{"took":241,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":13,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4806981","_score":29.803238,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"Coinbase allowed an unknown person to gain access to my account and disable XXXX ( multi factor authentication ) that I had previously enabled for my own protection. That person ( s ) purchased additional virtual currency with my linked credit card and bank account and immediately transferred the available funds, about {$3800.00} worth, to an untraceable address. I altered coinbase as soon as I saw the emails saying I had transferred funds. But their only method of contact is email so a rapid response is not possible, no phone or live chat is available for their customers. I changed my password and locked my account to prevent any further access. When coinbase later responded they said all charges are final no refunds will be offered. It is their laxed website security that allowed someone to change my security settings then quickly transfer out my money. They charged purchase fees on these fraudulent transaction and actually made a profit while I lost about {$3800.00}, they have no incentive to fix their account security since they still make money even when they let your account get hacked. \n\nCommon sense would dictate when an accounts security is changed like email address changed, multi factor authentication method disabled or password changed that account should be prevented from sending any funds out for 24-48 hours. They did not do this. \n\nI filed a complaint with the FBI Internet Crime Complaint Center ( IC3 ) and local law enforcement.","date_sent_to_company":"2021-10-13T05:37:12.000Z","issue":"Other transaction problem","sub_product":"Virtual currency","zip_code":"985XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4806981","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Coinbase, Inc.","date_received":"2021-10-13T05:23:19.000Z","state":"WA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["They charged purchase fees on these fraudulent transaction and actually made a profit while I lost about {$3800.00}, they have no incentive to fix their account <em>security</em> since they still make money even when they let your account get hacked. \n\nCommon sense would dictate when an accounts <em>security</em> is <em>changed</em> <em>like</em> email address <em>changed</em>, <em>multi</em> <em>factor</em> authentication method disabled or password <em>changed</em> that account should be prevented from sending any funds out for 24-48 hours."]},"sort":[29.803238,"4806981"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15524500","_score":25.672691,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"My loan originator is CrossCountry Mortgage. My issue is not the convenience but the security of their ccm.com loan services portal. The portal uses all pre-known information to access, there is no username, no user password, no ability to change any authentication methods, no multi-factor authentication, no trusted device. It simply asks for your name, your account number and the last XXXX digits of my SSN, which has been compromised for years. Everyone 's SSN has been compromised for years, I believe there were XXXX XXXX leaks in XXXX. I used to work for a financial firm and the government and this is laughable. You literally can't change your authentication to the site, it's completely static based upon known or easily found out attributes, none of which come even close to a username/password, let along something like XXXX and XXXX. \nThis wouldn't comply with security regulations for XXXX, especially for a financial firm. \n\nBefore this blows up, please shut them down and force them to put in something that is based upon the traditional XXXX or FTC standards. \n\nXXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-26T21:36:33.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"Other type of mortgage","zip_code":"27278","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15524500","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CrossCountry Mortgage LLC","date_received":"2025-08-26T21:13:45.000Z","state":"NC","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue while managing or servicing your loan"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["My issue is not the convenience but the <em>security</em> of their ccm.com loan services portal. The portal uses all pre-known information to access, there is no username, no user password, no ability to <em>change</em> any authentication methods, no <em>multi</em>-<em>factor</em> authentication, no trusted device. It simply asks for your name, your account number and the last XXXX digits of my SSN, which has been compromised for years. Everyone 's SSN has been compromised for years, I believe there were XXXX XXXX leaks in XXXX."]},"sort":[25.672691,"15524500"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"9835862","_score":23.779411,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"A person physically went to a Chase branch and posed as me. They went with a friend. Apparently they opened up a joint savings account. They linked all my other accounts. They transferred roughly $ XXXX out of multiple accounts to this new joint account and the either withdrew it or transferred to another Chase account that I did not have access. The thing that really annoys me is that I had this happen to me a couple of years ago. The bank said they put additional safeguards on my account, including an oral password needed for any in branch transaction. Apparently the process was not followed. I dont understand why they dont have multi step verification for in branch transactions. It makes no sense. Even if they CALLED me. Or sent a text code to my phone. Either of these would have saved me from what is going to be a nightmare to get my money back. Apparently, they dont have any of these protocols in place for in branch. In addition, all of this happened in 1 day. How did it not set off fraud signals? There were multiple high dollar transfers happening within minutes of each other. How does that not seem suspicious? And, apparently, the person did a teller cash withdrawal of $ XXXX. How did that not set off alerts? But most importantly, I feel like I was physically assaulted. I feel like I was physically violated and there needs to be some changes to Chases in branch transactions to make them more secure. Every back has online multi factor in place. The physical branch is very weak in terms of security and the CFPB needs to push them to make it more secure","date_sent_to_company":"2024-08-20T13:30:23.000Z","issue":"Opening an account","sub_product":"Savings account","zip_code":"105XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"9835862","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2024-08-17T11:28:26.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account opened without my consent or knowledge"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["But most importantly, I feel <em>like</em> I was physically assaulted. I feel <em>like</em> I was physically violated and there needs to be some <em>changes</em> to Chases in branch transactions to make them more secure. Every back has online <em>multi</em> <em>factor</em> in place. The physical branch is very weak in terms of <em>security</em> and the CFPB needs to push them to make it more secure"]},"sort":[23.779411,"9835862"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"9297748","_score":19.934595,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Wells Fargo has allowed unauthorized users to access my bank account three times in the last 6 months -- XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX. It appears their security verification for changing online banking passwords is not strong enough -- seems like you only need a phone number or email, or if you have the last four digits of the SSN you can change it, and those are easily found on the dark web. When this happened in XXXX, I asked the bank to open an investigation and they found that one of their customer service agents failed to recognize that someone was impersonating me and had called asking to change the phone number associated with my bank account, so they were able to set it to their phone number, change the password, and withdraw funds. The investigator told me that the customer service representatives didn't catch the fraud because the person calling \" sounded confident, '' which was not an indication that anything was wrong. I pointed out that people committing fraud are often professionals and very good at coming across in a certain way, so their security should be more than what appears to be them just checking out the vibes of the person calling. \n\nWells Fargo also represented to me that their would be additional fraud alerts placed on my account after the XXXX incident. However, if they did anything like that, it didn't work because my account has now been compromised again. This time, someone was able to change my password without my authorization, and then they granted themselves guest access to my online banking. The hacker was able to transfer {$2500.00} before Wells Fargo 's fraud system caught on and alerted me. It also allowed some of the transactions to go through ; only one was caught and frozen. The hacker overdrew my bank account, so Wells Fargo allowed the {$2500.00} transaction to go through. The hacker also used XXXX to transfer {$950.00} after adding a new recipient. This was not picked up by fraud detection either, even though I had never sent money to this recipient before. There should be some kind of multi-factor authorization or other security measure for adding or sending funds to a new phone number. Wells Fargo did freeze an attempted {$45.00} transfer, but the other money had already been taken. I'm attaching to this complaint emails that I received that indicated that the fraud was occurring. I don't know the people or phone numbers who are listed as recipients in the emails. \n\nI have been very careful with my online password -- it is not saved in my browser nor is it a password I use anywhere else. I have done scans of my devices for keystroke tracking and have not found anything. I often use my work computer to log in, using XXXX mode, and I work around sensitive information so the security on the work devices is very high. The problem seems to be with Wells Fargo not having effective security. I have been a customer for 10 years, but I am going to close my account and move my money to a bank with better security practices.