes, or authorization requests related to unfreezing the account.\n\nFinancial Harm As a result of Discovers actions : * Fraudulent charges totaling {$1400.00} remain on my account.\n\n* My fraud claims have been repeatedly closed without resolution.\n\n* I have spent months attempting to coordinate communication between Discover and XXXX myself.\n\n* I have continued making minimum payments to avoid damage to my credit while this matter remains unresolved.\n\nDiscover also issued correspondence stating they considered the transaction valid and would not continue the dispute despite the documentation provided.\n\nSecurity and Account Control Concerns A particularly concerning issue in this case is that the unauthorized transactions were processed while my Discover account was actively frozen using Discovers Freeze/Lock feature, which is specifically marketed to prevent new purchases if a card is lost or compromised.\n\nDiscover even sent email notifications confirming that the XXXX transactions had been blocked because the account was frozen. However, those same transactions were later processed and posted to my account. This raises serious concerns about Discovers internal controls and the reliability of the account freeze feature that consumers rely on to prevent fraud.\n\nFurthermore, Discover later informed me that someone allegedly called and requested that the account be unfrozen. I dispute that I made such a call. Discover has not provided any documentation explaining : * How the callers identity was verified * What authentication methods were used * Why no alerts, calls, or verification notifications were sent to me * Why the account was unfrozen when the mobile application already allows the cardholder to perform that action directly If Discover allowed an unauthorized individual to unfreeze the account without proper identity verification, that represents a serious security failure and should not result in financial liability for the consumer.\n\nRequested Resolution I respectfully request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau assist in resolving this matter and require Discover to : 1. Conduct a proper investigation of the unauthorized XXXX transactions.\n\n2. Provide documentation showing how my account was allegedly unfrozen and how the callers identity was verified.\n\n3. Coordinate directly with XXXX regarding the confirmed fraud investigation.\n\n4. Remove the fraudulent XXXX charge from my account and reimburse the full unauthorized amount of {$1400.00}.\n\n5. Correct any interest or fees related to the disputed charges.\n\nAs a consumer who promptly reported fraud, secured my account, and cooperated fully with the investigation, I should not be held financially responsible for unauthorized transactions.\n\nI appreciate the CFPBs assistance in ensuring that Discover complies with its obligations under federal consumer protection laws. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2026-03-10T04:22:58.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"11003","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"20118120","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"DISCOVER BANK","date_received":"2026-03-10T03:53:58.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Conduct a proper <em>investigation</em> of the <em>unauthorized</em> XXXX transactions.\n\n2. Provide documentation showing how my account was allegedly unfrozen and how the callers identity was verified.\n\n3. Coordinate directly with XXXX regarding the <em>confirmed</em> fraud <em>investigation</em>.\n\n4. Remove the fraudulent XXXX <em>charge</em> from my account and reimburse the full <em>unauthorized</em> amount of {$1400.00}.\n\n5. Correct any interest or fees related to the disputed <em>charges</em>."],"sub_product":["General-purpose credit card or <em>charge</em> card"]},"sort":[18.048544,"20118120"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21865923","_score":17.747248,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"This is the story to the issue at hand. Unauthorized charge made to our debit card for subscription services to our current vendor for web services. Payment method of XXXX was not removed as told by customer service that would resulting in payment method left in their database, and therefore was charged the amount below. Merchant was contacted of their mistake. Bank was contacted. Bank did chargeback and issued temporary credit. Merchant responded. Denied unauthorized charge by their offshore call center representative. Sent refund policy to bank. Bank returned money to merchant again. Our account debited. Beside this issue, bank is having claims representatives to use FAKE names to address customers, admitted to us by one of their people. All of this information is supported by bank 's recording system. All calls recorded. Very disappointed with their poor customer service. Please read the below letter sent to them on XX/XX/year>. They reopened the claim again. Thank you for your assistance with this matter. \n\nNOTE : This claim is from both my wife and I. XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX. \n__________________________________________ Re : Unauthorized/Fraudulent Transaction Account ending XXXX Claim : # XXXX | Merchant : XXXX | Amount : {$500.00} To Whom It May Concern : Purpose of This Letter Report and dispute an unauthorized debit-card charge from XXXX for {$500.00} on account ending XXXX ( Claim # XXXX ). \nRequest reimbursement by crediting bank account ending XXXX for {$500.00}, and confirm the result in writing.\n\nRequest clarification on the conflicting claim updates and the representative name/ID issues described below.\n\nBackground This dispute is not about XXXX service quality, terms, or a refund policy. It is about a charge that was not authorized.\n\nThe debit card ending XXXX ( cardholder : XXXX XXXX ) was charged for a renewal without authorization.\n\nThe card had been used once the prior year and was supposed to be removed from the XXXX payment methods but was not removed by customer service which allowed the renewal to charge the card.\n\nTo prevent another charge, the card was removed ending XXXX from XXXX, the subscription was cancelled, and a new subscription was purchased using a different card ending XXXX ( including a discount of {$250.00} ).\n\nTimeline ( Calls, References, and Employee IDs ) XX/XX/year> ( approx. ) Dispute started ; stop-payment request recorded ( Ref # XXXX ). \nXX/XX/year> Follow-up call ( s ) ; additional reference recorded ( Ref # XXXX ) ; claim also referenced as # XXXX. \nSame day as posting We contacted XXXX Customer Service and filed an unauthorized-charge report.\n\nSubsequent call Representative XXXX issued a temporary credit after finding the dispute had merit ( claim also referenced as # XXXX ). \nXXXX XXXX, 2026 Follow-up referencing claim # XXXX. \nXXXX XXXX, 2026 Spoke with XXXX ( Emp ID # XXXX ), who said the claim was closed on XXXX XXXX, 2026. That same day, at the request of XXXX ( Claims Customer Service, Emp ID XXXX ), we emailed supporting documents ( including evidence of cancellation and a sworn statement ), without being told the claim had already been closed. \nXXXX XXXX, 2026 Spoke with XXXX ( employee ID not obtained ) about reopening/resolution. XXXX said the name XXXX could not be verified and confirmed the name provided to us was not the representatives actual name ( a false name/alias ). We were later told the person existed under a different name, which raised concerns about being able to track prior conversations. \nXXXX XXXX, XXXX  XXXX escalation; spoke with supervisor XXXX after attempted supervisor contacts ( including XXXX ) . We discussed the basis for the denial and how the claim was originally entered. \nXXXX XXXX, 2026 Status update : XXXX ( Emp ID XXXX ) and supervisor XXXX ( Emp ID XXXX ) said the matter was reopened and notes were added for investigator review.\n\nIssues We Noticed How the claim was entered : we were told the original claim was entered as ( i ) not unauthorized/fraud, ( ii ) a dispute about services provided, and ( iii ) paid by other means. That does not match what we reported.\n\nConflicting status updates : we were told the claim was closed ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX  ) and later told it was reopened, without a clear explanation.\n\nName/ID concerns : at least one representative ( XXXX ) would not provide an employee ID, and we were told the name XXXX could not be verified as given.\n\nDocument access : we were told the emailed documents could not be viewed during reopening attempt ( s ).\n\nWhat We Need Wells Fargo to Do Credit {$500.00} back to bank account ending XXXX for the unauthorized XXXX charge and confirm in writing when that credit is completed. \nReview this as an unauthorized transaction ( not a service dispute ) and complete the investigation under the correct category. \nSend a written status update confirming whether the claim is open or closed, who is handling it ( if available ), and the expected timeline for a decision for Claim # XXXX. \nExplain in writing why we were told the claim closed on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, why documents were requested on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, and not when the claim was reported and filed, and why we received conflicting information about reopening. \nClarify representative identification : confirm the policy on providing employee IDs and how customers can reliably reference prior calls. \nExplain the use of an alias/false name ( as confirmed by XXXX ) and how customers can verify who they spoke with if a different name is used.\n\nCFPB Complaint ( For Your Awareness ) We submitted a complaint to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) due to the conflicting information we received and the concerns noted above.\n\nDocuments Included Copies of the documents we emailed on XXXX XXXX, XXXX  ( requested by XXXX, Emp ID XXXX ) show cancellation/termination of the XXXX service. \nSworn statement stating the XXXX charge was not authorized by the cardholder. \nPlease review this dispute as soon as possible and send a written response confirming the outcome. Please contact us at XXXX if you have any questions.\n\nNote : Some dates, times, and call details above are based on our best recollection and may be approximate. The information herewithin may be updated at a later date.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-05-04T20:56:55.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"77024","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21865923","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2026-05-04T20:27:35.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Request clarification on the conflicting claim updates and the representative name/ID <em>issues</em> described below.\n\nBackground This dispute is not about XXXX service quality, terms, or a <em>refund</em> policy. It is about a <em>charge</em> that was not <em>authorized</em>.\n\nThe debit card ending XXXX ( cardholder : XXXX XXXX ) was charged for a renewal without authorization."]},"sort":[17.747248,"21865923"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17810072","_score":16.613773,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"Subject : Discover Has Twice Denied XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX I am filing this complaint because Discover has twice refused to remove fraudulent charges from my account despite overwhelming evidence, including a federal court judgment, proving the merchant operated a deceptive fraud scheme. \nSUMMARY OF FRAUD : Approximately 2 years ago, I was defrauded by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX through a sophisticated scheme where they sent me fake invoices and deceived me into making payments totaling approximately {$8000.00} on my Discover card. I believed these were legitimate business transactions. They were not - this was fraud. \nXXXX XXXX HAS CONFIRMED THIS WAS FRAUD : On XX/XX/XXXX, the Federal Trade Commission obtained a court order against Ascend CapVentures in the XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX California ( Case : Federal Trade Commission XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, et al. ). The court issued a XXXX XXXX XXXX, froze their assets, and appointed a federal receiver. \nSubsequently, the court entered a PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND MONETARY JUDGMENT against Ascend CapVentures, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, and the individual operators XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX for operating a fraudulent and deceptive business scheme. \nThis federal court judgment proves definitively that XXXX was operating a fraud operation and that I was a victim of that fraud. \nI REPORTED THIS FRAUD TO DISCOVER 2 YEARS AGO - THEY WRONGLY DENIED ME : When I discovered the fraud approximately 2 years ago, I immediately reported it to BOTH the Federal Trade Commission AND to Discover simultaneously. I was XXXX of the first victims to report Ascend to the FTC, which helped trigger the federal investigation. \nDiscover denied my legitimate fraud claim at that time, incorrectly applying billing dispute timeframes to what was clearly identity theft and fraud. \nDISCOVER HAS NOW DENIED ME A SECOND TIME : After the federal court issued its permanent injunction confirming Ascends fraudulent operations, I contacted Discover again with the court documents proving I had been reporting legitimate fraud all along. \nAfter I sent a formal demand letter with federal court documents, Discover sent me a letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, with their investigation findings. \nWhile Discover acknowledged my dispute by marking the account as disputed on my credit report, they concluded that the account and balance are considered valid and still hold me liable for {$6000.00} in fraudulent charges. \nDiscovers investigation completely ignored the federal court judgment proving XXXX operated a fraudulent scheme. Their letter states the charges are explained in detail by the billing statements- but thats XXXX XXXX : I was DEFRAUDED into making those payments. A federal court confirms this was fraud. \nWHY DISCOVERS DENIAL IS WRONG : XXXX. Fraud Through Deception is Still Fraud : Yes, I paid invoices that XXXX sent me - because they DECEIVED me into believing they were legitimate. That is the textbook definition of fraud. A federal court has now confirmed XXXX operated a deceptive scheme. \nXXXX. The Invoices Were the XXXX of XXXX : Discover is using the sophistication of XXXX fraud scheme against me. The fact that XXXX created fake invoices does not make this a billing dispute- it makes it sophisticated fraud that a federal court has confirmed. \nXXXX. I Would Not Have Authorized These Charges But For the Deception : The legal test is not did you click pay but were you deceived into authorizing charges for fraudulent purposes? I was defrauded. Federal court agrees. \nXXXX. Discover Can not Use the Fraudsters Characterization to Avoid Liability : Ascend calling these invoices does not determine the legal classification. This was fraud, confirmed by federal court. \nDISCOVERS VIOLATIONS : Discovers continued refusal to remove these fraudulent charges despite federal court confirmation of fraud raises serious concerns about violations of : Fair Credit Billing Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1666 ) - Failure to properly investigate fraud Truth in Lending Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq. ) - Improper handling of fraudulent charges Regulation Z ( 12 CFR 226.12, 226.13 ) - Requirements for resolving unauthorized use Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 ) - Reporting fraudulent debt as legitimate DISCOVER HAS MADE XXXX ERRORS : XXXX. Original incorrect denial of my legitimate fraud report 2 years ago XXXX. Current refusal to correct that error despite federal court proof Total financial harm : Fraudulent charges still on account : {$6000.00} Interest paid over XXXX years : [ approximately {$1200.00} ] Ongoing monthly interest charges XXXX XXXX impact ( though account now marked as disputed ) Emotional distress from XXXX years of fighting proven fraud WHAT I AM SEEKING : XXXX. ImmediXXXX removal of all fraudulent charges related to Ascend CapVentures from my account XXXX. Reversal and refund of all interest, fees, and penalties charged over the past XXXX years on these fraudulent charges XXXX. Correction of all credit reporting to reflect these were fraudulent charges, not legitimate debt XXXX. Written confirmation that these charges have been removed due to fraud XXXX. Assurance that Discover will properly investigate fraud claims in the future ADDITIONAL ACTIONS TAKEN : I filed XXXX of the first complaints with the FTC about XXXX, helping trigger the federal investigation I filed a claim with the federal receiver for losses via wire transfer I have sent Discover a formal demand letter via certified mail with federal court documents attached I am prepared to file complaints with FDIC, my state Attorney General, and consult with consumer protection attorneys if this is not resolved CONCLUSION : A federal court has determined that XXXX XXXX operated a fraudulent scheme. I reported this fraud to Discover in good faith 2 years ago. Discover made an error in denying my claim. That error is now proven by federal court judgment. \nDiscover must correct this error immediately. Holding a consumer liable for federally-proven fraudulent charges is unconscionable and violates consumer protection laws. \nI am being forced to pay for charges that a federal court has confirmed were obtained through fraud and deception. This is wrong, and I need the CFPBs assistance in getting Discover to do the right thing. \nAccount Information : Amount in dispute : {$6000.00} Account opened : XX/XX/XXXX First reported fraud to Discover : Approximately 2 years ago ( XXXX ) Discovers investigation letter date : XX/XX/XXXX 2025","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-25T23:35:28.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"79701","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17810072","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"DISCOVER BANK","date_received":"2025-11-25T23:22:22.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I Would Not Have <em>Authorized</em> These <em>Charges</em> But For the Deception : The legal test is not did you click pay but were you deceived into <em>authorizing</em> <em>charges</em> for fraudulent purposes? I was defrauded. Federal court agrees. \nXXXX. Discover Can not Use the Fraudsters Characterization to Avoid Liability : Ascend calling these invoices does not determine the legal classification. This was fraud, <em>confirmed</em> by federal court."],"sub_product":["General-purpose credit card or <em>charge</em> card"]},"sort":[16.613773,"17810072"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16920791","_score":16.235704,"_source":{"product":"Prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"Subject : Formal Complaint PayPal , Inc . Violation of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ) and Regulation E To : Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Attn : Office of Consumer Response XXXX. XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX DC XXXX Via : www.consumerfinance.gov/complaint Complainant : Name : XXXX XXXX XXXX Phone : XXXX Email : XXXX Respondent : Entity : PayPal , Inc . \nAddress : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, CA XXXX Issuer : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. ( PayPal Debit XXXX Issuer ) To Whom It May Concern : This letter constitutes a formal legal complaint against PayPal , Inc. for repeated and willful violations of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ), 15 U.S.C. 1693 et seq., and its implementing regulation, Regulation E ( 12 CFR Part 1005 ). PayPal failed to investigate, protect, and refund a series of clearly unauthorized electronic fund transfers totaling {$3500.00}, and subsequently engaged in retaliatory action by permanently limiting my account after I followed PayPals own procedures and fully complied with applicable law. These actions constitute unlawful practices that have caused me substantial financial, academic, and personal harm. \n\nXXXX. Summary of Events On XX/XX/year>, at approximately XXXX XXXX, I discovered that my Paypal account balance was unexpectedly low after receiving my school tuition refund of {$4500.00} the day prior. Upon further investigation, I found that my PayPal Debit XXXX ( issued by The XXXX XXXX  ) had been used XXXX times without authorization between the evening of XX/XX/XXXX and the morning of XX/XX/XXXX, totaling {$3500.00}. All of The charges were made to XXXX XXXX and XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX during overnight hours, with several of the transactions occurring within the same minute, indicating automated or fraudulent activity. \nAt XXXX XXXX, less than XXXX minutes after discovery, I contacted PayPal by telephone to report the unauthorized transactions. The representative confirmed the activity appeared suspicious and instructed me to obtain documentation from the merchant confirming that no account in my name existed. \n\nOver the next XXXX weeks, I made more than XXXX attempts by phone and email to obtain such documentation from XXXX. The merchant confirmed in writing : My email address is not registered to any XXXX account. \n\nMy card number and personal information do not match any user or record. \nNo transaction history exists associated with my details. \n\nAll documentation was provided to PayPal multiple times, per PayPals instructions. \n\nXXXX. PayPals Gross Negligence, Mishandling and Breach of Statutory Obligations Despite my full compliance and timely reporting, PayPal failed to meet multiple obligations imposed by EFTA 1693f and 1693g and Regulation E, 12 CFR 1005.6 and 1005.11.\n\na ) Failure to investigate within required timeframes Under 12 CFR 1005.11 ( c ) ( 1 ), a financial institution must investigate any reported error ( including unauthorized electronic fund transfers ) promptly and resolve the matter within 10 business days of receiving notice. If additional time is needed, provisional credit must be provided. PayPal denied XXXX of XXXX disputes within XXXX dayswell before any meaningful investigation could have occurredconstituting a prima facie violation of 1005.11 ( c ). \n\nb ) Failure to provide provisional credit Per 12 CFR 1005.11 ( c ) ( 2 ) ( i ), if an institution can not conclude an investigation within 10 business days, it must provisionally credit the consumers account for the disputed amount ( including interest where applicable ) and provide written notice within two business days. PayPal issued no provisional credit, thereby depriving me of critical access to funds intended for tuition and education-related expenses, in violation of EFTA 1693f ( c ). \n\nc ) Failure to provide written explanation and access to evidence When a financial institution determines no error occurred, 1005.11 ( d ) ( 1 ) requires a written explanation of findings and a statement of the consumers right to request copies of documents relied upon. Despite multiple written and verbal requests, PayPal provided only a cursory denial ( We found these transactions were authorized ) and refused to produce any supporting documentation. This refusal constitutes a clear violation of 1005.11 ( d ) ( 1 ).\n\nd ) Failure to limit consumer liability Under 12 CFR 1005.6 ( b ) ( 1 ), if the consumer notifies the institution within two business days of learning of unauthorized use, liability is limited to no more than {$50.00}. I reported the fraud within minutes of discovery, well within this statutory window. PayPals refusal to credit my account, combined with its denial of my dispute, unlawfully shifted full liability onto me in direct contravention of EFTA 1693g ( a ).\n\ne ) Retaliatory account limitation Following my repeated attempts to obtain compliance and lawful resolution, PayPal permanently limited my account, citing abuse of the dispute process. This constitutes a retaliatory action designed to deter the exercise of rights protected under EFTA 1693m ( civil liability ) and violates the fundamental principle of good faith in consumer protection enforcement.\n\n3. Systemic Failures and Gross Negligence PayPal ignored clear indicators of fraud, including 44 identical transactions executed in rapid succession overnight.\n\nIts adjudication was inconsistentone charge may have been reversed, while 43 others with identical patterns were denied without explanation. \n\n\nPayPal disregarded documentation from the merchant confirming no account linkage, violating 1005.11 ( c ) ( 4 ) ( v ) - ( vi ), which mandates consideration of any relevant information within the institutions own records.\n\nRequests for the documents used to reach denial were ignored, violating 1005.11 ( d ) ( 1 ).\n\nThe permanent limitation of my account following legitimate disputes constitutes retaliatory interference and demonstrates institutional negligence and bad faith. \n\n\n\nXXXX. Consequences and Harm Loss of {$3500.00} in unauthorized debits, representing tuition refund funds. \n\n\nInability to purchase required educational materials, resulting in withdrawal from my academic program. \nSevere emotional distress, reputational harm, and disruption to personal and academic progress. \n\n\nDenial of access to essential financial tools and payment services due to retaliatory account termination. \n\n\n\nXXXX. Legal Authority Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ), 15 U.S.C. 16931693r Regulation E, 12 CFR Part 1005 1005.6 Liability of consumer for unauthorized transfers 1005.10 Preauthorized transfers 1005.11 Procedures for resolving errors Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Official Interpretations of Regulation E 15 U.S.C. 1693m ( a ) Civil liability for noncompliance ( actual and statutory damages, attorneys fees, and costs ) 6. Nature of Violations Violation of 12 CFR 1005.11 ( c ) ( 1 ) Failure to conduct prompt investigation.\n\nViolation of 12 CFR 1005.11 ( c ) ( 2 ) ( i ) Failure to issue provisional credit within 10 business days.\n\nViolation of 12 CFR 1005.11 ( d ) ( 1 ) Failure to provide written findings and supporting documentation. \n\n\nViolation of 12 CFR 1005.6 ( b ) ( 1 ) Improper denial of consumer liability limitation ( {$50.00} cap ).\n\nRetaliatory account limitation inconsistent with good-faith compliance under EFTA 1693m .