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-06-19T19:51:17.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"941XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"9297748","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2024-06-19T19:00:39.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["It appears their <em>security</em> verification for <em>changing</em> online banking passwords is not strong enough -- seems <em>like</em> you only need a phone number or email, or if you have the last four digits of the SSN you can <em>change</em> it, and those are easily found on the dark web."]},"sort":[19.934595,"9297748"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"9555074","_score":17.406654,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Hello - I recently received an alert that a hard inquiry was made to my credit report by XXXX XXXX. Having never applied for a XXXX XXXX credit card and otherwise having no business with them, I was concerned. I immediately checked my credit report, disputed the fraudulent inquiry, and in doing so made accounts at the 3 major credit bureaus : Experian, XXXX, and XXXX. Since I did this last week, my Experian account has been hacked twice and is currently outside of my control. A hacker, using my SSN, must have gained access to my Experian account and changed my password and phone number associated with the account- in other words, there is no way for me to gain access to my own credit report through Experian.\n\nExperian 's account safeguards seem to be so lacking that anyone with your SSN can create an account in your name or take over your existing account. I tried calling Experian 's customer service line many times - it is automated, and there seems to be no way to actually get to an agent to discuss this issue, prove who I am, and receive timely help on this sensitive, concerning matter. After 3 days, Experian did respond to an email, asking me to physically mail copies of my driver 's license, utility bills, and social security card to their address. Needless to say, especially considering what I'm going through at the moment, I don't feel comfortable sending around my sensitive personal documents across the country. Also, the email they sent was itself concerning- although it was from the experian.com domain name, it had several typos and formatting issues. It made me feel paranoid, like these people ostensibly trying to help me monitor issues of identity theft might be scammers themselves. \n\nI just want the opportunity to safely access my credit report through Experian, and the assurance that they will automatically use multi-factor authentication to prove, as much as possible, that people are who they say they are and are legitimately trying to access their own credit information.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-07-18T16:22:09.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"020XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"9555074","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2024-07-18T16:00:19.000Z","state":"MA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["It made me feel paranoid, <em>like</em> these people ostensibly trying to help me monitor issues of identity theft might be scammers themselves. \n\nI just want the opportunity to safely access my credit report through Experian, and the assurance that they will automatically use <em>multi</em>-<em>factor</em> authentication to prove, as much as possible, that people are who they say they are and are legitimately trying to access their own credit information."]},"sort":[17.406654,"9555074"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13381306","_score":15.333063,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"Between late XXXX and early XX/XX/year>, I was the victim of a sophisticated cybercrime scheme involving phishing-based deception and impersonation. Over {$41000.00} in unauthorized cryptocurrency transfers were executed through my Crypto.com account without my knowledge, intent, or consent. The individuals responsible impersonated a known digital marketing company, sent falsified onboarding documents, and redirected my browser to malicious domains ( including XXXX ) via deceptive links delivered through platforms like XXXX, XXXX, and email. \n\nAt no point did I share my Crypto.com credentials, XXXX codes, XXXX tokens, or recovery phrases. My account was protected by multi-factor authentication, and I maintained exclusive control over my device. There is no indication that anyone else had authorized or physical access. The transactions occurred during a session that I did not initiate, approve, or engage with in any way. Upon discovering the unauthorized activity, I promptly reported the incident to Crypto.com and submitted extensive documentation, including wallet addresses, transaction hashes, timestamps, communications, and flagged domain reports from my antivirus software. \n\nCrypto.com ultimately denied my claim, stating that no credential change was detected and that the transactions occurred during a session authenticated with valid credentials. However, this explanation does not reasonably account for phishing-based session hijacking, remote exploit access, or injected malwarerecognized vectors in cases of digital financial fraud. \n\nAdditionally, Crypto.com 's denial appears to rely on narrow interpretations of its Account Protection Program ( APP ) and Terms of Use. Their explanation does not clarify whether access gained through deception or exploit constitutes unauthorized use, nor does it define how users are protected in cases of non-consensual but credential-authenticated access. Their policy lacks transparency around protections for victims of phishing, malware, or remote session compromisedespite consumers following all standard security practices. \n\nIn similar cases involving credential-authenticated but unauthorized transactions, other platforms have recognized the distinction between access via fraud and true user authorization. Denying recovery based solely on session authenticationwithout considering deceptive accesscreates precedent that undermines consumer trust and safety in digital financial ecosystems. \n\nReports have been formally submitted to the FBIs Internet Crime Complaint Center ( IC3 ), the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ), and I have attempted to file locally with law enforcement. All evidence has been preserved with metadata intact and is available upon request. Im requesting CFPB assistance to prompt a second-level review by Crypto.com and to highlight the broader consumer risk posed by current crypto platform policies in handling digital financial fraud.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-07T11:21:19.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Virtual currency","zip_code":"30248","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13381306","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Foris DAX, Inc.","date_received":"2025-05-07T11:06:05.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The individuals responsible impersonated a known digital marketing company, sent falsified onboarding documents, and redirected my browser to malicious domains ( including XXXX ) via deceptive links delivered through platforms <em>like</em> XXXX, XXXX, and email. \n\nAt no point did I share my Crypto.com credentials, XXXX codes, XXXX tokens, or recovery phrases. My account was protected by <em>multi</em>-<em>factor</em> authentication, and I maintained exclusive control over my device."]