\n\n7. Timeline of Key Events XXXX XXXX XXXX : Unauthorized transactions occur ( XXXX charges totaling {$3500.00} ). \n\n\nXX/XX/year> ( XXXX PM ) : I report all transactions as unauthorized to PayPal. \n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX, 2025 : I make over XXXX attempts to obtain written verification from XXXX, which confirms no account exists in my name. \n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX : PayPal requests I submit evidence, which I do. \n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX : I resubmit all documents multiple times per PayPals requests. \n\n\nXX/XX/year> : PayPal denies XXXX of the XXXX disputes without explanation. \n\n\nXX/XX/year> : My appeal is rejected with a generic response and no documentation. \n\n\nXX/XX/year> : PayPal permanently limits my account for abuse of dispute process. \n\n\nXXXX. XXXX of Events including XXXX  Below is the complete, verified timeline of events summarizing my interactions with XXXX  and the related transactions for PayPals dispute investigation. This information has been relayed to Paypal numerous times by email, phone, and the uploading of documents through the Paypal message center. \nPaypal has chosen to ignore the information and has denied the claims and refused to refund my money despite XXXX giving written confirmation XXXX separate times that my email and identity are not tied to a XXXX account. Furthermore, they gave me written confirmation multiple times, by multiple employees, they don't have any record of these transactions. These written statements from XXXX satisfies the requests made by PAYPAL, confirming that my information is not linked to an account where the charges occurred. This is what Paypal instructed me to get from XXXX, and is the proof they needed to make the determination that the charges were unauthorized and issue the appropriate refund. The written confirmation from XXXX further proves that the charges made using my PayPal debit card were completely unauthorized, not associated with me nor linked to an account associated with me.. \nXX/XX/year> I discovered that my PayPal balance was unexpectedly low after receiving a tuition refund of {$4500.00} the day before. \n\n\nUpon review, I found XXXX unauthorized transactions from XXXX XXXX and XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, totaling {$3500.00}. \n\n\nI immediately contacted PayPal ( XXXX XXXX  ) and reported the transactions as unauthorized. \n\nXX/XX/year> Spoke with A PayPal Rep and was told to get something from XXXX that shows my name is not associated with an account where my debit card was used Request # : I contacted XXXX via phone to report the unauthorized use of my PayPal debit card, and asked for the information that Paypal requested Request number XXXX : I sent XXXX via email documents that i created to assist in the investigation XXXX issued Ticket # XXXX, acknowledging receipt of my request. ( Source : XXXX - We have received your request XXXX ) XX/XX/year> I sent a XXXX Request for XXXX and asked for them to take my attached information and check their system for the requested information. \nXXXX XXXX, ( XXXX ) responded to my outreach and confirmed that my email address is not registered to any accounts in their system. \nXXXX wrote : Dear XXXX Thank you for contacting XXXX Pennsylvania XXXX XXXX. \n\nYour email address is not registered to any accounts in our system. \nIf you have an account with us and have access to the email address registered on it, please send us your query from it or make live contact with our support team via chat or phone. \n\nXX/XX/year> XXXX sent a follow-up request for verification documents, asking for : First XXXX and last XXXX digits of card Total amount of unauthorized transactions Supporting bank statements XX/XX/year> I responded to XXXX request ( via XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXX  ), providing all requested documentation and a detailed explanation. \n\n\nI reiterated that PayPal required documentation showing the XXXX  account tied to these transactions is not in my name. \n\n\nI provided transaction details, totaling {$3500.00}, and clearly stated that these were unauthorized charges. \n\n\nAttachments included PayPal transaction records and screenshots showing each charge. \n\n\n\nXX/XX/year> XXXX ( XXXX ) replied, stating the matter was escalated to their operations team and asked for XXXX hours for review. \n\n\nI followed up that evening, noting no update or communication had been received. \n\n\n\nXX/XX/year> XXXX ( XXXX ) replied, claiming the review was still ongoing and asked for patience. \n\n\nI responded the same day, stating that my request was simple and could be completed in minutes, not weeks. \n\n\nI emphasized I was only asking XXXX  to confirm whether the account tied to these transactions was registered under my name or not, and warned I would escalate to regulators if not addressed by XX/XX/XXXX. \n\n\n\nXX/XX/year> After no further response, I followed up again (??? ). \n\n\nLater that day, XXXX ( XXXX ) responded, stating : We were not able to locate an account that matches the transactions provided with the card details previously shared. \n\n\n\nXXXX again requested the same documentation ( first XXXX / last XXXX digits, statement, and card images ) all of which had already been submitted. \n\n\n\nXX/XX/year> I replied, expressing frustration that XXXX kept requesting the same information, pointing out that I had already submitted all documents multiple times and that the matter was overdue. \n\n\nLater that day, another XXXX  representative ( XXXX ) repeated the same message as XXXX again stating no matching account was found and asking for the same materials again. \nWe were not able to locate an account that matches the transactions provided with the card details previously shared. \n\n\n\n\nXX/XX/year> I again provided the requested information for a third time, including : PayPal XXXX XXXX ending in XXXX XXXXXXXX Issuing bank : XXXX XXXX transactions totaling {$3500.00} Despite this, Paypal has ignored this information and chose not to review it. \n\n\nXXXX. Requested Remedies Pursuant to XXXX XXXX ( civil liability for noncompliance ), I request that PayPal and any relevant oversight bodies take the following corrective actions : Reverse all denials and refund the full {$3500.00} in unauthorized charges. \n\n\nProvide {$25000.00} in punitive and compensatory damages for financial losses, educational disruption, and emotional distress. \n\n\nIssue a formal written acknowledgment and apology for procedural and investigative failures. \n\n\nImmediately lift the permanent account limitation and restore full access. \nImplement corrective measures to ensure : Timely investigations and provisional credits per 1005.11 ( c ).\n\nWritten explanations and disclosure of evidence per 1005.11 ( d ).\n\nProhibition of retaliatory account actions against consumers asserting protected rights.\n\nProvide regulators with all internal records, including fraud-detection logs, denial rationales, investigator notes, and communications regarding this case.\n\n10. Conclusion I have acted in full good faith, complied with all PayPal instructions, and fulfilled every requirement under EFTA and Regulation E, which includes the reporting of the unauthorized transactions immediately and promptly. I have followed every instruction given by paypal in the process and provided all requested evidence multiple times. The documentation proves these transactions were unauthorized and not tied to me in any way. PayPal representatives have confirmed that these are not authorized and assured me when providing these documentations it would satisfy the unlawful demands that paypal requested. By law, paypal has no right to demand that a consumer must contact a merchant in order to file a dispute over an unauthorized transaction. \nThe evidence provided incontrovertibly establishes that these transactions were unauthorized and that PayPals handling of the matter constitutes multiple regulatory violations.\n\nPayPals unlawful conduct and actions violate my rights multiple times, including its failure to investigate, denial of provisional credit, lack of written explanation, refusal to provide documentation, failure to limit consumer liability, and retaliatory account termination. These violate both the letter and spirit of federal consumer protection law and my rights as a consumer. \nPaypal chose to not address or acknowledge this gross negligence and mishandling of this case, and instead attempted to gaslight me with their retaliatory account termination, by claiming abuse of their dispute process hoping I would just go away and not pursue this any further. This is not only unacceptable but unlawful and has caused me significant financial and personal hardship. I am seeking immediate corrective action, a refund of my stolen funds, punitive damages and accountability for the repeated failures in this case. I respectfully request that PayPal and their gross negligence, be compelled to remedy these violations immediately and that appropriate enforcement and compliance actions be undertaken by relevant regulatory authorities. \nThank you for your time and attention to this serious matter. \n\nRespectfully submitted, XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX Phone : XXXX Email : XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-30T18:36:48.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase or transfer","sub_product":"General-purpose prepaid card","zip_code":"196XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16920791","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Paypal Holdings, Inc","date_received":"2025-10-30T18:19:17.000Z","state":"PA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase or transfer"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["These written statements from XXXX satisfies the requests made by PAYPAL, confirming that my information is not linked to an account where the <em>charges</em> occurred. This is what Paypal instructed me to get from XXXX, and is the proof they needed to make the determination that the <em>charges</em> were <em>unauthorized</em> and <em>issue</em> the appropriate <em>refund</em>."]},"sort":[16.235704,"16920791"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18078721","_score":15.781395,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"# # COMPLAINT FORM - COMPLETE ANSWERS # # # * * Question 1 : Have you already tried to fix this problem with the company? * * * * Answer : YES * * * * Detailed Response to Include : * * \" Yes, I have attempted multiple remedies with both Chime and XXXX XXXX : * * Attempts with XXXX XXXX ( The Merchant ) : * * - Contacted XXXX XXXX support team regarding unauthorized duplicate accounts - Received official response ( XX/XX/year> ) confirming account verification rejection and permanent account lock - Requested refunds for fraudulent charges - No satisfactory resolution provided by merchant * * Attempts with Chime ( The Financial Institution ) : * * - Filed initial dispute in XX/XX/year> - Chime DENIED the dispute on XX/XX/year> - Immediately re-filed with complete documentation as Dispute # XXXX on XX/XX/year> - Currently in active investigation ( status : In Progress ) - Uploaded XXXX files of supporting documentation The merchant has not provided refunds, and Chime 's initial response was denial. I am now in the rebuttal and appeal process with Chime. '' * * * # # # * * Question 2 : Did you request information from the company? * * * * Answer : YES * * * * Detailed Response to Include : * * \" Yes, I specifically requested the following information from both XXXX XXXX and Chime : * * From XXXX XXXX ( Merchant ) : * * 1. Proof of account verification completed with legal identification 2. Explanation of how duplicate accounts were created under my name 3. Authorization documentation for each disputed transaction 4. Reason for permanent account lock 5. Refund for all unauthorized charges * * From Chime ( Financial Institution ) : * * 1. Explanation of why the original dispute was denied 2. Full documentation of their investigation 3. Reconsideration of the denial with new evidence 4. Status of current dispute # XXXX XXXX. Timeline for dispute resolution * * Documentation Received : * * - XXXX XXXX  provided an official support email ( XX/XX/year> ) confirming account issues but did NOT provide refunds or satisfactory resolution - Chime has not yet provided a written explanation of their original denial, though they have acknowledged the new dispute and are investigating '' * * * # # # * * Question 3 : What information did you request? ( Optional ) * * * * Answer ( Detailed List ) : * * \" I specifically requested the following categories of information : * * Account Verification & Compliance Information : * * - Proof that legal identification verification was completed before any charges were processed - Account verification status and dates - Identity verification compliance documentation ( KYC records ) - Account creation and activation records- Verification method and completion proof * * Fraudulent Activity Investigation : * * - Investigation of how duplicate accounts were created under my name - Security assessment of account compromise - Timeline of when duplicate accounts were discovered - Account creation IP addresses and timestamps- How unauthorized duplicate accounts were allowed to operate * * Transaction Authorization Documentation : * * - Written authorization for each of the XXXX  disputed transactions - Digital signatures or explicit customer consent records- Proof that customer explicitly authorized each charge - Terms and Conditions acceptance verification - Payment authorization records * * Account Restriction & Lock Details : * * - Reason for permanent account lock - Date decision to lock accounts was made - Retroactive review of account status at time each charge was processed - Policy violations documented - Terms and Conditions violations detailed * * Refund & Remediation : * * - Full refund for all fraudulent charges - Refund processing timeline - Account cleanup ( duplicate account removal ) - Compensation for fraudulent activity - Prevention measures to stop future unauthorized charges * * Regulatory Compliance : * * - Merchant account verification policies and procedures - Duplicate account prevention protocols- Payment processing compliance documentation - Chargeback and reversal procedures- Dispute investigation procedures followed '' * * * # # # * * Question 4 : Did the company provide this information? * * * * Answer : NO * * ( Select the \" NO '' option ) * * Detailed Response to Include : * * \" No, the company did NOT provide the information necessary to resolve this dispute.\n\n* * What XXXX XXXX DID Provide : * * - Official support email ( XX/XX/year> ) confirming : - Account verification was REJECTED - Multiple duplicate accounts were discovered- All accounts were PERMANENTLY LOCKED - Terms violations occurred * * What XXXX  XXXX  DID NOT Provide : * * - Proof of account verification ( they admit verification was rejected ) - Authorization documents for any transaction - Explanation of how duplicate accounts were created - Refund or compensation for fraudulent charges - Security investigation or account compromise report - Any satisfactory resolution * * What Chime DID Provide : * * - Dispute case number ( # XXXX ) - Request for additional documentation - Status update ( Agent investigating ) * * What Chime DID NOT Provide : * * - Written explanation of original denial ( XX/XX/year> ) - Written investigation findings- Provisional credit ( {$1200.00} ) - Resolution or refund ( case still in progress ) - Detailed response to appeals * * Critical Finding : * * Fortune Coins provided information that VALIDATES my fraud claim but did NOT provide refunds or resolution. In fact, their support email PROVES the charges were fraudulentthey admitted : 1. Account verification was REJECTED 2. Duplicate FRAUDULENT accounts existed 3. ALL accounts were PERMANENTLY LOCKED * * Yet despite this admission of fraud from the merchant, neither XXXX XXXX nor Chime has provided the critical information needed for resolution : A REFUND. * * * * Conclusion : * * The companies have not provided satisfactory information or resolution. The information they DID provide actually proves my fraud claim. Therefore, I am escalating to the CFPB for investigation and enforcement. '' * * * # # COMPLETE SUMMARY TABLE | Question | Answer | Status | | -- -- -- -- -- | -- -- -- -- | -- -- -- -- | | Tried to fix with company? | * * YES * * | Contacted both XXXX XXXX  and Chime multiple times | | Requested information? | * * YES * * | Specific, documented requests for verification and authorization | | What information requested? | * See detailed list * | Account verification, transaction authorization, refund details | | Company provide info? | * * NO * * | They provided admissions of fraud but NOT resolution | * * * # # STATEMENT TO INCLUDE WITH CFPB SUBMISSION * * '' Although both XXXX XXXX and Chime have provided limited information confirming the fraudulent nature of my accounts, neither company has provided the essential information required for resolution : proof of transaction authorization, account verification documentation, or a refund of fraudulent charges. * * * * In fact, XXXX XXXX ' own support email proves that : * * - Account verification was REJECTED - Multiple duplicate accounts were fraudulently created- ALL accounts were PERMANENTLY LOCKED * * Despite this clear evidence of fraud provided by the merchant themselves, I have received : * * - NO refunds from XXXX  XXXX  - NO satisfactory resolution from either company - NO adequate explanation of Chime 's original dispute denial * * I have attempted every reasonable remediation with both companies. Both have failed to provide adequate information or resolution. Therefore, I am escalating to the CFPB for investigation. * * '' * * * # # CRITICAL POINTS FOR CFPB These answers establish : * * I made good-faith efforts * * to resolve with the companies * * I specifically requested essential information * * they should have provided * * The companies failed to provide adequate information or resolution * * * * The merchant 's own communications prove fraud * * * * I have exhausted all reasonable remedies * * * * Escalation to CFPB is justified and necessary * * This positions your complaint perfectly for CFPB investigation and enforcement action against Chime for : - Improper dispute denial - Failure to investigate adequately - Violation of Regulation E And against XXXX XXXX  for : - Fraudulent merchant practices - Account verification failures - Unauthorized duplicate account creation More information # CFPB COMPLAINT : Chime Dispute # XXXX # # Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Complaint Form -- - # # COMPLAINT INFORMATION * * Filing Date : * * XX/XX/year> * * Your Name : * * XXXX XXXX * * Your Email : * * XXXX * * Complaint Type : * * Billing disputes and problems * * Sub-Category : * * Dispute over a bill or service I didn't authorize -- - # # COMPANY INFORMATION * * Primary Company : * * Chime ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX / XXXX XXXX, XXXX. ) * * Company Address : * * XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX * * Secondary Company Involved : * * XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX  ) * * Issue Date ( s ) : * * XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/year> * * Dispute Case Number : * * # XXXX -- - # # DETAILED COMPLAINT NARRATIVE * * What happened : * * I submitted a formal dispute to Chime ( Dispute # XXXX ) on XX/XX/year>, for unauthorized charges totaling {$1200.00} USD from XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ). This dispute involves XXXX transactions processed between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/year>. \n\n* * Why these charges are fraudulent and unauthorized : * * On XX/XX/year>, XXXX XXXX ' support team sent me an official email stating : \" Upon reviewing your account, we discovered numerous duplicate accounts under your name. We regret to inform you that we will no longer continue the account verification. We will now reject your account verification application. All accounts under your name have been permanently locked. '' This email proves : 1. My accounts were never legitimately verified with proper legal identification 2. Duplicate/fraudulent accounts existed under my name without my authorization 3. All accounts were permanently locked by the merchant 4. Therefore, all transactions processed on these unverified and later-locked accounts are fraudulent and unauthorized * * Pattern of merchant fraud : * * I have also successfully disputed charges from the same merchant ( XXXX XXXX ) through XXXX. Multiple XXXX disputes were closed in my favor, demonstrating a pattern of problematic practices by XXXX XXXX. The charges I am now disputing with Chime represent the same pattern : charges processed on unverified or compromised accounts. \n\n* * Evidence provided to Chime : * * I submitted XXXX files of documentation to Chime, including : - XXXX XXXX  ' official support email confirming account lock and verification rejection - All transaction confirmation emails from XXXX XXXX- XXXX dispute screenshots showing prior successful disputes against XXXX XXXX- Complete transaction history with dates, amounts, and transaction IDs- Bank records showing all charges * * Why this matters : * * Chime is responsible for handling this dispute fairly and thoroughly. The merchant 's own email proves these accounts were unverified and compromised. Chime should reverse all charges on these accounts, as they were processed on invalid accounts that the merchant itself has confirmed were never properly verified. \n-- - # # SPECIFIC COMPLAINT ISSUES * * Complaint Issue 1 : Failure to Investigate Authorized Disputed Charges * * * * Details : * * Chime received my dispute for unauthorized charges but has not yet resolved them ( case still marked \" In progress '' as of XX/XX/year> ). The evidence clearly shows these charges should be reversed immediately, as XXXX XXXX ' own email proves the accounts were unverified and later permanently locked. \n-- - * * Complaint Issue 2 : Merchant Account Verification Failure * * * * Details : * * XXXX XXXX allowed charges on accounts that were never properly verified with legal identification. When I requested refunds, their support team confirmed accounts were unverified and locked. Chime should hold XXXX XXXX  accountable for processing charges on unverified accounts. \n-- - * * Complaint Issue 3 : Pattern of Merchant Fraud Not Addressed * * * * Details : * * I have successfully disputed charges from XXXX XXXX through XXXX multiple times. Chime should be aware that this merchant has a documented history of fraudulent transactions across multiple payment platforms. My current dispute is part of this ongoing pattern. \n-- - # # REQUESTED RELIEF/RESOLUTION 1. * * Immediate reversal of all disputed charges : * * {$1200.00} USD 2. * * Full refund to my Chime account * * for all XXXX XXXX transactions 3. * * Chime should terminate its relationship with XXXX XXXX * * as a merchant due to pattern of fraudulent transactions 4. * * Investigation into whether XXXX XXXX violated payment processing agreements * * regarding account verification requirements 5. * * Chime should flag XXXX XXXX in their merchant database * * as a high-risk merchant with documented fraud history -- - # # TRANSACTION DETAILS | Date | Merchant | Amount | Transaction ID | Status | | -- -- -- | -- -- -- -- -- | -- -- -- -- | -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -| -- -- -- -- | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$140.00} | XXXX | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$190.00} | XXXX | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$290.00} | XXXX | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$190.00} | ( from transaction list ) | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$1.00} | ( from transaction list ) | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$7.00} | ( from transaction list ) | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$4.00} | ( from transaction list ) | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX  | {$1.00} | ( from transaction list ) | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$290.00} | ( from transaction list ) | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$74.00} | XXXX | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$290.00} | XXXX | Disputed | * * Total Disputed Amount : {$1200.00} USD * * -- - # # KEY EVIDENCE SUPPORTING COMPLAINT # # # Evidence 1 : XXXX XXXX Support Email ( Critical ) * * Date : * * XX/XX/year>, XXXX PM * * From : * * XXXX * * Subject : * * Account Verification Status * * Full Email Content : * * \" Hi XXXX, Upon reviewing your account, we discovered numerous duplicate accounts under your name. We regret to inform you that we will no longer continue the account verification. \n\nWe will now reject your account verification application. All accounts under your name have been permanently locked. \n\nWhen you created an account on XXXX XXXX, you explicitly agreed to our Terms and Conditions. [ Link to T & Cs ] Please take note of the following section : - A check can only be issued to an open and operative Account, Operating one or opening duplicate Accounts may lead to the censure of all of your Accounts and render you ineligible.\n\nIf, however, please be aware that if you misuse your access in the future, they will also be banned. \n\nKind Regards, XXXX Customer Support Representative Get answers XXXX '' * * Why this is critical : * * This email proves XXXX XXXX : 1. Confirmed unverified accounts 2. Discovered duplicate/fraudulent accounts under my name 3. Rejected account verification 4. Permanently locked ALL accounts under my name 5. Admitted I should not have been able to operate multiple accounts This email alone proves all transactions were unauthorized and should be reversed. \n\n-- - # # # Evidence XXXX : XXXX Dispute Confirmations * * Multiple successful disputes closed in your favor against XXXX XXXX : * * - XXXX - {$190.00} USD ( Case Closed ) - XXXX - {$140.00} USD ( Case Closed ) - XXXX - {$290.00} USD ( Case Closed ) * * Why this matters : * * This demonstrates a pattern of XXXX XXXX processing fraudulent or unauthorized charges. XXXX has already determined similar charges were invalid, yet Chime has allowed the same merchant to continue charging the same account. \n\n-- - # # # Evidence 3 : Multiple Transaction Confirmations All transactions show XXXX XXXX  processed charges successfully on accounts that were later confirmed to be unverified and fraudulent. The confirmations themselves prove the merchant accepted charges knowing verification procedures were incomplete. \n\n-- - # # MERCHANT RESPONSE ANTICIPATED XXXX XXXX will likely claim : - \" Digital goods were delivered '' - \" Customer authorized the purchases '' - \" We don't require verification for virtual currency '' * * Why these arguments fail : * * - Their own support email proves accounts were unverified and locked - Unverified accounts = unauthorized charges - Their own terms state operating duplicate accounts violates their policy - XXXX has already ruled against them on similar charges - Chime holds merchants responsible for verification failures -- - # # PREVIOUS CONTACT WITH COMPANIES * * Chime Contact : * * - Submitted formal dispute : XX/XX/year> - Dispute Case # XXXX - Status : In progress / Agent investigating - Uploaded XXXX files of documentation * * XXXX XXXX Contact : * * - Received their support email confirming account lock : XX/XX/year> - No response to subsequent inquiries about refunds - Merchant has not addressed the fraudulent account issue -- - # # COMPLAINT AGAINST * * Primary : * * Chime ( and associated banks : The XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX. / XXXX XXXX, XXXX. ) * * Secondary : * * XXXX XXXX ( XXXX )- for fraudulent transaction processing -- - # # WHY I'M FILING THIS COMPLAINT I am filing this CFPB complaint because : 1. * * Chime is not moving quickly enough * * to resolve obvious fraud ( case marked \" In progress '' as of XX/XX/year> ) 2. * * The evidence is overwhelming and undisputed * * XXXX XXXX  ' own email proves the fraud 3. * * Pattern recognition failure * * Chime should be aware XXXX XXXX has prior XXXX disputes, yet allowed continued transactions 4. * * Consumer protection failure * * A major issue with Chime 's dispute process is that it allows merchants to continue processing charges on flagged accounts 5. * * Accountability requirement * * Chime needs to understand this merchant represents ongoing fraud risk to their customers -- - # # SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Please attach to this CFPB complaint : 1. * * XXXX XXXXs Support Email * * ( XX/XX/year> ) MOST CRITICAL 2. * * Chime Dispute Confirmation * * showing case # XXXX XXXX. * * XXXX Dispute Screenshots * * showing successful prior disputes XXXX. * * All transaction confirmations * * from XXXX XXXX 5. * * Bank statements * * showing the charges 6. * * Screenshots of the XXXX files uploaded * * to Chime 's dispute portal -- - # # AUTHORITY & LEGAL BASIS * * Regulations violated : * * - Regulation E ( Electronic Fund Transfers ) 12 CFR 1005 - Regulation Z ( Truth in Lending ) 12 CFR 1026 - Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act Consumer Financial Protection Bureau jurisdiction - Payment Card Network Rules ( XXXX  ) regarding merchant account verification * * Merchant violation : * * - XXXX XXXX violated Payment Card Association rules by processing transactions on unverified accounts - XXXX XXXX violated their own Terms and Conditions * * Bank responsibility : * * - Chime ( and underlying banks ) must properly investigate and resolve unauthorized transaction disputes - Chime is responsible for ensuring merchants comply with verification requirements -- - # # TIMELINE OF EVENTS - * * XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/year> : * * Fraudulent charges processed on unverified XXXX XXXX accounts - XXXX XXXX XX/XX/year> : * * XXXX XXXX  support confirms accounts unverified and permanently locked - * * XX/XX/year> : * * Original dispute with Chime denied ( based on dispute list screenshot ) - * * XX/XX/year> : * * Filed new dispute # XXXX with Chime - * * XX/XX/year>, XXXX XXXX  : * * Chime requested additional documentation - * * XX/XX/year>, XXXX XXXX  : * * Filing this CFPB complaint -- - # # CONSUMER CONTACT INFORMATION * * Name : * * XXXX XXXX * * Email : XXXX XXXX XXXX * * Account Number : * * ( Your Chime account number mask last 4 digits if preferred : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) * * Dispute Case Number : * * # XXXX -- - # # STATEMENT OF TRUTH I certify that the information provided in this complaint is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I am the account holder named above and have personally reviewed all evidence supporting this complaint. I am filing this complaint in good faith to protect myself and other consumers from XXXX XXXX ' fraudulent practices. \n\n* * Signature : * * XXXX XXXX * * Date : * * XX/XX/year> XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-16T17:22:01.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"463XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18078721","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Chime Financial Inc","date_received":"2025-12-16T16:52:31.000Z","state":"IN","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Chime should reverse all <em>charges</em> on these accounts, as they were processed on invalid accounts that the merchant itself has <em>confirmed</em> were never properly verified. \n-- - # # SPECIFIC COMPLAINT <em>ISSUES</em> * * Complaint <em>Issue</em> 1 : Failure to <em>Investigate</em> <em>Authorized</em> Disputed <em>Charges</em> * * * * Details : * * Chime received my dispute for <em>unauthorized</em> <em>charges</em> but has not yet resolved them ( case still marked \" In progress '' as of XX/XX/year> )."]},"sort":[15.781395,"18078721"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11517385","_score":15.307276,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"My paycheck was deposited into my account on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nI paid a few bills on XX/XX/XXXX in the morning in anticipation of being out of town. \n\nI got back from being out of town and had more bills to pay on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nI checked my account, like I always do when paying bills, and saw that there were transfers to XXXX XXXX  that cleared my account from XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and earlier that day ( XX/XX/XXXX ) totaling {$720.00}. \n\nI called the Chase Fraud Department on XX/XX/XXXX to report the unauthorized transfers. I answered all of their questions that I had no idea what that was or how someone would have gotten my account information because no one has access to that information. \n\nThey said they would temporarily credit my account and complete an investigation. They recommended that I change my log-in information. I did so. \n\nI received the temporary credits and letters stating that they were giving me the temporary credits. \n\nI checked my account on XX/XX/XXXX to check and make sure that my mortgage payment had gone through ( one of the bills that I paid on XX/XX/XXXX ). I called Chase Fraud Department to inquire about the process, since the unauthorized, fraudulent charges would make my account not have enough money in it to allow the mortgage payment to clear. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX I received a letter stating that the investigation was completed and that they had found that the charges were authorized and that they would be removing the money that they had temporarily credited to my account. \nI checked my account on XX/XX/XXXX and there was ANOTHER unauthorized transfer to XXXX XXXX for {$150.00}, THE SAME VENDOR that I had JUST called about and filed a fraudulent claim about. Thus, because they did not take proper action and were negligent in their responsibilities to safeguard my account when I reported fraud on my account, additional fraud was able to take place. I called the Chase Fraud Department, but they were closed, and bringing the total of funds fraudulently removed from my account to {$870.00}. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I called the Chase Fraud Department to report the unauthorized transfers. I answered all of their questions that I had no idea what that was or how someone would have gotten my account information, because no one has access to that information. And that it was not the additional signer of the account ( my father ), which is who they were saying it was. \n\nThey said they would temporarily credit my account and complete an investigation. \n\nI spoke to my father confirming that this XXXX man who does not have a smartphone and is not tech savvy, did not access my account to withdraw money. He confirmed. \n\nI received the temporary credits and letters stating that they were giving me the temporary credits. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX I received a letter stating that the investigation was completed and that they had found that the charges were authorized and that they would be removing the money that they had temporarily credited to my account. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX I received a letter stating that the investigation was completed and that they had found that the charges were authorized and that they would be removing the money that they had temporarily credited to my account. \n\nI called Chase Fraud Department on XX/XX/XXXX. They said that their financial investigation was completed and that they found that the activity was within the geographic location ( though they didnt say where that was ), no activation codes had been sent out and that the IP address matched the signers, and were all things within normal activity and that nothing could be done with Chase to get my money back. I then spoke to Supervisor XXXX. She reviewed everything and felt like a decision and been made too quickly and that she would include information about me disputing what they had found ( me being out of town when the transactions happened and not having my laptop ), and send it back to be reviewed which could or could not change the outcome. She said it would take 3-5 days and to call back on the XXXX. I asked her about outstanding bills that I had paid when I had gotten the credits from Chase to cover the fraudulent charges, and she said that there was nothing that they could do until they showed as pending. And that if I got any overdraft fees to call the number on the back of my card to see if that department could help with any refunds for overdraft fees. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX I called Chase Fraud Department to get information on the online profile that made the transactions, since it was not mine and my father does not have one set up. They said that there was no fraud activity, no new devices, no log-in failures and the service provider was consistent. I reiterated how the device was not mine because I only use my laptop computer at my home and was out of town when the majority of the transactions occurred and did not have my laptop with me. They said that the additional signers profile was my fathers name but they didnt have a geographic location. When I provided his one and only e-mail address, Chase confirmed that was not the e-mail address that was associated with the on-line profile. So I again pointed out how that meant that it wasnt me/my father ( the additional signer ) and that the charges were fraudulent. They agent told me that while they believed me, there was nothing they could do. The only things he suggested was to provide some supporting documentation of proof that it was not my father ( example : a picture of his flip phone/not smartphone, a screenshot of his e-mail address, a screenshot of his browser history showing that hes never been to chase.com ). He told me that uploading the documents would reopen the claim, there would be a determination, and then hopefully the money would be put back in my account. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX I called the Chase Fraud Department to speak to Supervisor XXXX to get clarification on the supporting documents I had been told about the previous day. She stated that there was nothing that Chase could do anymore for me because they cant prove that it is or isnt fraud. That if I wanted to pursue the issue any further I would have to do it legally. She said she would send me their research and findings ( which would take 7-10 days ). I asked her how to remedy covering bills since my account has been in the negative since they started taking the money out of my account and she said that I would have to put funds into the account to not only cover the negative balance, but also the amount for the bills. She also stated about calling Customer Service for any overdraft fees. She stated that Chase could not put any funds into my account because the investigation was completed.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-15T04:06:48.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"863XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11517385","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2025-01-15T03:34:30.000Z","state":"AZ","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Deposits and withdrawals"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["He <em>confirmed</em>. \n\nI received the temporary credits and letters stating that they were giving me the temporary credits. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX I received a letter stating that the <em>investigation</em> was completed and that they had found that the <em>charges</em> were <em>authorized</em> and that they would be removing the money that they had temporarily credited to my account."]},"sort":[15.307276,"11517385"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4987271","_score":15.256892,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/XXXX, a fraudster gained unauthorized access to my online Wells Fargo account. The fraudster was able to initiate a cash advance from the credit card in the amount of {$7200.00} to the checking and from the checking, wired the {$7200.00}, along with {$1900.00} from the checking account ( {$9100.00} in total ) to an unknown account/bank. Prior to this incident, I had a {$0.00} balance on the credit card with an available credit balance of {$7500.00}. I also had {$2000.00} in the checking account. No unusual transactions alerts were triggered. Wells Fargo did not flag either the cash advance or the wire transfer. I have had these accounts for XXXX years and have never authorized a wire transfer out of my accounts. \n\nI reported the fraudulent transactions to Wells Fargo via telephone and a representative went through measures to issue out a new checking account number, a new debit card and a new credit card. The representative assured me that the matter would be investigated and to rest assured, Wells Fargo would help keep my accounts secure and assist me in restoring the funds taken by the fraudster. However, despite me making multiple calls to check in on the status of the claim, I was given the runaround repeatedly. Several representatives sympathized with me, while others questioned the authenticity of my claim. \n\nWells Fargo failed violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by failing to properly investigate my dispute of fraudulent transactions on my Wells Fargo Checking/Credit Accounts XXXX Despite reporting the fraudulent transactions to Wells Fargo on the day that the transactions occurred, Wells Fargo kept the fees associated with the fraud on the account, which resulted in the credit balance to be overlimit. Additionally, Wells Fargo reported the credit card account as OVERLIMIT to Credit Reporting Agencies ( reported on XX/XX/XXXX ), which resulted in my credit score decreasing by XXXX points. \n\nI did not know about or authorize anyone to initiate these transactions on my Wells Fargo Accounts. I did not know about anyone who owns a XXXX bank account to which the my funds were transferred to. \nI have attempted to dispute the fraudulent transactions directly with Wells Fargo several times but Wells Fargo has closed these claims with the conclusion that I have authorized these transactions, despite me consistently telling them that I did not authorize or give my authorization to anyone to initiate these transactions. I have also reported these fraudulent transactions to CFPBXXXX XXXX  OCC, AG, FDIC, and the XXXX XXXX XXXX. Report # is XXXX and the report was taken by XXXX XXXX. Wells Fargo has responded to CFPB claims with little to no change. They applied a credit to refund the fees associated with fraudulent balance, however a balance of {$6700.00} remains. A payment on this fraudulent balance is due and Wells Fargo has told me that I will need to pay this balance. On XX/XX/XXXX, I called Wells Fargo to address the lack of action that has been done in regards to my disputes. After being on the line for more than XXXX hours and being transferred XXXX times, the XXXX representative whose name is XXXX from the Customer Advocacy Group reviewed my concerns. He guaranteed that no payment would be due, no late or interest charge fees would be applied and that it would not be reported to the CRAs while the claim was open. He provided me with a reference number for the recorded call - # XXXX XXXX XXXX. A payment was still due, a late payment of {$29.00} was applied as well as an interest charge of {$110.00}. \n\nI have also disputed the transaction to XXXX twice. The first time, Wells Fargo, responded with a result of \" Completed investigation of FCRA dispute - consumer disagrees ''. I filed another dispute with XXXX and it is currently open. \n\nI complied with the expectations set forth in Wells Fargo Online Use Agreement, in regards to the liability of unauthorized EFTs. \nXXXXI reported fraudulent activity directly to Wells Fargo via telephone on XX/XX/XXXX. Claim was opened and representative confirmed that no further action was needed on my part. \n-Received statement reflecting erroneous/fraudulent charges on XX/XX/XXXX -Sent written notice to Wells Fargo via Certified Mail on XX/XX/XXXX ( within 60 days of receiving the statement showing first unauthorized electronic fund transfer ). \nPer Wells Fargo 's own Online Use Agreement, with respect to Regulation E, my liability \" won't exceed lesser of {$50.00}, or the total amount of unauthorized EFTs that occur before notice to us ''. \n\nI called Wells Fargo XX/XX/XXXX and was able to speak with analyst, XXXX XXXX, who closed out case # XXXX, XXXX, XXXX and XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX reviewed that the cases were closed - HOWEVER, she reported that when working with the fraud investigators and other departments in regards to the claim, they deemed the claims for the credit card transactions as FRAUD. XXXX went on to explain that while Wells Fargo acknowledges that the transaction was fraud, they are unable to reverse it because the funds are no longer in the checking account. I explained to her that the funds were not in the checking because the fraudster had wired the funds to an unknown account. XXXX acknowledged that she did see in the notes of my case that the funds were wired to an account at XXXX bank but when Wells Fargo attempted to recall the funds, XXXX would not return the funds- either because the funds were no longer there and/or because the account was now closed. XXXX stated that Wells Fargo did not go further than attempt to recall the funds. I asked if they attempted to track the funds and she said that they did not. Another representative, XXXX, said that if Wells Fargo attempts to recall the funds and the other bank does not cooperate, Wells Fargo does not go further and will not attempt to recall again. \n\nWells Fargo has confirmed that their findings surrounding the credit balance are that the transaction was indeed fraudulent. Multiple representatives have identified this fraud to be a trend amongst numerous Wells Fargo customers. Yet Wells Fargo is doing nothing to offer relief or support from the economic hardships resulting from having my accounts completely wiped out by these fraudulent transactions. Wells Fargo failed to conduct an investigation with respect to the disputed information and failed to review all relevant information provided by me in the dispute provided to them and other agencies I reported to.","date_sent_to_company":"2021-12-08T05:58:53.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"91304","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4987271","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2021-12-08T00:52:14.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I have had these accounts for XXXX years and have never <em>authorized</em> a wire transfer out of my accounts. \n\nI reported the fraudulent transactions to Wells Fargo via telephone and a representative went through measures to <em>issue</em> out a new checking account number, a new debit card and a new credit card. The representative assured me that the matter would be <em>investigated</em> and to rest assured, Wells Fargo would help keep my accounts secure and assist me in restoring the funds taken by the fraudster."],"sub_product":["General-purpose credit card or <em>charge</em> card"]},"sort":[15.256892,"4987271"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7069676","_score":14.968041,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am grateful that the CFPB expects companies to provide complete, and accurate responses to consumer complaints, and responses tailored to the issues described in each consumers complaint, yet in an original complaint against Barclays JetBlue World MasterCard being either lost, stolen, or cloned, their response for the investigation they allegedly made, appears in itself fraudulent, and totally invented. Throughout Barclays FRAUD DEPARTMENT investigation, the company failed to properly manage, respond correctly nor in a timely fashion, to my credit card dispute and fraud claim, as per law, and continue to post their debt collection on my online credit card account.\n\nAfter receiving Barclays Fraud Department XX/XX/XXXX, response to the CFPB, I found four phone conversations with their Fraud Department that I forgot I recorded which are all very contradictory and prove Barclays kept prolonging their investigations, after re-opening of the case just after I called and complained that they returned all the unauthorized charges for me to pay.\n\nThis newly found evidence assures me that Barclays Fraud department never fully investigated the matter as per their apparently fraudulent response letter to my CFPB complaint. The mutually agreed upon recorded phone calls are months apart from XXXX to XXXX, when I was so tired of speaking hours on the phone altogether, faxing them more and more documents, so I asked my daughter to please follow up. \n\nThe newly discovered lengthy phone conversation recording I have on an old phone in my possession include one with Barclays XXXX XXXX on XXXX XXXX, XXXX ; Barclays Agent XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, Barclays Agent XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX ; Barclays Agent XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. All of them insisted the investigations could take up to 90 days but they kept taking more. Apart I have written records of calls with XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX who insisted on having a police report made ; with XXXX the manager of the fraud department made on the last Monday, end of XX/XX/XXXX, among others. \n\nIn Barclays response letter to my CFPB complaint, nothing makes any sense. First it claims I received a fraud alert from them on XX/XX/XXXX and then a passcode to unlock my adult daughters authorized users card because she was traveling, when in fact I never received an alert from Barclays, nor a passcode to unlock her card, but originally phoned the Fraud Department from my Florida, US landline and told them to cancel the card because I was alerted of suspicious activity ( by my computer security program and not from Barclays ) on my daughters card while she was already in XXXX XXXX. \n\nFurther proof that Barclays response to its investigation of fraud is their response to my CFPB complaint also states, The representative confirmed with you the transactions were reported as fraud, and informed you he would be closing your authorized users card ending in XXXX and replacing it with the above-referenced card ending in XXXX. In fact, in the documents I sent, such as credit card statements, all the charges made on XXXX XXXX were already made from the card ending in XXXX and not ending in XXXX ; so this Barclays stated fact is impossible and further proof of their apparent investigation fraud. \nUpon receiving my pcs program message to check the credit card account, I immediately saw online large amounts of temporary authorization transactions, so that is why I originally instantly called Barclays to cancel my daughters additional card knowing something serious was wrong since we have never been in the habit of charging such large sums of money and in so many places on the same day. \n\nFrom my Florida, US landline, I finally could reach my daughter on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, not until the afternoon, who was on an emergency 2-day trip in XXXX XXXX XXXX She told me the card was either lost, stolen or cloned because the last XXXX times she used her card in XXXX XXXX was the previous night at a XX/XX/XXXX just near her two-night XXXX rental and then at a late dinner at the restaurant XXXX, leaving just at their usual closing time, before going to sleep. \n\nShe did not realize until later the same day that her card was missing from her purse since at that restaurant XXXX, they hung up the ladies purses. The next day she told me she called XXXX to talk to the manager who apologized profusely for all the confusion and offered to refund her dinner of {$40.00} which they did shown on my statement period XXXX, since they recognized their responsibility and her innocence and could not explain why her card was missing from her purse. I told her not to worry since I called earlier the same day to Barclays to cancel her card over this fraud and was assured by Barclays that we would not be charged for all the unauthorized charges. Barclays did not say at that time that they would ever return the charges to a later bill nor mention she had to get a police report. \n\nFurther proof of Barclays invented statement in their response to my CFPB complaint, is if as they state her card was locked, why were charges on her card ending in XXXX even temporarily authorized? I sent Barclays screenshots of the charges appearing on XX/XX/XXXX online and even over the phone questioned them about the time of day they were made and exactly where, seeing that the unauthorized charges were made way after midnight on the XXXX and beyond after I even phoned them early in the morning on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nNext in their response to my CFPB complaint, Barclays states that I said I was in possession of both cards, which is obviously impossible due to the dozens of unauthorized purchases in XXXX XXXX and the fact that I was calling from my Florida landline in the US both on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nAt first Barclays took off the reported charges starting the same day, then they reinstated them some two months later which is causing my family extreme hardship since the total unauthorized charges made were over {$3300.00} plus the interest they are charging since I can only afford to make minimum payments on such huge bill for purchases my daughter never made nor authorized, nor received. \n\nOver the course of all this time, we have had to conduct our own investigation and sent Barclays over 20 pages of diverse documents of proof and a letter explaining all the minutest details. In the meanwhile, Barclays would send us many misleading letters that were contradictive saying she was the same day responsible and the same day not and so on including letters about her being responsible for the XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX charge which we never disputed nor other charges on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nOn other occasions Barclays also asked my daughter to provide more proof such as a police report when it was impossible for her to return to XXXX XXXX to acquire one in a timely fashion in times still of XXXX, so instead, she wrote the receiving company of many of the charges. XXXX XXXX, to send us copies of the bills and when we received them contained many different fraudulent signatures claiming they were hers so we also sent that to Barclays as proof her US passport with her legal signature Later when her US passport expired months later, Barclays demanded to send a copy of her new passport and as well she did. According to our own investigation XXXX XXXX is a credit card phone service application for small merchants used in XXXX XXXX Their three bills sent to us included long lists of separate charges on a single invoice. The three different invoices we received from them were at establishments and times when they are reported online as closed.