},"sort":[15.333063,"13381306"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6813633","_score":12.887047,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"To whom it XXXX concern : Good afternoon, I am sending this over to dispute the XXXX denials of my dispute with Chase bank in regards to {$14000.00} being deducted out of my Chase Checking by a fraudster using my Chase debit card via XXXX XXXX  in total of {$14000.00}. I have email correspondence between myself and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) as well as the e-mail correspondence between myself and XXXX ( XXXX ) in which I sent to chase as part of the investigation reporting the fraudulent charges that were completed on my Chase debit card that Chase has somehow deemed authorized. I never authorized any of the transactions listed below that have already been taken out of my Chase Checking account. The total amount of the fraudulent charges is {$14000.00} that were withdrawn from my chase checking account ending in XXXX with debit card ending in XXXX attached to that named checking at that time. I Initially Called and reported the fraudulent transactions when I first noticed my account had been compromised on Wednesday XX/XX/XXXX at approx XXXX when I had initially noticed the fraudulent transactions. I locked my Chase debit card from the app prior to calling. Chase Fraud department was closed at that time I reported the fraudulent activity, in which as advised by your representative I followed up the following day Thursday XX/XX/XXXX to report all 15 transactions. I then followed up with fraud team again Sunday XX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXX as well as Monday XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX. Email correspondence was sent to XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX regarding the Fraudulent transactions and was told by both there was nothing they could do that I had to reach out to bank/card carrier in which I immediately did as well as changing passwords, usernames and adding 2 factor authentication to accounts. As soon as I noticed the Fraudulent transactions I immediately locked my debit card and requested a new one. I Kindly ask that some hold Chase accountable and reopen this matter and look into it further due to the fraudulent activity in the amount of {$14000.00}. I do not feel that there was a proper investigation done considering the magnitude of the amount and from what I was told the transactions were completed through XXXXXXXX XXXX  which I never authorized, nor did I authorize any other individuals to do so. My phone and other personal items were on me at all times and never misplaced or lost. I was told by Chase Fraud team that their findings included there to be a 2 factor code that was verified during these transactions. When these transactions were made I never received a Fraud alert from chase nor did I ever receive any type of code that would cause any alarm that there was fraudulent activity being completed with my card. I would greatly appreciate it if this could be looked into further and if more time is needed by their team a provisional credit of {$14000.00} be issued to my account while a investigation is being completed. The amount that was taken from me without knowing is causing a financial hardship due to the magnitude of the amount and I feel needs to be looked into further. Like mentioned I have attached email correspondence between the two merchants regarding the fraudulent claims and I feel that Chase and XXXX  need to look into this further and stand behind there Zero Liability Protection. If there is any further information needed from me please do not hesitate to reach out as I will do whatever is necessary to help rectify this issue to obtain the {$14000.00} which is rightfully mine. I have followed all of your steps that I was advised to do by Chase Fraud team during this process and feel that their findings are incorrect and am still out {$14000.00} and Chase claims that theirs nothing they can do since their was already transactions completed prior to the fraudulent ones that is the reason they are not accountable. They claim if you have ever made a transaction with a specific merchant in the past using that card any fraudulent transaction done with that card is not covered. Along with the email correspondence I had sent and attaching a article that I came across while researching how my XXXX XXXX could possibly be compromised and it states in the article One fraudster said that XXXX XXXX is the easiest way to make money with a recently developed hacking tool available in the digital underground that focuses on stealing victims multi-factor authentication tokens. I feel that chase and XXXX  need to look into their security further and on how this could be stopped as well as standing behind their Zero Liability Protection. I would like to thank you in advance for your time and consideration in this matter when reopening and looking into this further. \n\nRespectfully, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$11000.00} from XXXX XXXX  {$2500.00} XXXX XXXX {$180.00} XXXX cleared XX/XX/XXXX {$2500.00} XXXX cleared XX/XX/XXXX {$100.00} XXXX Cleared XX/XX/XXXX {$1200.00} XXXX Cleared XX/XX/XXXX {$2100.00} XXXX Cleared XX/XX/XXXX {$1000.00} XXXX Cleared XX/XX/XXXX {$650.00} XXXX Cleared XX/XX/XXXX {$250.00} XXXX Cleared XX/XX/XXXX {$100.00} XXXX Cleared XX/XX/XXXX {$100.00} XXXX Cleared XX/XX/XXXX {$100.00} XXXX Cleared XX/XX/XXXX {$100.00} XXXX cleared XX/XX/XXXX {$900.00} XXXX cleared XX/XX/XXXX {$2500.00} XXXX XXXX cleared XX/XX/XXXX {$2500.00} XXXX cleared XX/XX/XXXX Total of 15 transactions","date_sent_to_company":"2023-04-08T18:34:30.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"07869","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6813633","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2023-04-08T17:59:59.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I feel that chase and XXXX  need to look into their <em>security</em> further and on how this could be stopped as well as standing behind their Zero Liability Protection. I would <em>like</em> to thank you in advance for your time and consideration in this matter when reopening and looking into this further."]},"sort":[12.887047,"6813633"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10977967","_score":11.6924515,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"XX/XX/year> : Received a text notification of a false attempt to utilize my Chase Bank debit card at a cafe in XXXX Georgia while I was at work nowhere near there. I took time to change my username & password for security reasons. I checked my accounts and noticed 30+ unauthorized XXXX XXXX being processed on both my Chase Bank personal and business checking accounts to an unknown XXXX XXXX. Each transfer, other than the {$5.00}, was somewhere in the {$60.00} to {$79.00} range. \n\nI called Chase immediately to report the fraud and to freeze both of my accounts. By that point, a total of {$5.00} from my personal checking account and a total of around {$3000.00} from my business account had been withdrawn. There were about {$2000.00} of XXXX payments that were still in the process status that luckily got cancelled before it was too late. I informed the customer service representative that I want to make a fraud claim as these were all transactions that I did not make or approve for anyone else to make on my behalf. I was informed that there would be an investigation and that the money would be credited back. The bank immediately credited the personal account the {$5.00} back, contingent on the investigation. \n\nXX/XX/year> : XXXX PM, I called the Chase Bank Fraud Dept as it had been a week and I had not heard any updates and no credit had been applied to my accounts. The customer representative said that the investigation was ongoing but that the {$3000.00} was scheduled to be deposited back to the business account no later than XX/XX/XXXX, but could possibly be applied even sooner. \n\nXX/XX/year> : XXXX PM, My wife ( also listed on both accounts ) gets an email from Chase regarding the {$5.00} fraud claim on the personal checking account. We logged on to get the document and it stated, \" We have researched the transaction ( s ) you reported on XX/XX/year>. \nWe found that the transaction ( s ) was processed according to the information you provided or was authorized. \nAs a result, we are removing {$5.00} from your account on or after XX/XX/year>. If the account the claim is related to is no longer open with Chase, and you don't have an open account with Chase for us to debit, we may request you to repay the credit ( s ).\n\nContact us if you would like to request the information we used for our research. '' They indeed removed the {$5.00}. Again, this transaction was not authorized nor do we know the account it transferred to. \n\nThis prompted us to check for a similar letter on the business account. ( As of this writing, I have not received any notice of a decision regarding the business account. We found it only because of the personal account claim notification. ) We did find a letter online regarding the business checking fraud claim which stated : \" We have researched the transaction ( s ) you reported on XX/XX/year>. \nHere 's what you should know : We found that the transaction ( s ) was processed according to the information you provided or was authorized. \nNo adjustment will be made to your account at this time. \nContact us if you would like to request the information we used for our research. '' So nothing will be credited to the business account. Also again, these transactions were not authorized nor do we know the account it transferred to. \n\nXXXX PM, I called the Chase Bank Fraud Dept to find out what exactly they meant and what the next step is. I was told by the representative that the claim had been denied and the case had been closed because they found something with the log-in history and ISP being consistent with my banking. No new devices detected. No password change. Things were consistent with my log-in history. \n\nI was told the only course of action I could take now is to contact my ISP provider to request a document stating that someone logged into my ISP from somewhere else. I requested to speak to a XXXX or a person from the XXXX XXXX but was told there was no way to transfer to me such a person. They'd have to submit a notification and I will have to wait for them to get back to me. \n\nXXXX PM. I contacted my mobile carrier for such a document since I was on the on cell service during the time the fraud occurred. The XXXX XXXX Representative told me that they can't determine these things in a situation ; that the best I can do is print out my text log from that day to show that I didn't get any log-in/2 step verification for the account access. Because I have XXXX step multi factor authenticator. \n\nNext course of action : I plan on filing a Police Report to my local precinct, as well as visiting the local Chase Bank XXXX, on Monday, XXXX XXXX while I wait for an investigative team member to reach back out to me.