\n\nDuring the course of our dispute, Barclays would send us misleading letters, some separate on the exact same date saying we were responsible in one, and on the other hand not responsible in the other. I included sending them copies of their contradictory letters.\n\nCFPB claims online if there is unauthorized use of your card before you report it missing, the most you will owe for unauthorized charges on the card is {$50.00}. Many cardholder agreements say you are not responsible for any charges in this circumstance. If you have not lost the card itself, but someone steals and uses your account number, you generally have no liability for unauthorized use. \n\nApart from all of the above, the listings of the temporary authorizations that were appearing on my online Barclays account on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, and relisted in my following XXXX statement were different, mostly from the vendor XXXX XXXX and not from each establishment, and did not correctly mathematically add up. The establishments were all over XXXX XXXX where my daughter was not in possession of a vehicle and another charge included was a very far away gas station with very poor online reviews of previous frauds. \n\nFinally Barclays is responsible for their inaccurate information and failure to investigate my dispute adequately and for their apparent fraudulent response to the CFPB. I would like Barclays to compensate me for all my losses plus interest which are described and detailed in my original complaint, plus punitive damages for all my time and duress. \n\nI have also reported their shoddy fraudulent findings to the ReportFraud.ftc.gov FTC complaint on XX/XX/XXXX, and intend to file a FDIC complaint, consult lawyers about opening a lawsuit, as well as reporting Barclays to the BBB for their misconduct. \nThank you for your kind consideration of this matter.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-06-03T13:01:20.000Z","issue":"False statements or representation","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"33321","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7069676","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE","date_received":"2023-06-03T12:20:18.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Attempted to collect wrong amount"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Further proof that Barclays response to its <em>investigation</em> of fraud is their response to my CFPB complaint also states, The representative <em>confirmed</em> with you the transactions were reported as fraud, and informed you he would be closing your <em>authorized</em> users card ending in XXXX and replacing it with the above-referenced card ending in XXXX."]},"sort":[14.968041,"7069676"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"20389496","_score":14.443259,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"My spouse and I are filing this complaint against XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and Barclays Bank Delaware regarding the unauthorized opening of a revolving line of credit in connection with a timeshare purchase made on XX/XX/XXXX, at the XXXX XXXX sales location in XXXX. \nDuring the sales presentation, we were asked to provide our personal financial information, including our Social Security numbers, for what we were explicitly and unambiguously told was a credit inquiry to determine our eligibility for timeshare financing. We consented only to a credit inquiry. At no point during the presentation were we informed that our personal information would be used to open a new revolving line of credit in the form of a XXXX XXXX credit card through Barclays Bank Delaware. We did not provide verbal or written authorization for the opening of this specific financial product. \nWithout our informed consent, a XXXX XXXX credit card was opened through Barclays Bank Delaware  and immediately charged {$3600.00} as a down payment toward the timeshare purchase. We were in an exhausting four-to-six-hour high-pressure sales environment and were overwhelmed by the volume of documents presented to us for electronic signature on a tablet. The distinction between a credit inquiry and a credit card application was never clearly explained to us, and we were never given adequate opportunity to review the specific terms of the credit card application before it was processed. \nWhile we were still sitting with the sales team, I received an email notification indicating that a credit card had been opened. I immediately questioned the salesperson, asking, 'You just opened a credit card in my name? ' The salesperson denied having opened a card in my name. However, as we proceeded with the process, it was then disclosed that they had opened a card in my husbands name, and that they intended to use that card to pay the down payment.We immediately contacted Barclays to report the unauthorized nature of the application. Barclays conducted a thorough fraud investigation and issued a formal determination letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, explicitly stating : We have concluded that you are not responsible for the transaction ( s ) you identified as fraudulent. As a result, the provisional credit ( s ) previously issued, and any associated fees and finance charges, are now final. \nBarclays further instructed credit reporting agencies to remove all fraud-related information from our credit report. This constitutes a definitive, final determination by the issuing bank that the transaction was fraudulent and that we bear no financial responsibility for it. \nDespite this irrefutable, bank-verified finding of fraud, Travel + XXXX XXXX XXXX Consumer Affairs Manager, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has repeatedly and knowingly misrepresented the status of this down payment in communications to the XXXX  Attorney Generals Office, claiming that the down payment has been re-applied to our account and that the contract remains the same as originally agreed. This assertion is demonstrably false and constitutes a knowing misrepresentation of fact to a state regulatory agency. \nFurthermore, the unauthorized opening of this credit account has significant legal implications for the validity of the entire timeshare purchase agreement. Our Retail Installment Contract, Paragraph 17.A, explicitly requires the payment of a down payment in immediately available funds as a condition for the completion of the sale. Since the only purported down payment was deemed fraudulent by the issuing bank and was never legitimately received by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX from an authorized source, this constitutes a complete failure of consideration, rendering the contract void ab initio ( void from the beginning ) or, at minimum, legally voidable at our election. \nThe unauthorized credit application also appears to violate the following federal consumer protection laws and regulations : The Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) requires clear and informed disclosure of credit terms before a consumer can be bound by a credit agreement. We were never clearly informed that we were applying for a credit card ; we were told we were submitting to a credit inquiry. This distinction is material and its absence constitutes a TILA violation.\n\nThe Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) strictly governs the permissible purposes for which a consumers credit information may be accessed and used. Using our personal financial information, provided for a credit inquiry, to open a new revolving line of credit without our explicit, informed consent constitutes an impermissible use of our credit information under the FCRA. \nThe Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( ECOA ) and Regulation B require that creditors provide consumers with clear notice of credit actions taken. We were never provided with clear notice that a new credit account was being opened in our names as part of the timeshare purchase process. \nAdditionally, the entire timeshare purchase was induced through material misrepresentations by sales representative XXXX XXXX, who repeatedly represented that we were purchasing a fractional real estate interest that would appreciate in value, could be sold for profit, and represented a sound financial investment. These representations directly contradict the written contract terms, which state the purchase is for personal use and enjoyment only. The combination of unauthorized credit application and fraudulent sales misrepresentations creates a pattern of deceptive practices that extends beyond our individual transactions. \nWe have attempted to resolve this matter directly with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on multiple occasions, presenting the Barclays fraud determination letter as definitive proof. The company has consistently refused to acknowledge the finality of Barclays fraud finding and has continued to assert that we remain bound by the terms of a contract whose foundational financial transaction has been declared fraudulent by the issuing bank. We have also filed complaints with the Tennessee Attorney Generals Office ( File Number XXXX ) and the XXXX  Attorney Generals Office, with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX continuing to provide dismissive responses that fail to address the specific, verifiable evidence we have presented. \nWe are requesting that the CFPB immediately investigate the following specific issues. First, the unauthorized opening of a Barclays credit card account in our names without our informed consent during a timeshare sales presentation. Second, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 's systematic practice of using consumer personal financial information provided for credit inquiries to open new revolving lines of credit without explicit, informed consumer authorization. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 's continued attempts to enforce a contract whose foundational financial transaction has been confirmed as fraudulent by the issuing bank. Fourth, the broader pattern of deceptive sales practices employed by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX at its Missouri sales locations and potentially across its nationwide operations. \nOur desired resolution is the immediate and unconditional cancellation of Contract Number XXXX and release from all future financial obligations, including loan payments, maintenance fees, and any other assessments associated with this purchase. We are not requesting a refund of amounts already paid. We are simply requesting release from a contract procured through unauthorized financial transactions, confirmed as fraudulent by an independent bank, and through material misrepresentations about the nature of the product being sold. \nDesired Resolution : Immediate cancellation of Contract Number XXXX and release from all associated financial obligations. \nSupporting Documentation : Barclays Investigations Department Letter dated XX/XX/XXXX. \nComplete correspondence with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Consumer Affairs Manager, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Co XXXX \nXXXX  Attorney Generals Office File Number XXXX correspondence. \nXXXX Attorney Generals Office correspondence.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-03-18T21:51:26.000Z","issue":"Getting a credit card","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"380XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"20389496","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE","date_received":"2026-03-18T21:33:28.000Z","state":"TN","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Card opened without my consent or knowledge"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["We are not requesting a <em>refund</em> of amounts already paid. We are simply requesting release from a contract procured through <em>unauthorized</em> financial transactions, <em>confirmed</em> as fraudulent by an independent bank, and through material misrepresentations about the nature of the product being sold. \nDesired Resolution : Immediate cancellation of Contract Number XXXX and release from all associated financial obligations."],"sub_product":["General-purpose credit card or <em>charge</em> card"]},"sort":[14.443259,"20389496"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"20879785","_score":14.355417,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE OF THIS COMPLAINT This complaint is filed as a new, comprehensive formal complaint against Navy Federal Credit Union ( NFCU ) following the inadequate and factually inaccurate response Navy Federal provided to CFPB Case No. XXXX. The prior complaint was closed on XX/XX/XXXX after I disputed Navy Federal 's response, indicating that their response did not address my issues, I did not understand their response, and they did not do what they said they would do. \nThis complaint addresses multiple serious federal violations including unauthorized electronic fund transfers, systemic internal accounting errors, retaliatory conduct, denial of legally required documentation, and the improper closure of my accounts during an active dispute period. The total financial harm I have suffered is substantial and has resulted in the depletion of inherited funds, returned payments, inability to pay essential bills, and significant financial instability. \n\nXXXX. BACKGROUND AND TIMELINE I established membership with Navy Federal Credit Union on XX/XX/XXXX. Beginning in XX/XX/XXXX, I noticed unauthorized and fraudulent transactions on my accounts. The following is a summary of key events : XX/XX/XXXX : Membership established with NFCU XXXX XXXX : Unauthorized transactions begin appearing on accounts XX/XX/XXXX : First fraud claims filed XX/XX/XXXX : Inheritance funds of {$98000.00} deposited via bank wire into savings account XXXX XXXX XXXX : Unauthorized transfers from savings to checking account begin, exposing inheritance funds to fraudulent debit card activity XX/XX/XXXX : {$2700.00} money order deposit NFCU text message confirmed available balance of {$2900.00} ; however, statement shows a completely different balance, constituting a documented three-way discrepancy between text notification, ATM receipt, and statement XX/XX/XXXX : AppFolio/Salesloft data breach discovered, exposing XXXX XXXX XXXX address, date of birth, and Social Security number to unauthorized actors XX/XX/XXXX : Additional fraud claims filed XX/XX/XXXX : Additional fraud claims filed XX/XX/XXXX : Navy Federal sends threatening letter warning me that continued fraud claims could result in XXXX suspension of debit card privileges sent while I was a confirmed data breach victim XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX formal data breach notification letter received XX/XX/XXXX : Granite School District data breach also exposed my personal information XX/XX/XXXX : I submitted formal Second Appeal with full evidence packet by email to multiple Navy Federal departments including Legal, Compliance, Executive Relations , and Fraud Operations XX/XX/XXXX : Navy Federal responds to prior CFPB complaint response is factually incomplete and fails to address core issues XX/XX/XXXX : I disputed Navy Federal 's CFPB response, marking all three questions as 'No ' XX/XX/XXXX : CFPB complaint closed without resolution III. SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS AND EVIDENCE A. Regulation XXXX Violations Failure to Conduct Lawful Investigation Under 12 C.F.R. 1005.11, Navy Federal is required to investigate error notices within XXXX business days, provide provisional credit where applicable, and furnish written explanation of findings including the documents relied upon. Navy Federal has violated each of these requirements : Navy Federal closed my dispute in approximately XXXX days without conducting a good-faith review or requesting additional information from me Navy Federal claimed I did not answer 'XXXX  questions ' but no such form or questionnaire was ever provided to me Navy Federal 's denial letters stated 'you have the right to request the documentation used in making this determination ' I requested this documentation in writing and it was never provided, in direct violation of Regulation E Navy Federal 's stated reasons for denial 'you benefited financially ' and 'you authorized and/or participated \" are conclusory allegations with no factual support or documentation provided The use of 'and/or ' in the denial language demonstrates that Navy Federal did not conduct a specific investigation but rather applied a generic template denial B. Documented Balance Discrepancies Internal Accounting Failures The following discrepancies are documented with physical ATM receipts, NFCU text message notifications, and bank statements. These discrepancies exist independent of any fraud claims and demonstrate a systemic internal accounting failure within Navy Federal 's ledger and statement generation systems : Discrepancy 1 XX/XX/XXXX ( Statement XXXX ) : ATM receipt ledger balance : {$52000.00} ATM receipt available balance : {$51000.00} Statement Page XXXX, Line XXXX balance : {$50000.00} Statement Page XXXX, Line XXXX balance : {$50000.00} XXXX different figures for the same account on the same date unexplained difference of over {$2100.00} Discrepancy XXXX XX/XX/XXXX : ATM receipt shows : {$1300.00} Statement Page XXXX, Line XXXX : {$2900.00} Statement Page XXXX, Line XXXX : {$2900.00} Statement Page XXXX, Line XXXX : {$2700.00} Balance changing across XXXX consecutive lines with no corresponding posted transactions Discrepancy XXXX XX/XX/XXXX : ATM receipt shows : {$4900.00} Statement Page XXXX, Line XXXX : {$3600.00} Unexplained difference of {$1200.00} Discrepancy XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( Statement XXXX ) : XXXX XXXX XXXX ATM receipt dated XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, account ending XXXX : Receipt Ledger Balance : {$48000.00} Receipt Available Balance : {$46000.00} Statement Page XXXX, Line XXXX : {$47000.00} XXXX different figures {$1900.00} gap between ledger and available on the same receipt Discrepancy XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( {$2700.00} deposit ) : NFCU text message ( from short code XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX at XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX ) : \" {$2700.00} was deposited into your acct end. in XXXX. As of XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX  XXXX the avail. bal. is {$2900.00} ' ATM receipt available balance : {$2900.00} Statement Page XXXX, Line XXXX : {$4600.00} Statement Page XXXX, Line XXXX : {$1200.00} Navy Federal 's own text message contradicts their own statement this is documented in their system In their CFPB response, Navy Federal attempted to explain balance discrepancies by referencing their transaction posting order policy. This explanation is wholly inadequate and factually inapplicable because posting order does not explain why the ledger balance and available balance differ on the same receipt at the same moment, nor why the receipt balance differs from the statement balance for the same account on the same date. \n\nC. Unauthorized Transfers From Savings Account Following the deposit of my inheritance funds of {$98000.00} on XX/XX/XXXX, multiple large transfers were made from my savings account ( XXXX ) to my checking account that I did not initiate or authorize. These unauthorized transfers systematically moved my inherited funds from savings into checking where they were then exposed to fraudulent debit card activity. The pattern of transfers occurring in rapid succession in large round amounts is consistent with unauthorized account access rather than legitimate member-initiated transfers. \n\nXXXX XXXX Transactions My bank statements contain multiple instances of identical transactions posting on the same date for the same amount, which I have documented and flagged. Examples include duplicate XXXX XXXX Balance charges on the same day, duplicate XXXX XXXX charges, and duplicate XXXX charges. Navy Federal 's own text fraud alert system flagged card ending in XXXX for suspicious transactions including XXXX XXXX XXXX ( {$390.00} ) on XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX  ( {$3.00} ) on XX/XX/XXXX, yet these same transactions were used as evidence against me in the denial.\n\nE. Multiple Unauthorized Card Numbers and Account Access During the dispute period my Navy Federal profile had unauthorized phone numbers and accounts linked to it that I did not add. Multiple debit card numbers were active simultaneously including cards XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX appearing across statements in the same period. I received notifications of my card numbers being linked to XXXX accounts that are not mine. I was also informed that someone bypassed Navy Federal 's voice recognition system to gain access to my account, which Navy Federal 's security protocols should have prevented.\n\nF. Account Restriction During Active Dispute Navy Federal restricted my access to my account, statements, and transaction details during the period when fraudulent charges were occurring. This restriction directly prevented me from properly identifying, documenting, and disputing the unauthorized charges. This is particularly egregious because Navy Federal then used my inability to provide detailed documentation as justification for denying my claims. \n\nG. Retaliatory Threat Letter On XX/XX/XXXX, while I was a confirmed victim of XXXX separate data breaches and while my fraud claims were actively pending, XXXX XXXX sent me a threatening letter warning that I could have my debit card privileges suspended for up to XXXX years for filing 'suspicious claims. ' This letter was sent to both of my known addresses on the same date. This conduct is retaliatory, coercive, and constitutes an unfair, deceptive, and abusive act or practice under CFPB UDAAP authority, as it was designed to discourage me from exercising my federally protected right to dispute unauthorized transactions. \n\nH. Data Breaches and Compromised Identity I was the victim of XXXX documented data breaches during the period of fraudulent activity : XXXX XXXX XXXX data breach XX/XX/XXXX, exposing personal identifiable information AppFolio/Salesloft data breach discovered XX/XX/XXXX, formally notified XX/XX/XXXX ; breach exposed my name, address, date of birth, and Social Security number Navy Federal 's investigation made no attempt to consider whether my compromised identity from these data breaches contributed to the unauthorized account access. A proper Regulation E investigation would have considered this context. \n\nI. Merchant Refunds Not Credited XXXX formally processed a payment dispute for Full Self-Driving ( Supervised ) charges and confirmed in writing that the bank is responsible for refunding the original payment. Navy Federal has not processed or credited this refund to my account. \n\nJ. Account Closure During Active Dispute Navy Federal closed my accounts during the period of active dispute and regulatory complaint, leaving both my checking and savings accounts at XXXX. The final statement for period XXXX shows both accounts ending at {$0.00} with a notation that accounts were closed. This closure occurred while my disputes were unresolved and while I had an active regulatory complaint pending, leaving me without access to any funds. \n\nIV. FINANCIAL HARM As a direct result of Navy Federal 's failures, I have suffered the following documented financial harm : Depletion of inherited funds from a starting balance of approximately {$98000.00} through unauthorized transfers and fraudulent transactions Returned payments due to insufficient funds caused by account discrepancies Inability to pay essential bills during the dispute period Loss of account access preventing me from managing my finances Ongoing financial instability Professional risk I hold a state-issued professional license and any appearance of financial misconduct could jeopardize my career V. DEMANDS FOR RELIEF I respectfully request that the CFPB require Navy Federal Credit Union to : 1. Conduct a full forensic accounting reconciliation of all transactions across all affected accounts for the period XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX 2. Provide complete written documentation of all investigation findings for every denied claim, as required under Regulation E 3. Reimburse all unauthorized and fraudulent charges in accordance with the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1693 et seq. ) and Regulation E 4. Reimburse all funds lost through unauthorized transfers from savings account XXXX XXXX. Process the pending XXXX merchant refund 6. Explain and reconcile all documented balance discrepancies between ATM receipts, text message notifications, and bank statements 7. Withdraw and retract the retaliatory XX/XX/XXXX threat letter 8. Remove any adverse notations related to fraud claim activity from my member account record 9. Provide a full accounting of all account numbers, phone numbers, and devices that were linked to my membership profile during the dispute period VI. SUPPORTING EVIDENCE The following documents and evidence support this complaint and are available upon request : Physical ATM receipts showing balance discrepancies ( XXXX XXXX XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ) Navy Federal deposit receipt showing {$2700.00} deposit ( XX/XX/XXXX ) NFCU text message notifications showing balances that contradict statements Navy Federal bank statements for periods XXXX with annotated discrepancies XXXX Federal XXXX XXXX text messages on card XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ) Navy Federal security code warning texts ( XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ) Navy Federal denial emails for debit card XXXX ( {$1000.00} and {$4400.00} ) Navy Federal threatening letter dated XX/XX/XXXX ( received XXXX copies ) XXXX payment dispute confirmation email AppFolio/Salesloft data breach notification letter dated XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX data breach notification dated XX/XX/XXXX All formal appeal letters and legal notice emails sent to Navy Federal XX/XX/XXXX Prior CFPB complaint and Navy Federal response ( Case No. XXXX ) Call recordings of interactions with Navy Federal representatives VII. CONCLUSION Navy Federal Credit Union has repeatedly failed to conduct lawful investigations, has withheld documentation I am legally entitled to, has restricted my account during an active dispute, has retaliated against me for exercising my rights, and has provided responses to regulators that are factually incomplete and misleading. I am a victim of identity theft through XXXX documented data breaches, and Navy Federal 's failure to investigate properly has resulted in the loss of substantial inherited funds and ongoing financial harm. \nI respectfully request that the CFPB conduct a thorough investigation of this matter, impose appropriate penalties, and require Navy Federal to make me whole. \n\nRespectfully submitted,","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-02T12:29:03.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"758XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"20879785","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","date_received":"2026-04-02T12:23:39.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Banking errors"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["A proper Regulation E <em>investigation</em> would have considered this context. \n\nI. Merchant <em>Refunds</em> Not Credited XXXX formally processed a payment dispute for Full Self-Driving ( Supervised ) <em>charges</em> and <em>confirmed</em> in writing that the bank is responsible for <em>refunding</em> the original payment. Navy Federal has not processed or credited this <em>refund</em> to my account. \n\nJ."],"company_public_response":["Company believes it acted appropriately as <em>authorized</em> by contract or law"]},"sort":[14.355417,"20879785"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8158952","_score":14.090657,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX The companies involved in this issue are Chase and XXXX. \n\nFrom XX/XX/XXXX - XX/XX/XXXX I was charged a total of XXXX transactions by XXXX to my Chase XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ending in XXXX that I did not authorize or receive services for. The XXXX unauthorized charges amount to {$37000.00}. These charges do not appear on my XXXX billing history or my XXXX ads accounts. \n\nDuring XXXX I did run ads through XXXX and the ads charges only amount to XXXX transactions and a total of {$1700.00}. These legitimate charges do show up on my XXXX billing history and are listed below. \nXX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  CA {$400.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$15.00} XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$400.00} XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX fb.me/ads CA {$600.00} XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX fb.me/ads CA {$100.00} XX/XX/XXXX XXXX  XXXX fb.me/ads CA {$240.00} The fraudulent charges that I did not authorize, did not receive service for, and do not show up on my XXXX account are listed below. \nXX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$1200.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA XXXX XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX fb.me/ads CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA $ XXXX BY XXXX XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA $ XXXX BY XXXX XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$900.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$1000.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$600.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$400.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$250.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$170.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA XXXX XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$120.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA XXXX XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA XXXX XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA XXXX XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA XXXX XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$50.00} XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA XXXX XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$50.00} XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$35.00} XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$25.00} XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$15.00} XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$10.00} XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX CA {$7.00} XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$5.00} XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$5.00} XXXXXXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX CA {$3.00} XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$3.00} XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX CA {$3.00} XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX CA {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX CA {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX CA {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CA {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX CA {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX CA {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX CA {$2.00} You can see that all transactions I have listed as fraudulent have a XXXX billing code that ends in XXXX. While the XXXX transactions that did come from my account and show up on my billing history end in XXXX. \n\nXXXX I was shocked and overwhelmed when my card was declined and I saw that there was over {$40000.00} balance on my card. I initially believed these charges were fraudulent or some form of identity theft and called the Chase fraud dept for help. I was unsure of exactly which transactions were fraud because many were of the same amounts as the valid transactions. The fraud dept with Chase initially marked the unapproved charges as fraud and some of the valid charges as fraud as well. They took the charges off of my account, canceled my card and issued me a new card. \n\nApprox. XX/XX/XXXX I received a call from the Chase fraud dept. They stated that XXXX has said that these charges are from my XXXX account. The fraud dept said that this is not a fraud claim but a merchant dispute issue and they have recharged the charges to my card. They indicated I need to go through XXXX directly or the Chase dispute dept. They stated that if XXXX admitted that there was suspicious activity or fraud on my account that they could then reopen the fraud claim and refund the charges. I discovered that they had flagged some of the XXXX legit transactions in the fraud claim and called Chase to inform them that this XXXX have been the reason for the confusion with XXXX. \n\nXXXX I sent multiple messages to XXXX and XXXX through their help and billing support pages with no success. Each time I would get a generic reply stating that there was no suspicious activity on my account. \n\nXXXX Full packet of information with a letter and full list of all transactions showing which were legitimate and which were to be disputed was faxed to the Chase dispute dept. \n\nXXXX Chase Branch Manager stated they would attempt to escalate this to a higher level who would advocate for me. \n\nXXXX Update : I received a letter from Chase stating that my dispute has been resolved and my account has been credited for the first XXXX of the XXXX charges. These charges came from the same place as the other XXXX transactions. See attachment F. \n\nXXXX Police Report Filed. \n\nXXXX I found on my chase account under track disputes that they had again listed several of the XXXX legitimate transactions and disputes along with the XXXX fraud transactions. I called them multiple times to clarify that the XXXX transactions ending in XXXX should not be included in the dispute. \n\nXXXX I was called by XXXX from Chase executive dept who stated simply restated what the frauds dept finding were. \n\nXXXX Out of the blue I received a message from XXXX XXXX admitting that they had found Ive investigated these charges and believe your account has been compromised. Ive refunded all fraudulent purchases back to the original source. Please allow 3-5 business days for the refunded purchases to appear in your account. I saw that 2 of the fraudulent {$900.00} transactions were pending refunds to my account. \n\nXXXX I replied to XXXX with the additional transaction reference numbers and asked them to investigate and refund the additional charges. They replied, XXXX XXXX, Thanks for contacting XXXX. \nWe've detected suspicious activity surrounding your card that resulted in purchases you didn't make. I've issued you a refund for those fraudulent purchases. \nYour payment provider usually makes the refund available to you within XXXX business days. If you still haven't received the money after XXXX business days, I recommend contacting your payment provider for help getting your refund. \nXXXX Received letter from Chase stating that XXXX of the {$900.00} disputed transactions were resolved in my favor! \n\nI waited 9 days and only XXXX of the XXXX fraud charges were refunded to my account. I called the dispute dept at Chase and they directed me back to the fraud dept. I then submitted the fraud emails from XXXX to Chase fraud dept. \n\nXXXX Chase Fraud Dept . called me and stated that the email submitted from XXXX was not enough evidence to refund the additional charges and they would be closing the case again. They stated that this is still a merchant dispute and XXXX would have to refund the additional charges. \n\nChase keeps closing my case and sending me back and forth between the fraud dept and the dispute dept. XXXX will not thoroughly look through each transaction and issue a refund for the fraud charges. I did not receive any services or authorize any of the XXXX transactions. XXXX has admitted in writing that XXXX of the {$900.00} transactions ending in XXXX are from suspicious activity/fraud. I need Chase to take action on my behalf. Thank you so much to anyone who is taking the time to look into this and advocate for me. I need the truth to prevail as my wife and I, along with our XXXX childrens livelihood depends on this. \n\nSincerely, Attachment List : Chase Transaction list from card ending in XXXX ( previously XXXX ) FB lifetime billing report from my business FB ads account where the XXXX valid transactions are listed FB screenshots of the same transactions with FB reference numbers FB lifetime billing report from my personal FB ads account Screenshots of FB orders and payments history XX/XX/XXXX Update Chase Letter validating that XXXX of the transactions that were disputed as fraud were confirmed as fraud or a legitimate dispute and my account has been credited. \nAdded XX/XX/XXXX Police Report Added. \nAdded XX/XX/XXXX Emails from XXXX acknowledging that my account was compromised and suspicious activity resulted in charges that I did not make. \nAdded XX/XX/XXXX Additional Chase dispute letters.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-01-17T05:29:08.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"80923","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8158952","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2024-01-17T04:54:33.000Z","state":"CO","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX The companies involved in this <em>issue</em> are Chase and XXXX. \n\nFrom XX/XX/XXXX - XX/XX/XXXX I was charged a total of XXXX transactions by XXXX to my Chase XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ending in XXXX that I did not <em>authorize</em> or receive services for. The XXXX <em>unauthorized</em> <em>charges</em> amount to {$37000.00}. These <em>charges</em> do not appear on my XXXX billing history or my XXXX ads accounts."],"sub_product":["General-purpose credit card or <em>charge</em> card"]},"sort":[14.090657,"8158952"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17340775","_score":11.878711,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"To whom it may concern : I am requesting that CIT Bank and XXXX XXXX  treat the {$20000.00} I paid to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as what it is : money obtained through fraud, misrepresentation, and the unauthorized practice of law by a suspended attorney, not a legitimate legal-services transaction. \n\nXXXX. A suspended attorney can not legally practice law or collect retainers in any state Under nationwide attorney-licensing and disciplinary rules, including the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, a lawyer who has been suspended is prohibited from practicing law, giving legal advice, or assisting others in practicing law in any jurisdiction. XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX expressly prohibits a lawyer from practicing law where doing so violates that jurisdictions regulation of the legal profession, or from assisting another in doing so. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX defines professional misconduct to include violating the rules of professional conduct, and engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation. States, including California and others, have adopted parallel rules that bar unauthorized practice of law and assisting it, and that treat such conduct as disciplinable misconduct.\n\nOnce suspended, an attorney is legally considered not authorized to practice anywhere, not just in the suspending state. Any retainer taken under those conditions is inherently suspect and may be considered void, unenforceable, and obtained by fraud and false pretenses. \n\nXXXX. A suspended attorney can not run or profit from a law firm Under state and national ethics rules, a suspended attorney must cease all legal operations. They can not act as principal, founder, or managing attorney of a firm, can not direct staff in the practice of law, can not solicit clients or negotiate fee agreements, and can not collect legal fees or retainers through a law group or subsidiary entity. These principles flow from the same unauthorized-practice and misconduct rules, which prohibit lawyers from circumventing discipline through the acts of another or by assisting others to violate professional rules.\n\nPublic disciplinary records show that attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX has been suspended from the practice of law in XXXX  for five years by order of the Supreme Court XXXX Pennsylvania, effective XX/XX/XXXX, following a Disciplinary Board recommendation. The XXXX  Disciplinary Boards public attorney profile lists his current status as Suspended. In XXXX, the XXXX  State Bar Disciplinary Board revoked his privilege to practice law in that state effective XX/XX/XXXX, for violations of professional rules governing diligence, communication, fees, safekeeping property, terminating representation, supervisory responsibilities, and misconduct. \n\nDespite these disciplinary actions, his law-brand entities ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. ) have continued to advertise nationwide legal services and student/education defense representation through websites and marketing materials that present him as an active, lead attorney. That continuing operation, combined with his suspension, raises serious concerns of ongoing unauthorized practice of law and illegal fee collection. \n\nXXXX. What I paid and how it was represented There were two key transactions, processed by two banks : XXXX. XXXX XXXX  {$350.00} consultation fee I was charged {$350.00} for a one-hour consultation specifically with attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX That consultation never occurred as represented. Instead, I received approximately XXXX minutes with someone who was not clearly identified as a licensed attorney, and certainly not the attorney I paid for. I never received the one-hour consultation I was promised. \nXXXX. CIT Bank approximately {$20000.00} retainer on or about XX/XX/XXXX CIT Bank processed a phone transfer of approximately {$20000.00} to an external account identified on my statement as a transfer to XXXX XXXX around XX/XX/XXXX. This was presented to me as a fee retainer for assistance with a contingency case : I was told that the underlying lawsuit would be handled on a contingency basis, but that I had to pay a large upfront retainer so the firm could take the case and prepare filings. This structure is highly irregularpaying a massive retainer for a supposed contingency caseespecially where there is no valid, signed written fee agreement, no clear trust-account disclosures, and a suspended attorney involved. \n\nIn other words, both the {$350.00} and {$20000.00} were induced by misrepresentations about who would provide legal services, the attorneys licensing and disciplinary status, the nature of the case ( contingency vs. fee-based ), and the existence of any lawful fee agreement or trust arrangement. \n\nI later learned that no valid written retainer agreement governing the {$20000.00} existed, I received no meaningful legal work in return, and the attorney whose name was used to solicit these funds was not authorized to practice law at all due to suspension and disciplinary action described above. \n\nXXXX. Evidence that this is not a normal fee dispute, but fraud I now have written confirmation from the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of XXXX  that my complaint against XXXX XXXX XXXX has been filed and logged. The Disciplinary Boards public pages and the Supreme Courts disciplinary order confirm his five-year suspension and prior discipline. The XXXX  XXXX XXXX also publicly reports revocation of his privilege to practice in that state for serious professional violations. \n\nAdditional evidence includes : Public disciplinary orders from Pennsylvania and other jurisdictions showing suspension and prior discipline. \nAttorney-status records showing that his XXXX  license is currently suspended. \nMarketing and website content from his law entities holding out nationwide XXXX XXXX and student/education defense services despite his suspension. \n\nIn short, this is not a situation where I simply changed my mind about a lawyer. It is a case where : A suspended attorney continued to act as a lawyer, His operation collected money under false pretenses, I was never given the consultation or representation I was sold, and There is no valid fee agreement or bill justifying the {$20000.00}. \n\nXXXX. Why this is fraud from a banking and consumer-protection standpoint From a banking and consumer-protection perspective, this situation involves misrepresentation and omission of material facts ( including the attorneys suspended status ), services paid for but not rendered, unauthorized practice of law, and collection of fees under false pretenses. These are precisely the kinds of unfair or deceptive acts that consumer financial regulators and courts view as fraud. \n\nA suspended attorney can not lawfully accept retainers or operate a law firm. Therefore, any authorization I gave to Discover or XXXX was fraud-induced authorizationI only approved those transactions because I relied on false claims about the attorneys status, authority, and services. When authorization is obtained by deception, regulators and courts often treat resulting transfers in a similar manner to unauthorized or improper transactions, particularly in the context of electronic fund transfers and card payments. \n\nXXXX. The banks obligations, even when a customer authorized the transfer Even when a customer technically initiates or authorizes an electronic transfer, banks still have obligations under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ) and Regulation E to investigate alleged errors and unauthorized electronic fund transfers, and to respond within specific time frames. Regulation Es error-resolution rule ( 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ) requires financial institutions to investigate reported errors and, in many circumstances, to provide provisional credit if the investigation can not be completed within the defined period. CFPB guidance and compliance materials emphasize that errors include certain unauthorized or incorrect electronic transfers and that institutions must have fair, documented procedures for handling consumer fraud and dispute claims.\n\nAdditionally, national bank regulators such as the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency ( OCC ) and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) provide complaint and enforcement channels for consumers when banks mishandle fraud investigations or disputes. The OCCs HelpWithMyBank.gov and its consumer-complaints pages explain that the OCC can review national banks handling of consumer issues, including fraud and unauthorized transactions. The CFPBs complaint portal and guidance similarly highlight banks obligations to respond to and address consumer complaints and fraud issues related to financial products and services.\n\nBy simply coding my dispute as a routine authorized merchant transaction and refusing to meaningfully consider the fraud-induced nature of the authorization, the illegal status of the recipients law practice, and the absence of any valid contract or services, XXXX XXXX  and CIT Bank have XXXX in my view, failed to meet the spirit of these consumer-protection obligations. \n\nXXXX. Independent verification and role of online research The factual information regarding XXXX XXXX XXXX disciplinary history, suspensions, and revoked privileges in multiple states comes from : The XXXX  Disciplinary Board and Supreme Court orders suspending him for five years, and earlier disciplinary actions. \nThe XXXX State Bar Disciplinary Boards revocation of his privilege to practice law in Virginia for misconduct related to fees, safekeeping property, supervision, and other professional-rule violations. \nPublic summaries and reporting ( XXXX XXXX XXXX, case summaries, secondary commentary ) that corroborate the five-year suspension and its underlying findings. \n\nInitial verification was done through online research using publicly available disciplinary and bar records, and I then confirmed this by directly filing with the XXXX  Disciplinary Board, which issued a confirmation number for my complaint. This documentation supports my position that the {$20000.00} was obtained by an individual who was not authorized to practice law or collect legal fees at the time. \n\nXXXX. What I am asking CIT Bank and XXXX XXXX  to do Given all of the above, I respectfully request that CIT Bank and XXXX XXXX  : XXXX. Treat the {$20000.00} retainer transfer and the {$350.00} consultation charge as fraud-induced transactions tied to an illegal, suspended-attorney operation. \nXXXX. Conduct a full, formal fraud investigation into these transfers, rather than coding them as simple merchant disputes, taking into account the attorneys suspended status and the unauthorized practice of law. \nXXXX. Reverse and refund the total {$20000.00} to my accounts, to the greatest extent permitted under law and network rules, applying the protections of EFTA/Regulation E and other applicable consumer-protection laws. \nXXXX. Block any future payments to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX or any related entities connected to this suspended attorney. \nXXXX. Flag the receiving accounts for suspected fraud and cooperate fully with : State bar authorities ( Pennsylvania, Virginia, New Jersey, California, and any other relevant jurisdictions ) ; The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) ; The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency ( OCC ) in the case of CIT ; The Federal Bureau of Investigation ( FBI/IC3 ) and local law enforcement, to the extent they investigate fraudulent legal-services schemes. \n\nIf, after being provided with this information and supporting documentation, a bank still refuses to investigate or assist, I understand that I have the right to seek further relief from the OCC, the CFPB, state bar authorities, and law-enforcement agencies. My goal is not only to recover my own funds, but also to prevent other consumersespecially vulnerable clients seeking XXXX or civil-rights representationfrom being defrauded in the same way by an attorney who was not legally authorized to practice law or collect fees when these payments were taken.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-18T17:28:17.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Mobile or digital wallet","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17340775","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"FIRST CITIZENS BANCSHARES, INC.","date_received":"2025-11-18T07:33:26.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Public summaries and reporting ( XXXX XXXX XXXX, case summaries, secondary commentary ) that corroborate the five-year suspension and its underlying <em>findings</em>. \n\nInitial verification was done through online research using publicly available disciplinary and bar records, and I then <em>confirmed</em> this by directly filing with the XXXX  Disciplinary Board, which <em>issued</em> a confirmation number for my complaint."]