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-12-01T01:27:00.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"30315","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10977967","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2024-11-30T23:03:20.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Deposits and withdrawals"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Because I have XXXX step <em>multi</em> <em>factor</em> authenticator. \n\nNext course of action : I plan on filing a Police Report to my local precinct, as well as visiting the local Chase Bank XXXX, on Monday, XXXX XXXX while I wait for an investigative team member to reach back out to me."]},"sort":[11.6924515,"10977967"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"9750331","_score":6.359386,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"XX/XX/year>2024. \nConsumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX  XXXX XXXX  XXXX This is to complain against Coinbase URGENCY : HIGH IMPORTANCE : HIGH [ WITHOUT PREJUDICE ] I wish to practice my right as a customer of Coinbase to use your organisation 's service, seeking a formal, impartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute with Coinbase. \nIn order to clear up the myriad of letters and correspondences I have hitherto sent to Coinbase respecting my complaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding, by taking a deeper look at the happenings of my case, and analysing the relevant facts in an objective and comprehensive fashion. \nIt is crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially-engineered and coerced to engage these fraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognise that I am the victim of an investment scam. \nMy complaint to the CFPB has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct of Coinbase to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. They sell a service to look after their customers, protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a traditional relationship and way of working with its customers. \nDuring the complaints process with Coinbase, I found their communication ineffective, which further hides their conduct to management and diminishes the service offering to their clients. They are struggling to adapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is presenting a real problem which they choose to manage in a way which is not in line with rules and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients. \nGeneral Obligation : Commencing on or around XXXX XXXX 2024, I fell victim to a multi-layered scam operation orchestrated by a clone of XXXX XXXX  ( the XXXX  or the XXXX ), with the design, development, manufacturing, promoting, marketing, distributing, labelling, and/or sale of illegal and outright fraudulent investment services, all of which aim at contributing to the goal of robbing and defrauding clients through a predetermined cycle of client losses to gains in the equivalent of XXXX USD which was transferred from my Coinbase XXXX. \nWhen determining whats reasonable and fair, we should focus on the issue of liability ; common queries include, but are not limited to, the following ( i ) whether Coinbase did not take notice of any rule, law, or regulation, and/or possibly missed any material elements of the relevant bylaws or codes of conduct, that may have prevented them from protecting my financial safety ; ( ii ) whether by virtue of Coinbases custodianship over my funds or by its control over them, they owed a fiduciary duty to the me and if so, whether that duty was breached ; ( iii ) whether Coinbase promoted the transaction ( s ) in question despite being aware of the nature of the transaction ( s ) in question ( iv ) whether Coinbase was in compliance with its own policies and procedures ; ( v ) whether Coinbase owed duties to myself, what the scope of those duties was, and whether Coinbase did not uphold those duties ; ( vi ) whether Coinbases conduct was unfair ; and ( vii ) whether Coinbase has within its power the ability to, and should, compensate me for the harm that has befallen me.\n\nUpon identification of such unusual or suspicious activity, it is crucial that the relevant staff member adequately describe the factors making an activity or transaction suspicious, thoroughly depict the extent and nature of this activity and properly communicate to the customer that such activity meets the relevant criteria of fraud. \nIn providing its services to a customer, a financial institution is required by law to exercise the care and skill of a diligent, prudent banker. In this case, this means that the payment service provider should not turn a blind eye to known facts pointing to a real possibility that their customer is being scammed. In other words, Coinbase must have had special knowledge of what was occurring or been alerted to a real possibility of fraud taking place. The financial institution must have known or reasonably ought to have known that I was dealing with a scammer. \nGranted, there is room for diversity of view insofar as reasonableness is concerned. Indeed, there is a sense in which the standard of care of the reasonable person involves in its application a subjective element. \nHowever, it must be remembered that the correct test is always reasonable care in all circumstances, not average care. The fact that most people behave in a certain way may be good evidence that the conduct is reasonable, but this is not necessarily the case. Although reasonableness is a very fluid concept, all of the evidence suggests that Coinbase did not foresee the fraud and disregarded even the most obvious dangers in this respect. \nSituations do tend to repeat themselves and it is advisable to examine previous outcomes to see how the standard of the reasonable person should be applied, and that lessons can be learnt from the errors of the past. \nCoinbases Position : Please find all relevant evidence attached below. \nI have been a client of Coinbase for over a decade and it can be easily deduced that transactions to XXXX are outside of the usual pattern of my transactions. Coinbase should have warned me, educated me about the risky transactions and possible scams or blocked the suspicious transaction. I never received a call from Coinbase, nor did anyone ever ask me if I am sure to whom I am sending the funds or outlined the reasons for reconsidering sending the funds. \nCoinbase conspicuously touts their security as a reason to use their service. Specifically, Coinbase writes on their website : We work hard to protect you from fraud. That's why we : Apply best-in-class security technologies expertise to protect you XXXX, all year round. \nSecure every method of banking we offer including online, mobile, ATM and telephone banking. \nOffer free security software from our trusted tech partners to download on to your devices. \nFrequently train our employees on the latest practices in cyber and physical security. \nGive you the security tips and resources you need to protect yourself from potential threats. \nRefuting XXXX arguments from a purely logical perspective : XXXX position is that the features of the situation at hand do not generate a genuine obligation to protect innocent and helpless victims ; they are essentially arguing that common-sense-based approaches are doomed to fail, leaving their exclusively technical account of the subject matter as the only meaningful choice. For reasons which are unclear, this extremely serious situation barely gets the attention it deserves even though ample evidence has been offered in support of this complaint. \nIn XXXX view, it is implied that we should not home in ( and consequently rely ) on unwritten laws, practicality, good judgement, reasonableness, sharpness, sensibleness, past outcomes, and insight, when taking appropriate precautions. To underscore, once again, such views are at odds with common sense and are wildly irresponsible. \nImagine a view according to which the XXXX and only thing that can make Coinbase morally obligated to do something is having it written down somewhere. Pursuant to this view, if Coinbase encounter the suffering of totally naive victims, they are only obligated to intervene in or remedy the situation, to the degree required by written material. This is unbecoming for a reputable establishment such as Coinbase. \nI have reviewed the material hereto sent by Coinbase carefully, and it unfortunately provides no response to my fundamental argument concerning the degree of care. Given its size, influence, and the resources at its disposal, this establishment clearly had a far greater capacity than an individual such as myself had, to determine the level and likelihood of risk that a client such as myself is subjected to and had a duty to intervene as they now do to query in particular out-of-pattern transactions of this kind. \nIt is perfectly obvious that Coinbase, inadvertently, employs a subtle approach in addressing some of the key questions in a manner which neither provides me with adequate support nor protects anything other than its own interests. \nIt is Coinbase here, who has the burden of proof, to show that it has exercised the duty of care, that is to say, that Coinbase adhered to a standard of reasonable care in relation to the matter at issue given its extensive experience compared to mine. It is Coinbase that claims that the damages which I have suffered in connection to this matter have not been reasonably foreseeable, and that my proposed degree of care is not, and has not been, commensurate with XXXX capacity, experience, expertise, or scope of services in any way. To reemphasize, Coinbases indisputable overriding purpose is by no means to purely execute transactions in a blind and blank fashion, but rather to strike a balance between executing those transactions and capitalising on its undeniably vast capabilities to protect consumers thereby enhancing market integrity. \nApropos of the fluidity of the concept of reasonableness, all Coinbase has done in this regard is set up a dichotomy of having or not having the legal obligation under consideration, however, that does not go one-inch toward explaining why various regulatory authorities, has maintained that financial institutions can, and should, protect consumers using their systems, advanced technologies, and rich experience. \nCoinbase is obliged to take some action if it is sufficiently aware of a real possibility that a fraud may be being perpetuated. If you don't question its customers instructions or raise the possibility of a scam with the customer in these circumstances, it may be liable if the red flags indicate the customer is : particularly vulnerable, or if the possibility of fraud was serious or real, not just suspected.