},"sort":[11.878711,"17340775"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12364671","_score":10.949482,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX OK XXXX XXXX XXXX  \nCONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU\nConsumer Financial Protection Bureau\nPO Box 27170\nWashington, DC 20038 XXXX XXXX XXXX\n\nRE: Claim against Wells Fargo Claims Assistance Center, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, NC XXXX\n\nTo whom it may concern:\n\nIn XXXX XXXX XXXX, I was away from my home for four weeks. I returned on XXXX XXXX. I asked a friend to come in and water my plants once each week. In the third week, she sent me a text and told me she brought my packages inside. I had not ordered anything so I thought that was odd, but I didnt say anything more to my friend since she brought them inside. I wrote it off thinking someone must have sent something to me that I wasnt expecting. When I arrived home a week or so later, I was shocked to find XXXX packages on my counter. When I looked at where they came from they all were from XXXX. \n\nThe next day I opened the packages and discovered items I was not familiar with and had not ordered. I took a couple pictures and posted them on my FB page and asked if anyone had sent them to me by mistake. I have sent things to people all over the country so I thought maybe someone selected my address instead of their own and had these items sent to me by mistake. No one had. Someone suggested that I had been scammed. I went to the XXXX  website to search for an answer. Under the FAQ section I found a section about what to do if you are scammed. The section is entitled Report Unsolicited Packages or Brushing Scams.\nXXXX  \nThat page contains a link to a form to report unwanted packages. Once on that page you can enter the tracking number(s) of the packages you received. \n\n\nOn the previous page XXXX  makes this statement,  XXXX  investigates reports of \"brushing\" and takes the appropriate action against bad actors that violate our policies. XXXX  may suspend or remove selling privileges, withhold payments, and work with law enforcement during investigations.\n\nXXXX  XXXX XXXX info about Brushing scams: XXXX  The page regarding this states:\nYou are allowed to keep the merchandise. The Federal Trade Commission says you have a legal right to keep unordered merchandise.\n\nXXXX  Scam Warning: Beware of Deliveries You Didnt Order\nWritten by XXXX Staff | XXXX XXXX XXXX\nXXXX  \nBy law, unsolicited merchandise is yours to keep, according to the United States Postal Inspection Service. So you dont have to return any package you receive, and if you dont want it, you can donate it to a good cause.\nWith XXXX  brushing, there is no risk of legally owing money on a package you did not order.\n____________________\nPrior to reporting these packages as fraud, I posted the following on my FB page and included four photos of the items. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\nDo these items look familiar to anyone? They were delivered to my house (to my name) while I was away. I did not order any of them. Maybe someone accidentally selected my name/address when ordering?? There are XXXX  of the XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX of the lanterns. I believe most were delivered almost a month ago.\n_____________________\nThis is where it was brought to my attention that I had likely been scammed. I then found the page on XXXX  website  to report the packages I received and entered all XXXX tracking numbers. I did not receive any sort of a confirmation or notice telling me what would happen next or advising me further on what to do. I made the assumption that I would hear something in the near future. \nIn the meantime, I took a look at my Wells Fargo bank account to see if I could find any transactions that I did not recognize. Unfortunately, I did. The following are the four unauthorized charges on my account that were for the XXXX  items. \nPost Date\t\tMerchant\t\tAmount\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\n\t\t\tTOTAL \t\t               XXXX  \n\nThere were no descriptions of the items. I matched them only because of the amounts listed that I did not recognize and that they were XXXX  purchases. I then reviewed my XXXX account to make sure that they were in fact not my purchases, which I confirmed. I knew I hadnt ordered anything, but wanted to double check what my account reflected. \n\n\nAt this point I contacted Wells Fargo and reported the fraudulent activity. I was told that my debit card would be immediately cancelled and a new one would be issued. I was also told that a provisional credit in the amount of XXXX would be issued to my account while they researched the issue. I later discovered and informed WF that XXXX  items initially thought to be fraud were not, so the correct unauthorized amount is XXXX.\n\n\nI received a letter from the WF Claims Assistance Center dated XXXX XXXX stating the above. \nSee Exhibit A\n\n\nNext, I received a letter from Wells Fargo Claims Assistance Center dated XXXX XXXX XXXX  stating they had completed their research into my fraud claim and found that the purchases were authorized and that no processing error occurred. They would be deducting the provisional credit of XXXX  from my account on XXXX  The letter further stated that I had the right to request copies of the documents they relied on to make their decision, which I did immediately. See Exhibit B\n\n\nI received the above letter on XXXX XXXX XXXX. Upon receipt of this letter I called WF  to dispute their decision. I spoke with a woman named XXXX. She told me that WF had contacted XXXX  as part of their research and they confirmed that the purchases in question were all delivered to the address of record for my XXXX  account, which WF accepted as meaning the purchases were legitimate. I asked to speak to someone above her and wished to file a complaint. I was then assigned COMPLAINT ID XXXXXXXX XXXX \nI was transferred to a senior resolution specialist named XXXX. She told me they cannot help me any further. The research was complete and I would be charged. \n\n\nThe next day, on XXXX XXXX XXXX, I called XXXX  and spoke to XXXX. \nShe looked at my account and told me that the purchases in question were unauthorized. \nShe also told me there was no history of these items or the charges for them on my account, therefore there was nothing they could do. I provided her with a tracking number for one of the packages and she told me that nothing came up. She said she was going to send an email to the Investigative Charges team and explain my situation. I would receive an email within one day letting  me know their findings. \n\n\nOn XXXX XXXX XXXX, I received an email from XXXX  thanking me for reporting the unauthorized charges. That was all it said. Nothing else. \n\n\nSo now I have WF charging me for items purchased from XXXX  that XXXX  says are not on my account. How is this possible? I feel I am a victim times three at this point; of the scammer who hacked my XXXX  account, of XXXX  for doing nothing and of WF for accepting charges on my account that should have been red flagged in the first place. I am out XXXX  \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX I called XXXX  and spoke to XXXX. I asked her to look at my account to see if she could see the fraudulent charge amounts in my account. I provided her with the four amounts : XXXX XXXX XXXX and $XXXX. She confirmed all the charges were visible and agreed my case needed to be escalated. She would report it to the fraud team. I would then receive an email within forty eight hours regarding the investigation. \nI did not receive a response and so I called XXXX  again on XXXX XXXX XXXX  and spoke to a gentleman named XXXX.  He confirmed that the purchases in question were processed using a different account than mine but with the debit card attached to my account. He could not tell me the name of the other account, but told me that they would take action behind the scenes and not allow this account to be operational any longer. He also confirmed that I only have one XXXX  account. He then told me he was going to send another message to the payment department via email and that they should respond within 48 hours. He also told me he would send an email to me summarizing our conversation. He suggested that I file a police report. \n\n\nAt this time I decided to look up the tracking numbers from the packages I received and discovered the following. See Exhibit C \n\n\nPackage \nTracking Number\nReturn Address\nNotes XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX, OK XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, TX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  None listed\nThe tracking numbers beginning with XXXX  are identified as being associated with XXXX XXXX XXXX There are two QR codes on the side of the box. One says XXXX XXXX, the other says XXXX.\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\nNone listed\nThe tracking numbers beginning with XXXX  are identified as being associated with XXXX XXXX XXXX. There are two QR codes on the side of the box. One says XXXX, the other says XXXX.\n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX AL XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  None listed\nThe tracking numbers beginning with XXXX  are identified as being associated with XXXX XXXX XXXX There are two QR codes on the side of the box. One says XXXX, the other says XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX MI XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, OH XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  None listed \nThe tracking numbers beginning with XXXX  are identified as being associated with XXXX XXXX XXXX There are two QR codes on the side of the box. One says XXXX XXXX, the other says XXXX  \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX  I filed a police report for fraudulent use of my credit card with the city of XXXX XXXX Arkansas where I was living at the time. See Exhibit D\n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX  I received an email from XXXX  summarizing my previous conversation with XXXX  and telling me they believed an unauthorized party had registered an account using my visa card ending in XXXX  and that for my protection they had closed that account and cancelled any open orders. \nThe letter went on to identify the charges and then recommended that I contact my financial institution to dispute the charges. They further stated that they would provide information to any law enforcement agency that was investigating the issue, however they could not provide that information to me. See EXHIBIT E\n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX  : After receiving the above email from XXXX, I called WF again and spoke to XXXX  in the claims department and re-explained my story and told him the details of the email I had just received from XXXX. He told me they cannot help me further. I then asked to speak to a XXXX XXXX. \nXXXX, the resolution specialist, told me that WF sent a claim to Visa to investigate the charges. Visa then inquired with XXXX, who then told WF they are denying my claim because the merchant (XXXX) evidenced the charges were legitimate because the items were sent to the address of record for my account. \nXXXX  tells me I can send a letter to the WF claims department to dispute the charges again and suggests I include the email message from XXXX  along with my claim/reference number. He tells me it will take 48 hours for someone to review my message once they receive it.  See Exhibit B XXXX XXXX XXXX Per XXXX  request, I sent an email to the Wells Fargo Claims Assistance Center once again spelling out the fraudulent charges that occurred and all of the conversations I had with their representatives to appeal my case. I also added that I was not alerted from WF of these charges despite two of them being outside the usual pattern of my XXXX  orders. In the past I have received a text message or a phone call asking me to validate suspected fraudulent charges using my debit card. Two of the said charges were over $XXXX, which were way above what I typically spend on any XXXX  purchase. At this point, WF has told me the reason my claim is being denied is: 1. XXXX  stated that the said items were delivered to my address of record. 2. Visa conducted their own investigation and concluded the charges were valid based on the same findings as above and that the charges were made using my visa account. In this email I sent I included the email I received from XXXX  and the police report I filed. See Exhibit F\n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX: I called WF as I had not received a response to my email. I did not write down the name of the person I initially spoke with but after I explained that I was following up on my message, she said she would connect me to one of her XXXX. I was on hold for 30 minutes and was disconnected. I called back immediately and spoke to a gentleman named XXXX. Once again I had to re-explain my situation. He tells me he is going to contact an XXXX  XXXX and will escalate my claim to their resolution team. He said it would take two days and they would reach back out to me. He then gave me a new COMPLAINT ID, which was XXXX-XXXX. See Exhibit E\nXXXX XXXX XXXX: I received an email from WF stating that they will respond to my inquiry within ten business days, which would be by XXXX  XXXX. See Exhibit E\nXXXX XXXX XXXX: I received a secure email from WF informing me that they are still denying my claim. I called and spoke with XXXX  again and notified him of the decision that was made. He told me he was going to reopen my claim, will escalate it again and have the charges credited back to my account. He also told me that it would take 2-10 days to receive a response from the resolution team and he would make sure they had my phone number. See Exhibit E\nXXXX XXXX XXXX: My WF account was credited for all of the fraudulent charges, including the XXXX  I had previously informed them that were valid. I called and spoke to XXXX  and explained again that XXXX  of those charges were legitimate. She then transferred me to XXXX  who said she would take care of that. See Exhibit E\nXXXX XXXX XXXX  I received a package in the mail from WF containing the documents I had requested on XXXX XXXX. I examined them before I called and spoke to XXXX  and XXXX. I first wanted to resolve the issue of the XXXX  items being credited that should not have. Upon examining the documents, I discovered that with each of the fraudulent items (XXXX  of them) there was a name and Ordering IP attached to the ordering invoice. The name was XXXX XXXX.. See Exhibit G\nHere is a summary of the XXXX  items: \nItem name\nCost\nName on Ordering Invoice\nOrdering IP\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\n\nWith the sets of XXXX, they appear to be ordered at the same time as they are on the same order invoice, however, one was charged tax XXXX and the other wasnt XXXX. One set of  the XXXX  and the XXXX XXXX XXXX were ordered from the same IP address.  See Exhibit G\nIncluded in the document history was one item I had actually ordered close to the same date. The IP address attached to my order does not match any of those listed above. See Exhibit G\nFurther to my conversation with XXXX, I explained the discrepancy in the IP ordering addresses and asked that this information be included when my case is reviewed. I felt that this was overlooked and was not considered at any time in the previous reviews of my case. She told me that she made note of this in my claim file and that it would be considered.\n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX: I received a notice from WF Claims Assistance Center notifying me that they have completed their research and once again concluded that the charges were authorized and no processing error occurred. The letter further stated that I should consider my case closed and that on XXXX XXXX the amount of XXXX would once again be deducted from my account.  See Exhibit H\nXXXX XXXX XXXX: I called WF and spoke to XXXX  to attempt to dispute their decision again. She told me that because I didnt return the merchandise to XXXX  they could not credit my account. I informed her that I was not required by law to return merchandise that was sent to me fraudulently. She went on to say that WF had no dispute rights because I didnt return anything and didnt ask XXXX  for a refund. I informed her that I was not notified by WF of any suspicious charges even though the ones in question were outside of my typical XXXX  shopping. She then told me that being notified by WF of questionable charges was a courtesy and not a guarantee of protection of fraudulent activity. She then suggested she transfer me to customer service to ask them why they didnt flag the purchase. I refused as I knew that would get me nowhere and asked to be transferred to a XXXX XXXX XXXX. I then spoke with XXXX  who identified himself as a senior escalation resolution specialist. He was dismissive and rude and told me there was nothing they could do. I asked to speak to someone above him and he said he would have someone call me and I could expect to hear from them within 48 hours. That call never came. See Exhibit E. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX: In anticipation of WF deducting the XXXX  from my account, I initiated a transfer of most of the money in my account to a different bank. On XXXX XXXX when they deducted the funds, it overdrew my account. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX: I called WF to close my account. I was not able to do so because of the negative balance. \t\nThe person I spoke with was XXXX. She asked me why I was closing my account. I explained that I was very unhappy with how I have been treated as a customer despite being a long time account holder. She asked for details and I explained briefly. She then suggested I speak to a XXXX  to tell them about my complaint. She transferred me to XXXX  who told me that she would forward the information to the escalation department in the executive office. I would receive an acknowledgement within 48 hours. She gave me a new case number which was: XXXXXXXX.\nAfter months of going back and forth, I didnt have much hope, but agreed to try this direction. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX: I received a notice via secure email from WF denying my claim again and stating as they did before that they believe the charges are valid. My claim is closed. My account is overdrawn. I am out $XXXX  for items fraudulently charged to my account. See Exhibit J\n\nSUMMARY: My XXXX XXXX account was hacked. The hackers were able to use the debit card I had attached to my account to make multiple purchases and had them sent to my home. I was out of town when the packages were delivered and was not aware of the charges until after I returned home. I contacted XXXX  and then WF as soon as I realized that I was the victim of a brushing scam. Per the documentation and notes I have provided, it is clear that neither XXXX  or WF was willing to make this right. I feel the ownership belongs to WF, however, both XXXX  and WF essentially pointed fingers at each other, none taking responsibility. To date there is no evidence in the shopping history of  my XXXX  account that I purchased the items that were delivered to me. This is because they were not purchased using my account, only with my WF debit card. While I understand that large institutions such as these, do their best to control fraud, there will always be exceptions and high level thieves who slip through the cracks. What I also understand is the value of customer service and making things right. To be told by WF that the fraudulent charges on my account are valid only because the packages were delivered to my home is, in my opinion, weak evidence. Further stating that I should have returned the items is an invalid request as XXXX  and the Federal Trade Commission do not require the return of items that were sent as part of a scam. It is also an insult to my integrity and cost me a lot of money of which I have nothing to show for. While $XXXX  is nothing to them, it isnt to me. Despite providing evidence from XXXX  and considering the usual patterns of my XXXX  purchases, I have been told there is nothing else that can be done to get my money back. I believe I have more evidence of being scammed than they do to prove the items were valid purchases by me. The reasons given to me were inconsistent and varied depending on whom I was speaking with. If I made the purchases in question myself I would have simply paid for them as I have done with every other purchase I have ever made on XXXX  using my WF debit card. I would not dispute something that was valid. I have taken measures to assure this doesnt happen to me again. My XXXX XXXX account is no longer active, there is no credit or debit card attached to it and I have closed my WF account. However, my account has a negative balance of $XXXX  and cannot be officially closed until the balance is brought to a positive amount. I am at risk of that amount being charged off and reported to the credit bureaus causing a negative impact on my credit report. I have received correspondence from WF stating this. \nI am not willing to pay the negative balance off as I dont feel it is just. \nI am seeking reversal of the $XXXX  and would like an additional $XXXX  for the stress this has caused and the time I have spent over the last seven months attempting to favorably resolve this matter. \t\nSincerely,\nXXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-07T21:46:19.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"74017","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12364671","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2025-03-07T21:17:34.000Z","state":"OK","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["She looked at my account and told me that the purchases in question were <em>unauthorized</em>. \nShe also told me there was no history of these items or the <em>charges</em> for them on my account, therefore there was nothing they could do. I provided her with a tracking number for one of the packages and she told me that nothing came up. She said she was going to send an email to the <em>Investigative</em> <em>Charges</em> team and explain my situation. I would receive an email within one day letting  me know their <em>findings</em>."]},"sort":[10.949482,"12364671"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14175203","_score":9.8322315,"_source":{"product":"Vehicle loan or lease","complaint_what_happened":"XX/XX/XXXX came from out of state to Ohio buy XXXX truck @ agreed online price of {$22000.00}. get there, bait/switch price by {$2600.00} ( {$610.00} turned out to be unlisted/unauthorized Theft warranty ). Added warranties not authorized or signed or even received. Pre-arrival Had dealer throw in XXXX ( only did XXXX of XXXX requested ), as wouldn't lower ad. price. He Agreed. XXXX used distraction techniques during signing process & was leaning arm across top of papers pointing where to sign & only going over payment amount & length & would quickly remove when signed & were talking like old friends. XXXX XXXX XXXX back trans overheats & grinding gears up down, then sticks in XXXX, pull over & leaking trans fluid. text XXXX rep as highly upset. Manage to get home, took to XXXX XXXX says XXXX Qt still overfilled & damaged gears after found chunks metal in drained fluid. Overfilling trans is what caused the breakdown & is well documented for vehicle or any trans really. left multiple emails/calls/texts w/dealer that wanted contract price fixed & warranties cancelled & wouldn't respond until XXXX & then says \" use the VSC '' I don't have any paperwork & you gave me a XX/XX/XXXX % Powertrain warranty. Says will get the {$2000.00} \" signed off '' & send me papers for warranty claim & their XXXX pt inspection, XXXX report XXXX XXXX work order, as now claiming that's what the {$610.00} was for. I hear nothing for 4 days after many messages until I file XXXX & that afternoon I get XXXX of XXXX w/forged unauthorized electronic signature on it. Reviewing it I notice it's not the same Company listed on my contract. None of them were correct, XXXX isn't even a XXXX company after investigating. XXXX the claim XXXX & they sent me ALL XXXX pgs of contract they received & NONE have my signature on them. I sent them one I had. They were shocked. I got copies from EVERY correct warranty company & NOT XXXX has my signature on it. I was able to cancel all warranties & get refunded & off my contract. XX/XX/XXXX XXXX called & denied claim as dealer gave me a XX/XX/XXXX % powertrain warranty, XXXX XXXX & that has to come XXXX as still valid. Informed dealer, no response, left messages even for XXXX, emails requesting XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX the {$2000.00} & no response. Informed them I would file XXXX if they kept ignoring issues. XX/XX/XXXX they responded to BBB saying {$2000.00} was fair, yet NEVER produced a check or even confirmed XXXX was coming after XXXX. Wont acknowledge responsibility for their warranty. XXXX communication from dealer personally after this & I have all records, until XXXX. XXXX I received copy of Ohio title/cover page stating a 6 % sales tax was pd to Ohio & XXXX total sales price was different from my contract as I'm titling in Oregon & has no sales tax. After the \" fraud '' issue this finance person already had done I was concerned so called XXXX to see what their copy of contract had on it. They hadn't received from XXXX so requested it XXXX & on XXXX they sent me what they received ( XXXX ). I immediately called & told them it was a forgery & NOT the contract I have in my possession & signed at the dealership. I sent them that contract & XXXX pieces of evidence w/my actual signature. It is being investigated by their fraud dept. at this time. After finding this out, on XXXX sent dealer a Demand letter for {$42000.00} = {$2000.00} overcharge + {$8600.00} ( full trans repair as their tech overfilling caused it ) XXXX XXXX Treble damages for TILA, XXXX & Magnuson-Moss warranty Act violations. ONLY after that XXXX did XXXX try to call me & I wouldn't respond until heard back from Ohio XXXX as filed report w/them as well XXXX. Again responses in XXXX file from dealer I can prove are lies & not even correct info in it, I have all documentation to contradict. Again not acknowledging their warranty responsibility. Repeatedly asked in writing & text & phone messages for paperwork to file claim, the XXXX report, XXXX XXXX XXXX they said they do, flushings work order if I'm supposedly suppose to pay for it yet it's not listed anywhere. NOTHING, last XXXX response XX/XX/XXXX says \" verbally '' offered to buy truck back & pay shipping, no {$10000.00} reimbursement, or payments made or cost of trip there. I can prove this is a lie as well! XXXX was sent every piece of communication/phone logs/texts/emails/contracts & warranties etc, w/dealer & these warranty companies & lender. They kept file as I'm asking for more reimbursement so can't do much individually she said. Filed Police report XX/XX/XXXX for forgery & sent them all documents, wont put resources to it as calling it a civil matter. Dealer denied to them it is happening there, of course. This dealer was informed in mid XXXX I would pursue XXXX if they didn't honor their commitments. I believe this is why they altered the contract, ( well XXXX pgs not the others ), not realizing I was the one the XXXX was requesting a copy of contract for. Trying to cover their deceitful business practices, I XXXX XXXX  believe. XX/XX/XXXX I filed for Arbitration seeking {$75000.00} in total damages, the Demand letter amount {$42000.00} + {$32000.00} for punitive damages of Undue emotional & financial stress, Interest on CC charge, Travel to/from Ohio & XXXX XXXX XXXX committing fraud. I've hired a private forensics forgery expert as well for XXXX. I have a complete XXXX of events from day I called XX/XX/XXXX, w/documents attached ready for my XXXX case. This only let me add XXXX doc 's. The Ohio XXXX has all of this as well.