\n\nThere are some recommendations to organisations for protecting customers from financial harm that might occur as a result of fraud or financial abuse ; and gives guidance on how to recognise customers who might be at risk, how to assess the potential risks to the individual and how to take the necessary actions to prevent or minimise financial harm. \nThese recommendations are established as a general principle, the organisation should deliver a service that : XXXX ) Takes a proactive approach to minimising risks, impact and incidences of financial harm and it sets out systems and tools for the prevention and detection of fraud and financial abuse. As a general point, it says organisations should ensure that all systems are developed using technologies and methodologies that are effective in the prevention of fraud and financial abuse, through authorised and unauthorised payments, thereby minimising the risk of financial harm to customers. As regards to the detection of fraud and financial abuse, it says the organisation : A ) should have measures in place across all payment channels and products to detect suspicious transactions or activities that might indicate fraud or financial abuse. It then lists the following examples of suspicious activity on customer accounts : a. multiple cheque books; b. sudden increased spending ; XXXX transfers to other accounts ; d. multiple password attempts ; e. logins from new devices, multiple geographical locations ; f. sudden changes to the operation of the account ; Unusual transactions are transactions whose amount, characteristics and frequency bear no relation to the economic activity of the customer, exceed normal market parameters or have no apparent legal justification. \ng. a withdrawal or payment for a large amount ; h. a payment or series of payments to a new payee ; i. financial activity that matches a known method of fraud or financial abuse. \nB ) organisations should have a process in place to ensure that staff make contact with the customer to verify the financial activity, challenge its authenticity, explain the nature of the suspected or detected fraud and discuss an appropriate plan of action. \nThis series of payments to XXXX, which I have never used before this, clearly shows that I am a victim of a known method of a fraud. \nCoinbase are yet to show, or otherwise provide me with, a compelling argument that their wide-ranging experience and wealth of XXXX knowledge in detecting transactional anomalies were not sufficient to avert the fraud at issue. By contrast, I have provided a multitude of sound and powerful reasons by which requiring their involvement has not only been pressingly relevant but also eminently reasonable and well- justified. \nRather than empathising with and undertaking substantial efforts to convey their knowledge of the existence of such regulations abroad and thereafter use it to protect and proactively relieve the plight of consumers who have been cheated out of their money and whose role in society is properly fulfilled, positively contributing to local economic growth, development and sustainability Coinbase adopts a rather insouciant attitude toward my financial predicament portrayed herein. \nI am deeply convinced that the disastrous results that I have previously elaborated upon will continue to ensue if no responsibility is adopted by Coinbase in relation to this matter. I have also thoroughly detailed why they can not simply dismiss this problem by strictly adhering to legal technicalities which, after careful reflection, struck me as being nothing more than self-interest. Indeed, it seems to me utterly unfair to disregard fragile, sensitive, and vulnerable consumers who are afflicted by such allegedly malevolent acts, thereby keeping an unjust status-quo that is corrupting our society at its core. \nConclusion : Based on my analysis, and as confirmed by various authorities concerned with such matters, there is abundant evidence that forward-thinking financial institutions ought to take reasonable steps to forestall fraud, or at least mitigate its risk by using an effective risk management system, demonstrating their undisputed ability to responsibly and pre-emptively respond to questionable transactions in the digital arena. The use of such systems, largely based on newly adopted technologies aimed at effectively navigating the evolving threat landscape, is only XXXX of a number of possible endeavours undertaken in this connection, alongside the application of past knowledge and experience related to popular fraudulent practices. \nAstonishingly, I am pondering how it is that, despite being shown that XXXX business conduct was insufficient insofar as background checks are concerned, they keep refuting their indisputable role and responsibility in connection with the matter herein discussed. The points that I have hitherto made are too crucial to be taken lightly. XXXX non-observance of the fundamental principles of justice that is, to completely overlook and not even remotely try to mitigate the suffering of vulnerable consumers is inexcusable given the size of the establishment and the vast resources at its disposal as the direct result of the patronage of clients like myself. \nIf it was, indeed, solely my responsibility, we must then believe at least XXXX of the following clauses : a ) financial institutions have absolutely no role whatsoever in preventing and detecting fraud, b ) the fraud in question was not reasonably foreseeable, or c ) the transactions in question were not sufficiently alarming. \nIt is extremely unfortunate that Coinbase pushes quite hard for me to believe all three of these things despite evidence to the contrary. \nIn summary, I respectively ask your organisation to consider my points, given your personal and companywide obligation to provide a fair and reasonable investigation into the complaint. \nI look forward to your input and would gladly cooperate to reach a fair and reasonable outcome.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-08-08T08:31:27.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Virtual currency","zip_code":"34655","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"9750331","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Coinbase, Inc.","date_received":"2024-08-08T08:09:37.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Frequently train our employees on the latest practices in cyber and physical <em>security</em>. \nGive you the <em>security</em> tips and resources you need to protect yourself from potential threats."]},"sort":[6.359386,"9750331"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8234693","_score":5.182583,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"This is to complain against the Wells Fargo Bank ( WFB ).\n\nURGENCY : HIGH IMPORTANCE : HIGH [ WITHOUT PREJUDICE ] I wish to practice my right as a customer of WFB to use your organisation 's service, seeking a formal, impartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute ( Ref : XXXX ) with WFB. \nIn order to clear up the myriad of letters and correspondences I have hitherto sent to WFB respecting my complaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding, by taking a deeper look at the happenings of my case, and analysing the relevant facts in an objective and comprehensive fashion.\n\nIt is crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially-engineered and coerced to engage these fraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognise that I am the victim of an investment scam. \nMy complaint to the CFPB has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct of WFB to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. They sell a service to look after their customers, protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a traditional relationship and way of working with its customers.