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-19T17:56:15.000Z","issue":"Getting a loan or lease","sub_product":"Loan","zip_code":"95621","tags":"Older American, Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14175203","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"SANTANDER HOLDINGS USA, INC.","date_received":"2025-06-19T17:29:54.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem with signing the paperwork"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XX/XX/XXXX came from out of state to Ohio buy XXXX truck @ agreed online price of {$22000.00}. get there, bait/switch price by {$2600.00} ( {$610.00} turned out to be unlisted/<em>unauthorized</em> Theft warranty ). Added warranties not <em>authorized</em> or signed or even received. Pre-arrival Had dealer throw in XXXX ( only did XXXX of XXXX requested ), as wouldn't lower ad. price. He Agreed."]},"sort":[9.8322315,"14175203"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"20145800","_score":8.991217,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint to formally document a series of events involving unauthorized ACH debits, merchant processing security failures, and the handling of a fraud investigation by both XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and Atlantic Union Bank. This complaint concerns the merchant account used by my business, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, and the business operating account maintained with Atlantic Union Bank.The purpose of this complaint is to request regulatory review of the actions and non-actions of the parties involved, the handling of reported fraudulent transactions, and the failure to provide adequate investigation transparency or remediation.Beginning XX/XX/XXXX, I began preparing my accounting and tax practice for the XXXX tax filing season. This preparation included acquiring tax preparation software, accounting systems, payment processing infrastructure, and operational workflow systems required to serve clients. As a small woman-owned business operating in the tax and accounting field, the majority of annual revenue is generated during the tax season. XXXX for that season required approximately XXXX hours per week between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, representing roughly XXXX hours of operational preparation.Beginning XX/XX/XXXX, multiple debits associated with XXXX XXXX XXXX began appearing in the operating account connected to my business. These transactions included withdrawals of {$610.00} on XX/XX/XXXX ; {$600.00} on XX/XX/XXXX ; {$600.00} on XX/XX/XXXX ; {$98.00} on XX/XX/XXXX ; {$600.00} and {$600.00} on XX/XX/XXXX ; {$600.00} on XX/XX/XXXX ; and a chargeback debit of {$840.00} on XX/XX/XXXX. These withdrawals were not authorized by me.The fraudulent activity was verbally reported to Atlantic Union Bank on XX/XX/XXXX via phone and I was told the XXXX would return my calls. I reported the incident multiple times fromJan XXXX, XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX before it was acted upon.This date should represent the date of notice that the account had been compromised. A Written Statement of Unauthorized Debit was later submitted on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX  XXXX subsequently acknowledged in writing that fraudulent activity occurred on the merchant account. Communications from their fraud investigation team indicated that the fraudulent transactions were associated with exposure of an API key connected to the merchant account through a third-party vendor environment associated with the payment processing system.Despite this acknowledgement from the payment processor that the account credentials were compromised, Atlantic Union Bank later informed me that my fraud claims were denied.During a phone call with Atlantic Union Bank to discuss the matter, I requested confirmation of the status of the fraud investigation. I was informed that two cases existed : Case number XXXX for an amount of {$3700.00} and Case number XXXX for an amount of {$840.00}. I was told that both cases were closed and denied.I requested the name of the investigator responsible for the investigation and the department that handled the matter. I was informed that the bank could not provide the name of the investigator or identify the department responsible.I also requested confirmation of the investigation timeline and the date the investigation had been completed. I was informed that the investigation was completed on XX/XX/XXXX ; however, I was not notified of that determination when it occurred.During the same call I asked why additional transactions were allowed to process after the fraud had been reported on XX/XX/XXXX. I also asked what protective measures had been taken by the bank to prevent further debits after the fraud was reported, including XXXX blocks or merchant debit restrictions. The representative stated that these questions would be passed on to the dispute team but could not provide answers.I also asked whether the bank would reimburse overdraft fees and related charges that resulted from the unauthorized debits and the resulting negative account balance. The representative again stated that this question would be forwarded to the dispute team.The fraudulent activity and the resulting dispute occurred immediately before and during the beginning of tax season. Because the merchant processing system could no longer be trusted, I was forced to transition to a new payment processor and new software systems during the busiest period of the year for my business.In addition to the financial withdrawals themselves, I have spent approximately XXXX hours investigating the incident, compiling documentation, communicating with both XXXX and Atlantic Union Bank, filing a police report documenting the fraud, and reconstructing financial records.The unauthorized debits and the subsequent handling of the investigation caused significant operational disruption to my business during tax season and contributed to the operating account becoming negative. I also received notice indicating that the account could potentially be closed, despite the fact that the negative balance resulted from the disputed fraudulent transactions.I am requesting that the appropriate regulatory authorities review the actions and responses of both XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and Atlantic Union Bank with respect to the handling of this matter. Specifically, I request review of the following issues : The security incident involving exposure of merchant API credentials associated with XXXX XXXX XXXX.The unauthorized debits processed through the merchant account infrastructure.The handling of the fraud investigation by Atlantic Union Bank following notice of the fraud on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX denial of the fraud claims despite the payment processors acknowledgement that the account credentials were compromised.The failure to provide transparency regarding the investigator responsible for the determination.The failure to provide timely notice of the investigation outcome.The operational and financial harm resulting from the incident and the delayed resolution.I respectfully request that this matter be reviewed and that any appropriate corrective actions or enforcement measures be taken.Thank you for your time and consideration. \n\nAttachment Re : Notice of Evidence Preservation and Litigation Hold / XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  // XXXX to XXXX  XXXX XXXX and Atlantic Union Bank.eml added.Conversation opened. 1 read message. \n\nSkip to content Using XXXX with screen readers in : sent XXXX of XXXX Re : Notice XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX / XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX // XXXX to XXXX  XXXX XXXX and Atlantic Union Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXe XXXX XXXX ( XXXX minutes ago ) to Legal.Escalations, XXXX, XXXX To the Legal Department XXXX This correspondence constitutes a formal notice of claim and demand for remediation concerning fraudulent activity processed through the merchant account associated with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. The account was established through XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, a subsidiary of XXXX XXXX XXXX, and was linked to the business operating account maintained at Atlantic Union Bank. \n\nThe purpose of this notice is to formally document the facts surrounding the incident, provide notice of resulting damages, request preservation of evidence, and provide an opportunity for resolution prior to further regulatory or legal action. \n\nBackground and Relationship Heartland Payment Systems services were introduced to the account holder through an Atlantic Union Bank referral relationship beginning in XX/XX/XXXX. Through that referral, XXXX provided merchant payment processing services to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, XXXX. \n\nBeginning XX/XX/XXXX, the firm began preparing operational systems for the upcoming XXXX tax filing season. These preparations included acquisition of tax software, accounting software, payment processing infrastructure, and operational workflow systems required to serve tax clients. Approximately XXXX hours per week were devoted to operational preparation between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, representing approximately XXXX hours of preparation. \n\nThese preparations were designed to allow the firm to operate at full capacity during the XXXX tax filing season, which represents the primary revenue period for the business. \n\nUnauthorized Activity Beginning XX/XX/XXXX, multiple unauthorized debits associated with XXXX merchant processing activity appeared in the operating account held at Atlantic Union Bank. The transactions include, but are not limited to, the following debits reflected in the account history : XX/XX/XXXX {$610.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$600.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$600.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$98.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$600.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$600.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$600.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$840.00} chargeback These withdrawals were not authorized by the merchant. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX acknowledged that fraudulent transactions had occurred on the account. Subsequent correspondence on XX/XX/XXXX further indicated that the fraudulent transactions were believed to have resulted from exposure of an API key associated with the merchant account through a third-party technology vendor connected to the XXXX / XXXX XXXX  infrastructure. \n\nThe merchant did not provide API credentials to any third party and did not operate any online payment portal capable of exposing such credentials. \n\nOperational Impact The fraudulent activity occurred immediately before and during the beginning of the XXXX tax filing season. \n\nAs a direct result of the incident, the firm was forced to discontinue use of the XXXX XXXX  processing system and migrate to a new payment processor and software infrastructure during tax season. This migration required emergency operational changes that significantly disrupted the firms ability to invoice clients and receive payments. \n\nIn addition, the account holder has spent approximately XXXX hours investigating the incident, communicating with financial institutions, compiling documentation, filing reports, consulting cybersecurity professionals, and reconstructing financial records. \n\nThe disruption occurred during the primary operational period for the business and materially interfered with the firms ability to operate during tax season. \n\nPolice Report and XXXX XXXX A police report has been filed documenting the fraudulent activity affecting the business account. \n\nThe unauthorized withdrawals, related chargebacks, overdraft fees, operational disruption, and forced migration of payment systems caused significant financial harm to the business and placed the operating account in a negative condition. \n\nThe total financial impact of the incident is currently being reconstructed through a detailed forensic accounting analysis and is expected to exceed the direct transaction amounts reflected above due to operational disruption, lost revenue, and professional time devoted to the investigation. \n\nDemand for Remediation Accordingly, Make Cents Bookkeeping and XXXX XXXX, XXXX demands the following actions from XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX : Immediate reimbursement of unauthorized debits and related chargebacks. \n\nReimbursement of bank fees and costs incurred as a direct result of the unauthorized activity. \n\nWritten explanation of the security incident involving exposure of the merchant API key and the identity of the third-party vendor referenced in your XX/XX/XXXX correspondence. \n\nConfirmation that the merchant account has been permanently secured and that no further debits will occur. \n\nWritten confirmation that the merchant will not be held liable for fraudulent transactions resulting from the processors infrastructure or vendor environment. \n\nPreservation of Evidence You are hereby instructed to preserve all documents, communications, system logs, transaction records, audit logs, API credential records, vendor security reviews, and internal investigative materials related to this incident. \n\nThis preservation request includes communications involving XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, third-party vendors, and any internal security or fraud investigation teams. \n\nReservation of Rights Nothing in this letter constitutes a waiver of any rights or remedies available to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, XXXX. \n\nIf the matter can not be resolved promptly, the account holder reserves the right to pursue all available remedies including regulatory complaints, civil claims, and recovery of damages associated with the fraudulent activity and resulting operational harm. \n\nPlease provide a written response within XXXX ( XXXX ) days of receipt of this letter. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX  Registered XXXX | XXXX : XXXX On Fri, XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX wrote : XXXX XXXX Managing XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX  Registered XXXX | XXXX XXXX XXXX On Fri, XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX wrote : Thank you, I will do that. Especially because you have the nerve TO PUT XXXX XXXX DOLLARS THAT I NEVER GOT ON MY XXXX AS IF THE MONEY THAT WAS TAKEN OUT WAS NOT TAKEN OUT XXXX XXXX Managing Member XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX  Registered XXXX | XXXX : XXXX On Thu, XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX wrote : Hello, I understand you will be seeking legal consult. Please send all further communication to XXXX. \n\nXXXX XXXX, XXXX Risk XXXX XXXX  : A XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX work from home # XXXX XXXX Customer Service : XXXX XXXX Customer Service : XXXX XXXX Customer Service : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX # logos From : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Sent : Wednesday, XX/XX/XXXX XXXX PM To : XXXX XXXX XXXX Subject : Re : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX // XXXX image.png Hello XXXX, Thank XXXX for your response. However, your message does not resolve the core issues that have been repeatedly raised, nor does it account for the ongoing and significant financial harm your companys actions have caused to my business and personal livelihood. \n\nAs of today, my business account remains negative in the amount of approximately {$390.00}, as reflected in the attached account screenshot. This negative balance is not the result of any dereliction of duty on my part. It is the direct result of XXXX XXXX  failure to properly secure, monitor, and respond to fraudulent activity on the payment terminal associated with my account. \n\nYour companys negligence in safeguarding merchant credentials, monitoring suspicious activity, and timely resolving the resulting chargebacks has caused measurable financial damage to my business. Despite my repeated communications, requests for clarification, and attempts to resolve this matter in good faith, there has been no meaningful movement toward a full and proper resolution. \n\nYou have stated that : {$3600.00} is being applied to XXXX rejects resulting from fraud-related chargebacks No further transactions can occur due to terminal deactivation A formal meeting is not required However, this does not address the fact that : XXXX. My account remains in a negative balance due to XXXX  operational failures. \n\nXXXX. The ACH rejections were the result of fraudulent activity, not merchant misuse or misconduct. \n\nXXXX. My original requests for clear resolution, proper reimbursement, and accountability were ignored for an extended period. \n\nXXXX. Your companys internal handling of this matter has placed the financial burden of fraud on my business. \n\nAt every stage of this process, XXXX XXXX has focused primarily on protecting its own financial position rather than addressing the full scope of harm caused to my business and household. The emphasis has consistently been on how your company would reconcile the issue internally, rather than how I would be made whole for the losses, disruption, and operational impact caused by your negligence. \n\nThe financial impact of this situation has been severe. All of my personal funds have been depleted as a direct result of this matter. I am currently unable to afford even basic necessities, including essential groceries such as milk. This hardship is not the result of mismanagement on my part it is the result of unresolved fraud, improper account handling, and delayed remediation by your company. \n\nAdditionally, the continued negative balance on my account has created further operational harm. My financial institution has informed me that I can not fully utilize my new business account until this matter is resolved, meaning your companys failure to correct this issue is actively restricting my ability to conduct business and stabilize my finances. \n\nFor the record : I responded promptly to your initial request for a meeting. \nNo response was provided to my follow-up communications. \nA sales representative later contacted me with inconsistent information. \nNo credit or adjustment was posted when promised. \nMy account remains negative as a direct result of XXXX actions. \n\nAt this point, I have retained legal counsel. All further communications will be reviewed accordingly. \n\nPlease consider this email formal notice that I will be proceeding with regulatory filings and documentation with the following agencies : Federal Trade Commission ( FTC XXXX Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) XXXX  Attorney General XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) Applicable payment network and compliance oversight entities In addition to my own experience, there are numerous publicly available complaints and reviews describing fraud-related activity, unauthorized charges, account misuse, delayed responses, and unresolved disputes involving your company. These reports raise serious concerns about internal controls, monitoring systems, and response procedures related to fraudulent activity and merchant account protection. \n\nWhile I am not asserting wrongdoing beyond my own documented experience, the consistency of these reports suggests a need for closer regulatory and legal scrutiny regarding how fraud is detected, managed, and remedied across your organization. \n\nI am requesting, one final time, written confirmation of : 1. When my account will be restored to a non-negative balance, which should have already been completed. \n\n2. That no additional debits or fees will occur.\n\n3. That all fraud-related financial impacts will be fully reconciled in my account, not merely accounted for internally by your company.\n\n4. A final accounting of all charges, credits, and ACH activity.\n\n5. A formal written report emailed to me by this time tomorrow.\n\nIf this matter is not fully resolved, including both financial correction and accountability, it will proceed through formal legal and regulatory channels. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX  Registered XXXX | XXXX : XXXX On Wed, XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX wrote : I will have my lawyer get in touch soon. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX Registered XXXX | XXXX : XXXX On Wed, XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX wrote : Hello, Please see response to your questions : The exact amount being refunded or credited - {$3600.00} The date the adjustment will be posted - As previously mentioned, there are ACH rejects on the account from the fraud sales that did chargeback so these funds will be used to cover those rejects. \n\nConfirmation that no additional charges will occur - The terminal that the fraud activity occurred on was deactivated so no further transactions can go through. \n\nWhether a formal meeting is still required - I do not believe a formal meeting is needed. \n\n\n\nXXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : A XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX work from home # XXXX XXXX Customer Service : XXXX XXXX Customer Service : XXXX XXXX Customer Service : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX # logos From : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Sent : Wednesday, XX/XX/XXXX XXXX PM To : XXXX XXXX XXXX Subject : Re : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  // XXXX Hello XXXX, I am following up again regarding this matter. \n\nAfter your initial email requesting that I schedule a meeting, I responded promptly. Since that time, there has been absolutely no movement on the resolution I requested, and my follow-up communications have gone unanswered. \n\nInstead, I received a call from XXXX stating the amount would be reduced to {$390.00}. However, as of today, no adjustment or credit has been posted to my account. \n\nAt this point, all of my prior requests for clarification and resolution have been ignored, and this process has gone well beyond what I originally asked for. \n\nPlease provide a written update immediately addressing the following : The exact amount being refunded or credited The date the adjustment will be posted Confirmation that no additional charges will occur Whether a formal meeting is still required If I do not receive a timely response, I will proceed with formal escalation and documentation through regulatory and legal channels. \n\nThank you, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX  Registered XXXX | XXXX : XXXX On Sat, XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX wrote : Dear XXXX XXXX, Thank you for your continued correspondence regarding the fraudulent activity on my XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX account XXXX \n\nI am writing to formally document the facts, preserve my legal rights, and demand immediate, complete, and lawful remediation for the financial, operational, and reputational harm caused by this incident. \n\nHere are some key facts for the record ) My business, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, does not have any online payment portal, checkout system, or API integration accessible through my website or public platforms. \nI did not provide terminal credentials or API keys to any third party. \nMy bank, Atlantic Union Bank, has confirmed that the compromise did not originate from their systems. \nXXXX / XXXX Payments creates, issues, manages, stores, and controls all API keys associated with merchant accounts. Atlantic Union Bank and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  do not. \nYou have stated in writing that this fraud resulted from exposure of an API key through a third-party technology vendor servicing merchant accounts. \nI do not have any relationships with third-party vendors. My only financial service providers are XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and Atlantic Union Bank. \nA qualified computer and cybersecurity professional has reviewed my systems and confirmed that the breach did not originate from any of my devices, email accounts, website, or internal systems. \nI entrusted XXXX / XXXX Payments with my businesss financial operations, payment processing, and transactional security. That trust was a material and reasonable part of our business relationship. The exposure of API credentials through a vendor operating under your platforms control represents a breach of that trust, a failure to safeguard my businesss financial infrastructure, and a deviation from reasonable commercial security standards. \n\nAs a direct and foreseeable result of this incident, my business incurred multiple overdraft and NSF fees, experienced operational disruption, risk to my tax software integrations, delayed client payments, administrative burden, and reputational harm within my community as a professional financial services provider. \n\nImportantly, my business has only recently opened and is just beginning to gain significant client traction and a good reputation with the community. This incident interfered with my ability to serve new clients, process payments, and establish trust during a critical early growth phase. \n\nThe goodwill credit offered does NOT adequately compensate for the financial and operational losses, my time investment and administrative burden ( s ), the companys reputational damage, business growth interference and loss of goodwill and client confidence in XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX. \n\nUnder established commercial and tort law principles, business interruption, reputational harm, and loss of goodwill are recognized as categories of recoverable damages when a service providers security failure foreseeably harms a business. \n\nAs a direct result of this incident, I have spent a substantial number of professional hours addressing unauthorized transactions, communicating with your organization, coordinating with my bank, consulting technical experts, securing my systems, and mitigating harm to my business operations. During this time, I was unable to fully serve my clients or focus on revenue-generating work. \n\nAccordingly, I will be issuing a formal invoice for the reasonable value of my professional time, administrative burden, and business interruption caused by this incident. These costs are separate from, and in addition to, any goodwill credit offered and are recoverable as consequential damages under principles of negligence, breach of duty, and business interruption. \n\nFurther, while I have cooperated with your internal investigation process in good faith, I am not legally bound by your internal determinations, policies, or discretionary procedures. Any resolution to this matter must be based on applicable law, not solely on internal company findings or unilateral decisions. \n\nI reserve the right to reject any determination that does not fully and fairly compensate my business for the totality of the harm suffered. \n\nIt is not reasonable, appropriate, or legally justified to expect my small business to absorb any portion of the harm caused by a security failure that did not originate from my systems, credentials, website, or bank. \n\nUnder principles of negligence, breach of duty, and reasonable reliance, a service provider that undertakes to secure sensitive financial access must exercise appropriate care. When that duty is breached and damages result, the responsible party must bear the cost of remediation. \n\nAccordingly : I expect the full goodwill credit to be issued to my account within XXXX ( XXXX ) business day without reduction. \nI expect XXXX / XXXX XXXX  to absorb all additional costs associated with this incident, including all bank and NSF fees, chargeback-related losses, administrative and recovery costs, business interruption ( s ), and reputational harm Given the scope of the harm, the disruption to my early-stage business, and the breach of trust involved, the goodwill credit should be increased, not reduced. \nI therefore, demand that you provide the total amount of the original goodwill credit and provide confirmation that it will be issued in full, a breakdown of any chargebacks and why they are being charged back to me with laws that justify this action, written confirmation that no further debits will occur, and lastly, confirmation that all additional costs will be absorbed by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nThe damage to my professional reputation within the local business community is having a measurable impact on client trust and business growth. \n\nAs part of full remediation, and consistent with recognized remedies for loss of goodwill and reputational injury, I am requesting that XXXX / XXXX Payments fund a local marketing and reputation-restoration campaign to help rebuild confidence in my business, including : XXXX. Local digital advertising XXXX. Community-based marketing XXXX. Client communication support XXXX. Brand reputation restoration efforts Because this incident involved unauthorized access associated with my merchant account credentials, and because exposure to such credentials creates an ongoing risk of misuse, I am requesting : Business identity-theft protection services for my company, including monitoring for fraudulent use of my business name and financial information. \nXXXX of any reasonable costs associated with protecting, repairing, or restoring my business identity. \nIf reputational or security concerns require a business name change, coverage of the associated legal, administrative, branding, and filing costs. \nThese measures are consistent with reasonable mitigation and remediation obligations following a credential-related security failure. \n\nUnder XXXX and XXXX  law, payment processors have a legal duty to protect merchant accounts, credentials, and transaction systems, and to handle unauthorized activity fairly, transparently, and responsibly. \n\nXXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX ( UDAP Va. Code 59.1-196 et seq. ) : XXXX law prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in connection with consumer and business services. \n\nThis includes misrepresenting security protection, failing to disclose material risks, or shifting responsibility to customers for internal or vendor-related security failures. \n\nBusinesses harmed by such practices may seek damages, attorney fees, and other statutory remedies. \n\nUniform Commercial Code ( UCC ) Articles 3 & 4 : Merchants are not responsible for unauthorized transactions they did not approve. \n\nIn this case, I did not authorize the transactions, did not provide access credentials, and did not operate any online payment system through which such access could have occurred. \n\nhttps : XXXX and https : XXXX Federal Trade Commission XXXX : Companies may not misrepresent security protections or unfairly shift responsibility to customers when failures o","date_sent_to_company":"2026-03-10T22:21:47.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"229XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"20145800","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Atlantic Union Bankshares, Inc.","date_received":"2026-03-10T22:07:18.000Z","state":"VA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Can't stop withdrawals from your account"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Please provide a written update immediately addressing the following : The exact amount being <em>refunded</em> or credited The date the adjustment will be posted Confirmation that no additional <em>charges</em> will occur Whether a formal meeting is still required If I do not receive a timely response, I will proceed with formal escalation and documentation through regulatory and legal channels."]},"sort":[8.991217,"20145800"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4109034","_score":6.9716296,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Please see the attached document for the FULL complaint and my interaction with chase for a better understanding. \n\n\n\nStatement of Facts : 1 ) I received an email on XX/XX/XXXX asking me if I attempted to send someone named XXXX {$100.00} I replied \" NO ''. You guys then replied back that you would be sending me a new card. This was the first time I ever received an email from chase. I did not get any emails for the XXXX transactions. You may have sent a text message but my phone was stolen along with my wallet and I didnt know it was stolen at the time. \n\n2 ) Last time I remember using my card was sometime around XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX XXXX 3 ) I was hospitalized from XXXX XXXX and then XXXX. \n\n4 ) I did not notice my wallet and my work phone were missing because I was sick and in the hospital for several months. I have two phones : a work cell phone and a personal cell phone. The phone that was stolen was my work cell phone. My wallet was also stolen and it had my debit cards, my ID, My SS Card, everything. ( I stated this on the dispute form that I sent you and made it clear that all three of my cards that were in my wallet had been stolen ). \n\n5 ) After getting out of the hospital, I filed a police report XX/XX/XXXX and elected to retain victim rights and agreed to press charges 6 ) XX/XX/XXXX The person who committed the crime against me ( XXXX XXXX ) who I do no not know was detained and in police custody which is noted on the police report that I had provided you. \n\n7 ) After investigating into who this individual was, I had learned that XXXX XXXX is a XXXX  who has just recently been released from XXXX  after committing XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, and XXXX. This information is available on the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\n8 ) I did not use and I did not authorize or provide access to anyone my card, my phone, or my pin, my chase login. All Transactions that were made on the account from XXXX on both of my accounts were not made by me. This includes all quickpay and debit card transactions. \n\n9 ) I attempted to report the unauthorized transactions multiple times but could not get through to the online disputes team. So, I had to send my request through the XXXX. \n10 ) You have denied some of my claims because you state that the card was chipped enabled and is not able to be replicated. - Please refer to my XXXX that clearly states that my wallet which had my debit cards was stolen. I did not have the cards in my possession. \n\n11 ) You have denied some of my claims because you state that the card was used in my geographical location and pin was used. As I mentioned in previous XXXX  I was hospitalized/ and extremely sick almost the entire time this was going on without my knowledge. I provided dates of hospitalization. I also do not know how to drive. So, making physical purchases or ATM withdrawals, is basically impossible for me to do. I also requested you to pull ATM photos and compare it to my state ID ( NOT DL because again I dont know how to drive! ) I guarantee you that the ATM photos will confirm it was not me who was using my card. For the record, because my wallet was stolen I had to request a replacement ID which I did after I filed the police report. I would be glad to provide this if needed to validate what I am telling you. \n\n12 ) There is an obvious pattern here with a majority of these transactions. All the Quickpays were sent to the same individual. One of the last debit card transactions that was made fraudulently on my account was a XXXX  Payment of {$300.00} also made to XXXX XXXX. Then he attempted to send himself {$100.00} dollars which was the first and only time that I received an email notification from Chase that was on XX/XX/XXXX. It is extremely clear that XXXX XXXX who police have detained and has a previous criminal record for the same reason has committed fraud against me. Chase was able to finally detect something unusual on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\n13 ) On XX/XX/XXXX I purchased a work phone replacement through our XXXX XXXX account. The phone that was stolen was an XXXX XXXX and the replacement was an XXXX XXXX and a confirmation of that order was provided to you as well. \n\n14 ) I have never had any issues like this with any bank before. This has been an absolute nightmare. I honestly feel that the extended hold times and not being able to speak with the online disputes department has really made this headache even worse than what it already is. I have been through so much the last couple of months and almost died several times. Instead of making things easier for me and being there for me as my bank I literally felt that you have kicked me while I was down. You made it impossible for me to open a dispute, you then placed the burden of proof on me, you asked for more and more and more and still denied me. Then you closed my accounts and charged them off even though my disputes were still open. \n\n15 ) You have not provided me any statements since you charged off my account despite receiving adjustments for the few claims that you approved. \n\n`16 ) Please see the last response I received from XXXX at Chase Executive Office in regards to my complaint : Company 's Response We aim to give exceptional service and are sorry if we did not meet this goal when you contacted us about your account concerns. As we deal with the spiraling effects of COVID-19, we continue to review what we can do as a bank to remain strong, resilient and well-positioned to support our employees, clients, customers and communities across the globe. Your claim for transactions totaling {$260.00} was approved and the temporary credits issued for the same amount are now finalized. Your claims for a transaction with XXXX of {$100.00} and ATM withdrawals totaling {$1600.00} were denied because your chip enabled debit card was used at a chip enabled terminal, they were done within your geographical location and the PIN was used with no failed PIN attempts. Your claim for an ATM withdrawal of {$400.00} on XX/XX/XXXX, was denied because your chip enabled debit card was used at a chip enabled terminal and was done within your geographical location. Your claim for an ATM withdrawal of {$300.00} on XX/XX/XXXX, was denied because your chip enabled debit card was used at a chip enabled terminal You claim for QuickPay transfers totaling {$1300.00} was denied because the device used to send these QuickPay transfers was used previously to sign into your online account. We opened claims and gave you temporary credits for transactions totaling {$530.00}. A transaction of {$2.00} was refunded by the merchant so we reversed our credit. The rest of the transactions are still being reviewed and the expected resolution date is XX/XX/XXXX. We are enclosing copies of the claim letters for your review. \nMONETARY RELIEF AMOUNT {$260.00} 17 ) My concerns regarding your response are as follows : I tried calling to speak with the agent on several occasions who was handling my complaint with CHASE in executive office and was never able to get a hold of him nor did he return my calls except once which I had missed his call but was days after I had asked that he call me. Chase immediately closed my CFPB complaint and responded without talking to me. I made it very clear when I requested to dispute these charges that my wallet and phone had been stolen. The wallet had three debit cards from Chase, My ID, My SS Card, Etc. This was provided on the dispute form you required for me to send via your secure message center in order to initiate the dispute. I had provided sufficient information to initiate a dispute with your social media agents but they requested me to fill out the form and send it to you. I tried calling in but the excessive hold made it impossible to speak with anyone in the online claims department. Chase has two different departments for claims. The general claims team that handles disputes related to the debit card and the online claims team that handle disputes regarding online transactions. I reported all of the transactions I am disputing on the same date. However, they were not initiated on the same date and I had to make several requests to include them all. The general claims team wouldn't assist me or initiate the disputes when I tried calling in because there were online transactions involved. I was told that it needed to be all handled by the online claims team. That is when I experienced the excessive hold and couldn't speak with anyone from that department. Your claim regarding EMV enabled cards not being able to be replicated is false and you know that but it's not applicable because I told you that the cards that were in my wallet had been stolen. I believe where the confusion is stemming from is the fact that I advised you that on XX/XX/XXXX I received an email asking me to verify if I was trying to send someone {$100.00} from your fraud department. I replied no and you guys sent out a new card some time after. The transactions that were unauthorized were made prior to receiving this replacement which stopped the unauthorized usage. However because I was hospitalized I was not able to look into the matter further at the time from being too ill. I was not aware or able to confirm that my wallet and phone were stolen until I filed the police report which I provided you. \n\n18 ) Please see the following article regarding chip enabled cards below : Here is the link Deny Dispute if PIN Verified and Chip Read? | Bankers Online Question : EMV chip card read at the ATM. We have the information that the chip was read and now the customer is claiming unauthorized ATM withdrawals. Can we deny this dispute since the pin was verified and the chip was read? Are we still in compliance? \nAnswer : Let me run a scenario past you. Customer writes PIN on the card. Not smart, but doesn't eliminate Reg E liability limits if customer notifies of loss or theft in a timely manner. So now, PIN is on the card and it is lost or stolen. Customer no longer has a card in possession, but notifies the bank within 2 business days of learning of loss or theft. Customer 's max liability is {$50.00}, regardless of the fact that the PIN was on the card. \nOK, but what if the customer still has the card in their possession? You would have a stronger case that the transaction was not unauthorized, but what if someone took the card for the transaction in question, then replaced it in the customer 's wallet after the transaction was done? Wouldn't that still be unauthorized? \nBoth of these scenarios may reflect negligence, and negligence may cancel any zero liability protections from Visa/MC, but negligence does not counteract Reg E liability limits. \n\n19 ) Someone Stealing my work phone and wallet from my residence who I never met is not negligence. It is theft and I was not aware of it until I filed the police report which confirms this as well. Not only am I supposed to receive a XXXX dollar fraud liability from the card issuer which you are denying me but I am supposed to be protected under Regulation E and I will not stop pursuing this until I get my money back. \n\n\n20 ) I requested to open these disputes all at the same time. It is insulting that you credited a few transactions permanently but not all of them despite the fact that I disputed them at the same time for the same reason. I assume that the reasoning behind that is because you couldn't get the funds from the merchant. That is not my problem and you know that. Regulation E protects me from unauthorized use whether the merchant credits the consumer or the Bank has to. You cant deny my dispute because of that. A Bank would have to credit the consumer one way or another. That is what is considered the cost of doing business and just because we are in a pandemic does not give the bank the right to make assumptions and treat consumers unfairly. That is deceptive and unfair banking practices. \n\n21 ) I am concerned that after your latest response you sent me on XX/XX/XXXX which is # XXXX and provided above to my complaint submitted to the CFPB XX/XX/XXXX took almost two months. Not only that, but you had charged off and closed my account despite there being disputes that were open as you confirmed. I have not received any statements since before that complaint. I also have not received any letter or any communication regarding my accounts other than your response and the claim letters of the claims that were denied prior to your message. You stated that there were still claims pending and were going to be decided on XX/XX/XXXX. I have not been mailed a letter advising me the results of those claims. The only thing I received were several emails alerting me to letters being available on the account center. I am sure these alerts were sent because letters are being provided electronically but because you charged off my account there is nothing available to be viewed online. So not only are you not mailing me out these letters but you are not making them available to view online. This is also a violation of regulation E. Your alert tells me that a letter is available but when I log in there are no letters I can view. You have charged the account off and not only that but you deleted all the letters you have ever sent me previously. You deleted the statements as well as the secure messages of my communication ( Luckily, I had saved that ). You have not made an effort to upload a decisioning letter online for me to view regarding the pending claims or send me out a statement. That is a violation. I have a screenshot timestamped showing that you provided me nothing about the decisioning of the claims online and you didn't mail me one either. The account was set up for electronic communication which you failed to provide. \n\n1005.11 of Regulation E States ( 1 ) Written explanation. The institution 's report of the results of its investigation shall include a written explanation of the institution 's findings and shall note the consumer 's right to request the documents that the institution relied on in making its determination. Upon request, the institution shall promptly provide copies of the documents.","date_sent_to_company":"2021-02-01T08:47:06.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"85207","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4109034","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2021-02-01T08:05:48.000Z","state":"AZ","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem using a debit or ATM card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The institution 's report of the results of its <em>investigation</em> shall include a written explanation of the institution 's <em>findings</em> and shall note the consumer 's right to request the documents that the institution relied on in making its determination. Upon request, the institution shall promptly provide copies of the documents."]},"sort":[6.9716296,"4109034"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":25,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":25}]}},"product":{"doc_count":25,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":14,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":13},{"key":"Other banking product or service","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":5,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":5}]}},{"key":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Mobile or digital wallet","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Credit card or prepaid card","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit card debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Prepaid card","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose prepaid card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Vehicle loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Loan","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":25,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","doc_count":9,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Transaction was not authorized","doc_count":8},{"key":"Can't stop withdrawals from your account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":5,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Banking errors","doc_count":2},{"key":"Problem using a debit or ATM card","doc_count":2},{"key":"Deposits and withdrawals","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","doc_count":5,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement","doc_count":4},{"key":"Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"False statements or representation","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Attempted to collect wrong amount","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Fraud or scam","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Getting a credit card","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Card opened without my consent or knowledge","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Getting a loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with signing the paperwork","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase or transfer","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase or transfer","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Unauthorized transactions or other transaction problem","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":25,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":24},{"key":"No","doc_count":1}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":25,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":19},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":5},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":1}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":25,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":25}]}},"company":{"doc_count":25,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":4},{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":3},{"key":"Paypal Holdings, Inc","doc_count":3},{"key":"BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE","doc_count":2},{"key":"Chime Financial Inc","doc_count":2},{"key":"DISCOVER BANK","doc_count":2},{"key":"Atlantic Union Bankshares, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"FIRST CITIZENS BANCSHARES, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"MoneyLion Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","doc_count":1},{"key":"Netspend Corporation","doc_count":1},{"key":"SANTANDER HOLDINGS USA, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"U.S. BANCORP","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":25,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"TX","doc_count":5},{"key":"CA","doc_count":4},{"key":"AZ","doc_count":2},{"key":"CO","doc_count":2},{"key":"TN","doc_count":2},{"key":"FL","doc_count":1},{"key":"IN","doc_count":1},{"key":"MA","doc_count":1},{"key":"NC","doc_count":1},{"key":"NE","doc_count":1},{"key":"NH","doc_count":1},{"key":"NY","doc_count":1},{"key":"OK","doc_count":1},{"key":"PA","doc_count":1},{"key":"VA","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":25,"company_public_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","doc_count":9},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":1}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":25,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Older American","doc_count":3},{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":2},{"key":"Older American, Servicemember","doc_count":1}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{}}}