\n\nDuring the complaints process with WFB, I found their communication ineffective, which further hides their conduct to management and diminishes the service offering to their clients. They are struggling to adapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is presenting a real problem which they choose to manage in a way which is not in line with rules and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients. \nGeneral Obligation : Between XXXX  and XX/XX/, I fell victim to XXXX  multi-layered scam operations run by XXXX which involved me making deposits for a total amount of XXXX USD from my WFB account to fraudulent investment firm ( s ). \nWhen determining whats reasonable and fair, we should focus on the issue of liability ; common queries include, but are not limited to, the following ( i ) whether WFB did not take notice of any rule, law, or regulation, and/or possibly missed any material elements of the relevant bylaws or codes of conduct, that may have prevented them from protecting my financial safety ; ( ii ) whether by virtue of WFBs custodianship over my funds or by its control over them, they owed a fiduciary duty to the me and if so, whether that duty was breached ; ( iii ) whether WFB promoted the transaction ( s ) in question despite being aware of the nature of the transaction ( s ) in question ( iv ) whether WFB was in compliance with its own policies and procedures ; ( v ) whether WFB owed duties to myself, what the scope of those duties was, and whether WFB did not uphold those duties ; ( vi ) whether WFBs conduct was unfair ; and ( vii ) whether WFB has within its power the ability to, and should, compensate me for the harm that has befallen me.\n\nUpon identification of such unusual or suspicious activity, it is crucial that the relevant staff member adequately describe the factors making an activity or transaction suspicious, thoroughly depict the extent and nature of this activity and properly communicate to the customer that such activity meets the relevant criteria of fraud. \nIn providing its services to a customer, a financial institution is required by law to exercise the care and skill of a diligent, prudent banker. In this case, this means that the payment service provider should not turn a blind eye to known facts pointing to a real possibility that their customer is being scammed. In other words, WFB must have had special knowledge of what was occurring or been alerted to a real possibility of fraud taking place. The financial institution must have known or reasonably ought to have known that I was dealing with a scammer.\n\nGranted, there is room for diversity of view insofar as reasonableness is concerned. Indeed, there is a sense in which the standard of care of the reasonable person involves in its application a subjective element.\n\nHowever, it must be remembered that the correct test is always reasonable care in all circumstances, not average care. The fact that most people behave in a certain way may be good evidence that the conduct is reasonable, but this is not necessarily the case. Although reasonableness is a very fluid concept, all of the evidence suggests that WFB did not foresee the fraud and disregarded even the most obvious dangers in this respect.\n\nSituations do tend to repeat themselves and it is advisable to examine previous outcomes to see how the standard of the reasonable person should be applied, and that lessons can be learnt from the errors of the past.\n\nWFBs Position : On XX/XX/2023, WFB wrote in a letter Recently, your fraud inquiry was forwarded to us for our review. We found that between XXXXand XX/XX/2023, you authorized multiple wire transfers totaling {>= $1,000,000} for the benefit of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX As the money will not be returned from the receiving bank, we are not able to reimburse you. At this time, we consider your inquiry closed.\n\nPlease note that a wire transfer is an immediate form of payment and can not be reversed after the funds have been deposited in the beneficiary 's account, even if you believe you are a victim of fraud. To learn more about protecting yourself from fraud, visit our Fraud Protection Center at wellsfargo.com/privacy-security/fraud/.\n\nRefuting WFBs arguments from a purely logical perspective : WFBs position is that the features of the situation at hand do not generate a genuine obligation to protect innocent and helpless victims ; they are essentially arguing that common-sense-based approaches are doomed to fail, leaving their exclusively technical account of the subject matter as the only meaningful choice. For reasons which are unclear, this extremely serious situation barely gets the attention it deserves even though ample evidence has been offered in support of this complaint.\n\nIn WFBs view, it is implied that we should not home in ( and consequently rely ) on unwritten laws, practicality, good judgement, reasonableness, sharpness, sensibleness, past outcomes, and insight, when taking appropriate precautions. To underscore, once again, such views are at odds with common sense and are wildly irresponsible.\n\nImagine a view according to which the one and only thing that can make WFB morally obligated to do something is having it written down somewhere. Pursuant to this view, if WFB encounter the suffering of totally naive victims, they are only obligated to intervene in or remedy the situation, to the degree required by written material. This is unbecoming for a reputable establishment such as WFB.\n\nI have reviewed the material hereto sent by WFB carefully, and it unfortunately provides no response to my fundamental argument concerning the degree of care. Given its size, influence, and the resources at its disposal, this establishment clearly had a far greater capacity than an individual such as myself had, to determine the level and likelihood of risk that a client such as myself is subjected to and had a duty to intervene as they now do to query in particular out-of-pattern transactions of this kind.\n\nIt is perfectly obvious that WFB, inadvertently, employs a subtle approach in addressing some of the key questions in a manner which neither provides me with adequate support nor protects anything other than its own interests.\n\nIt is WFB here, who has the burden of proof, to show that it has exercised the duty of care, that is to say, that WFB adhered to a standard of reasonable care in relation to the matter at issue given its extensive experience compared to mine. It is WFB that claims that the damages which I have suffered in connection to this matter have not been reasonably foreseeable, and that my proposed degree of care is not, and has not been, commensurate with WFBs capacity, experience, expertise, or scope of services in any way. To reemphasize, WFBs indisputable overriding purpose is by no means to purely execute transactions in a blind and blank fashion, but rather to strike a balance between executing those transactions and capitalising on its undeniably vast capabilities to protect consumers thereby enhancing market integrity.\n\nApropos of the fluidity of the concept of reasonableness, all WFB has done in this regard is set up a dichotomy of having or not having the legal obligation under consideration, however, that does not go one-inch toward explaining why various regulatory authorities, has maintained that financial institutions can, and should, protect consumers using their systems, advanced technologies, and rich experience.\n\nWFB is obliged to take some action if it is sufficiently aware of a real possibility that a fraud may be being perpetuated. If you don't question its customers instructions or raise the possibility of a scam with the customer in these circumstances, it may be liable if the red flags indicate the customer is : particularly vulnerable, or if the possibility of fraud was serious or real, not just suspected. \nThere are some recommendations to organisations for protecting customers from financial harm that might occur as a result of fraud or financial abuse ; and gives guidance on how to recognise customers who might be at risk, how to assess the potential risks to the individual and how to take the necessary actions to prevent or minimise financial harm.\n\nThese recommendations are established as a general principle, the organisation should deliver a service that : 1 ) Takes a proactive approach to minimising risks, impact and incidences of financial harmand it sets out systems and tools for the prevention and detection of fraud and financialabuse. As a general point, it says organisations should ensure that all systems aredeveloped using technologies and methodologies that are effective in the prevention offraud and financial abuse, through authorised and unauthorised payments, therebyminimising the risk of financial harm to customers. As regards to the detection of fraud andfinancial abuse, it says the organisation : A ) should have measures in place across all payment channels and products to detectsuspicious transactions or activities that might indicate fraud or financial abuse. It thenlists the following examples of suspicious activity on customer accounts : a.multiple cheque books ; b.sudden increased spending ; c.transfers to other accounts ; d.multiple password attempts ; e.logins from new devices, multiple geographical locations ; f.sudden changes to the operation of the account ; Unusual transactions aretransactions whose amount, characteristics and frequency bear no relation to the economic activity of the customer, exceed normal market parameters or have no apparent legal justification.\n\ng.a withdrawal or payment for a large amount ; h.a payment or series of payments to a new payee ; i.financial activity that matches a known method of fraud or financial abuse.\n\nB ) organisations should have a process in place to ensure that staff make contact withthe customer to verify the financial activity, challenge its authenticity, explain the natureof the suspected or detected fraud and discuss an appropriate plan of action.\n\nWFB are yet to show, or otherwise provide me with, a compelling argument that their wide-ranging experience and wealth of specialist knowledge in detecting transactional anomalies were not sufficient to avert the fraud at issue. By contrast, I have provided a multitude of sound and powerful reasons by which requiring their involvement has not only been pressingly relevant but also eminently reasonable and well-justified.\n\nRather than empathising with and undertaking substantial efforts to convey their knowledge of the existence of such regulations abroad and thereafter use it to protect and proactively relieve the plight of consumers who have been cheated out of their money and whose role in society is properly fulfilled, positively contributing to local economic growth, development and sustainability WFB adopts a rather insouciant attitude toward my financial predicament portrayed herein.\n\nI am deeply convinced that the disastrous results that I have previously elaborated upon will continue to ensue if no responsibility is adopted by WFB in relation to this matter. I have also thoroughly detailed why they can not simply dismiss this problem by strictly adhering to legal technicalities which, after careful reflection, struck me as being nothing more than self-interest. Indeed, it seems to me utterly unfair to disregard fragile, sensitive, and vulnerable consumers who are afflicted by such allegedly malevolent acts, thereby keeping an unjust status-quo that is corrupting our society at its core. \nConclusion : Based on my analysis, and as confirmed by various authorities concerned with such matters, there is abundant evidence that forward-thinking financial institutions ought to take reasonable steps to forestall fraud, or at least mitigate its risk by using an effective risk management system, demonstrating their undisputed ability to responsibly and pre-emptively respond to questionable transactions in the digital arena. The use of such systems, largely based on newly adopted technologies aimed at effectively navigating the evolving threat landscape, is only XXXX of a number of possible endeavours undertaken in this connection, alongside the application of past knowledge and experience related to popular fraudulent practices. \nAstonishingly, I am pondering how it is that, despite being shown that WFBs business conduct was insufficient insofar as background checks are concerned, they keep refuting their indisputable role and responsibility in connection with the matter herein discussed. The points that I have hitherto made are too crucial to be taken lightly. WFBs non-observance of the fundamental principles of justice that is, to completely overlook and not even remotely try to mitigate the suffering of vulnerable consumers is inexcusable given the size of the establishment and the vast resources at its disposal as the direct result of the patronage of clients like myself.\n\nIf it was, indeed, solely my responsibility, we must then believe at least one of the following clauses : a ) financial institutions have absolutely no role whatsoever in preventing and detecting fraud, b ) the fraud in question was not reasonably foreseeable, or c ) the transactions in question were not sufficiently alarming. It is extremely unfortunate that WFB pushes quite hard for me to believe all three of these thingsdespite evidence to the contrary.\n\nIn summary, I respectively ask your organisation to consider my points, given your personal and companywide obligation to provide a fair and reasonable investigation into the complaint.\n\nI look forward to your input and would gladly cooperate to reach a fair and reasonable outcome.\n\nThank you. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2024-01-27T15:35:22.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Virtual currency","zip_code":"91011","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8234693","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2024-01-27T15:11:05.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["To learn more about protecting yourself from fraud, visit our Fraud Protection Center at wellsfargo.com/privacy-<em>security</em>/fraud/."]},"sort":[5.182583,"8234693"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7135443","_score":4.654552,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"XX/XX/XXXX\nThis is my complaint against CHASE BANK. \nURGENCY: HIGH\nIMPORTANCE: HIGH\n[WITHOUT PREJUDICE]\nI would like to draw your attention to XX/XX/XXXX - I had sent my complaint letter to CHASE BANK, in which I clearly stated\nhow this scam has affected me personally, psychologically andfinancially. \nI am afraid I have had to go through so much \"bureaucracy\" thus far in order to catch their attention to my concerns. This really doesn't\nshow their complaints department in a good light, to say the least; and certainly, does not contribute to my overall satisfaction and peace\nof mind.\nMy complaint is against the bank that did not do its job properly (could not prevent/foreseen fraud and could not conduct a proper\ninvestigation) and not against the vulnerable customer who fell victim and lost all the savings due to the misconduct of the bank.\nI feel very distressed and cheated, all because no one took action immediately and practice their duty of care, therefore I only request what\nI believe to be rightfully mine, as all institutions were more than negligent in protecting my account and handling the complaints. I \ncomprehensively provided explanations and proof to my claim, even so, CHASE BANK never acknowledged my complaint,\ntherefore, I have approached you CFPB and I would like to receive your assistance on this matter.\nGeneral Obligation:\nCommencing on or about XX/XX/XXXX, I fell victim to a multi-layered scam operation orchestrated by XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, \nand XXXX XXXX (the Scammers), all of which aim at contributing to the goal of robbing and defrauding innocent people.\nWhen determining whats reasonable and fair, we should focus on the issue of liability; common queries include, but are not limited to, \nthe following (i) whether CHASE BANK did not take notice of any rule, law, or regulation, and/or possibly missed any material elements \nof the relevant bylaws or codes of conduct, that may have prevented them from protecting my financial safety; (ii) whether by virtue of \nCHASE BANKs custodianship over my funds or by its control over them, they owed a fiduciary duty to me and if so, whether that \nduty was breached; (iii) whether CHASE BANK promoted the transaction(s) in question despite being aware of the nature of the \ntransaction(s) in question (iv) whether CHASE BANK was in compliance with its own policies and procedures; (v) whether CHASE \nBANK owed duties to myself, what the scope of those duties was, and whether CHASE BANK did not uphold those duties; (vi) whether \nCHASE BANKs conduct was unfair; and (vii) whether CHASE BANK has within its power the ability to, and should, compensate me \nfor the harm that has befallen me.\nUpon identification of such unusual or suspicious activity, it is crucial that the relevant staff member adequately describe the factors \nmaking an activity or transaction suspicious, thoroughly depict the extent and nature of this activity and properly communicate to the \ncustomer that such activity meets the relevant criteria of fraud.\nIn providing its services to a customer, a financial institution is required by law to exercise the care and skill of a diligent, prudent banker. \nIn this case, this means that the payment service provider should not turn a blind eye to known facts pointing to a real possibility that \ntheir customer is being scammed. In other words, CHASE BANK must have had special knowledge of what was occurring or been alerted \nto a real possibility of fraud taking place. The financial institution must have known or reasonably ought to have known that I was dealing \nwith a scammer.\nGranted, there is room for diversity of view insofar as reasonableness is concerned. Indeed, there is a sense in which the standard of care \nof the reasonable person involves in its application a subjective element. \nHowever, it must be remembered that the correct test is always reasonable care in all circumstances, not average care. The fact that most \npeople behave in a certain way may be good evidence that the conduct is reasonable, but this is not necessarily the case. Although \nreasonableness is a very fluid concept, all of the evidence suggests that CHASE BANK did not foresee the fraud and disregarded even the \nmost obvious dangers in this respect. \nSituations do tend to repeat themselves and it is advisable to examine previous outcomes to see how the standard of the reasonable person \nshould be applied, and that lessons can be learnt from the errors of the past.\nApropos of the fluidity of the concept of reasonableness, all CHASE BANK has done in this regard is set up a dichotomy of having or not \nhaving the legal obligation under consideration, however, that does not go one-inch toward explaining why various regulatory authorities, \nhas maintained that financial institutions can, and should, protect consumers using their systems, advanced technologies, and rich \nexperience.\nSCAMMERS FRAUD SCHEME  ALLEGATIONS\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I received a phone call in the morning at about XXXX XXXX. The caller identified himself as XXXX XXXX, ID ss(or XXXX) XXXX \nfrom XXXX. He stated that he was confirming a purchase that was made on my XXXX account of a gold XXXX that was to be delivered \nto an address in XXXX New York the next day on the XXXX. I told him that I had not made such a purchase and it needed to be cancelled. \nHe said he would cancel it, but he needed to transfer me to their fraud division and asked me to hold for a moment. This was at XXXX XXXX.\nThe next person got on the line (XXXX XXXX), the same phone number. This person identified himself as XXXX XXXX BadgeXXXX XXXX \nU.S. Marshall. He proceeded to describe that my name was used to open several bank accounts, in Texas, New York, New Jersey, etc. rent \na vehicle and that my name was being used in a money laundering scheme and possibly drug smuggling. He then started to tell me that he \nneeded me to talk to one of their U.S. Marshals that were in that department and proceeded to transfer me to yet another person. He had \nme stay on the line and not hang up for the whole day. The next person got on the line but had a different phone number, 1-XXXX. \nHe identified himself as a U.S. Marshall, XXXX XXXX, badgeXXXX XXXX, assigned to my caseXXXX XXXX, and that he would explain what \nwe could do to protect my money and provide proof that I was not involved with committing any of the fraud. \nHe said I needed to pull all my money out of my bank account and secure it so they could open a new account to put it into at my bank. \nHe then said to stay on the line no matter what and to not tell anyone what we were doing and asked how much money needed to be \nsecured, I then gave him my balance in my bank account. He never asked me for my actual bank account number. He then had me go to the \nbank and withdraw as much as I could in cash to take to a specific Bitcoin ATM that they provided to me after I let them know what city \nI was in. I used XXXX all day long because my car was in the shop.\nI withdrew XXXX cash and proceeded to the Bitcoin ATM address they gave me. He kept stating that my XXXX trips would be refunded \nafter all this was done. They sent me a QRC code to use at the Bitcoin ATM. I deposited the cash into the ATM and kept the receipt. Then \nhe directed me to buy as many XXXX  cash cards as I could to secure the rest. I went to XXXX and was only able to purchase XXXX  cash \ncards for the amount of XXXX each. Then he asked if I could do an ATM cash withdrawal at XXXX for the rest. I was only able to \nwithdraw XXXX because of limits.\nI told him I was at all my withdrawal limits and could do no more for XXXX hrs.\nHe then said that once we got all my money secured that he would set up an appointment for the next day to meet another Marshall in \nperson who would help me set up my new bank account and provide me with my new Social Security number and transfer all my money \ninto the new account.\nHe said he would postpone his case for a day so we could continue the next day because if we did not secure my money, they would close \nmy bank account and my Social Security number forever.\nThe next day, XX/XX/XXXX I was exhausted and didnt want to work with him anymore. I transferred my savings to checking for the next \nround of securing my money. I told him this and told him I did it because I needed to pay some bills with it and was leaving some money \nin my account,\nHe then got upset and said I broke the rules and hung up on me.\nPlease take notice that my funds were transferred through means of coercion and under false pretenses all along!\nCHASE BANK is obliged to take some action if it is sufficiently aware of a real possibility that a fraud may be being perpetuated. If you \ndon't question its customers instructions or raise the possibility of a scam with the customer in these circumstances, it may be liable if the \nred flags indicate the customer is:\n particularly vulnerable, or\n if the possibility of fraud was serious or real, not just suspected.\nThere are some recommendations to organisations for protecting customers from financial harm that might occur as a result of fraud or \nfinancial abuse; and gives guidance on how to recognise customers who might be at risk, how to assess the potential risks to the individual \nand how to take the necessary actions to prevent or minimise financial harm.\nThese recommendations are established as a general principle, the organisation should deliver a service that:\n1) Takes a proactive approach to minimising risks, impact and incidences of financial harm and it sets out systems and tools for \nthe prevention and detection of fraud and financial abuse. As a general point, it says organisations should ensure that all systems are \ndeveloped using technologies and methodologies that are effective in the prevention of fraud and financial abuse, through authorised \nand unauthorised payments, thereby minimising the risk of financial harm to customers. As regards to the detection of fraud and \nfinancial abuse, it says the organisation:\nA) should have measures in place across all payment channels and products to detect suspicious transactions or activities that \nmight indicate fraud or financial abuse. It then lists the following examples of suspicious activity on customer accounts:\na. multiple cheque books;\nb. sudden increased spending;\nc. transfers to other accounts;\nd. multiple password attempts;\ne. logins from new devices, multiple geographical locations;\nf. sudden changes to the operation of the account; Unusual transactions are transactions whose amount, \ncharacteristics and frequency bear no relation to the economic activity of the customer, exceed normal market \nparameters or have no apparent legal justification. \ng. a withdrawal or payment for a large amount;\nh. a payment or series of payments to a new payee;\ni. financial activity that matches a known method of fraud or financial abuse.\nB) organisations should have a process in place to ensure that staff make contact with the customer to verify the financial \nactivity, challenge its authenticity, explain the nature of the suspected or detected fraud and discuss an appropriate plan of action.\nI am deeply convinced that the disastrous results that I have previously elaborated upon will continue to ensue if no responsibility is \nadopted by CHASE BANK in relation to this matter. I have also thoroughly detailed why they cannot simply dismiss this problem by \nstrictly adhering to legal technicalities which, after careful reflection, struck me as being nothing more than self-interest. Indeed, it seems \nto me utterly unfair to disregard fragile, sensitive, and vulnerable consumers who are afflicted by such allegedly malevolent acts, thereby \nkeeping an unjust status-quo that is corrupting our society at its core.\nConclusion:\nBased on my analysis, and as confirmed by various authorities concerned with such matters, there is abundant evidence that forward thinking financial institutions ought to take reasonable steps to forestall fraud, or at least mitigate its risk by using an effective risk \nmanagement system, demonstrating their undisputed ability to responsibly and pre-emptively respond to questionable transactions in the \ndigital arena. The use of such systems, largely based on newly adopted technologies aimed at effectively navigating the evolving threat\nlandscape, is only one of a number of possible endeavours undertaken in this connection, alongside the application of past knowledge and \nexperience related to popular fraudulent practices.\nCHASE BANKs non-observance of the fundamental principles of justice  that is, to completely overlook and not even remotely try to \nmitigate the suffering of vulnerable consumers is inexcusable given the size of the establishment and the vast resources at its disposal as \nthe direct result of the patronage of clients like myself. \nIn summary, I respectively ask your organisation to consider my points, given your personal and companywide obligation to provide a fair \nand reasonable investigation into the complaint.\nI look forward to your input and would gladly cooperate to reach a fair and reasonable outcome.\nThank you.\nXXXX XXXX\n\nPage 1 of 7 XX/XX/XXXX \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, NY\nRe: Demand Letter \n For negotiation purposes only, without effect as to any and all rights\nAttn: Claims/Fraud Dept.\nDear Sir/Madam, \nThe goal of this letter is twofold: first, it aims to establish that a duty of care was breached, inasmuch as \nyou have failed to perform adequate due diligence or/and have not acted in a reasonable and prudent \nmanner to prevent foreseeable substantial damages I suffered as a result of a fraud [1]. Second, it shall \nserve as a formal written demand for reimbursement based on the aforementioned grounds, among \nothers.\nA very comprehensive analysis of fraud prevention suggests that by processing an atypical, non-routine \ntransaction(s), and/or by being aware of other fraudulent schemes similar to the one alleged herein \nand/or ignorance of obvious warning signs of fraud, you engaged in/ is a pattern or a practice of wrongful \nand negligent conduct which provided substantial assistance to advance the commission of a fraud that \nresulted in my financial and psychological damages. The facts and details concerning the actions in \nquestion are set forth hereunder.\nOVERVIEW\n Commencing on or about XX/XX/XXXX, I fell victim to a multilayered scam operation\norchestrated by XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX (the Scammers), all of which aim \nat contributing to the goal of robbing and defrauding innocent people.\n Money was transferred from my account via debit card, and through an intermediary named\nBitcoin Of America in the total amount of XXXX XXXX USD utilizing your services.\n This letter shall thrust into the spotlight, inter alia, the increasingly important role financial\ninstitutions play in the fight against financial crime and fraud, and the pressing need for higher\nlevels of supervision and vigilance within your organization.\n Additionally, it is vital that you will immediately take all actions within your power to remedy the\nsituation, whether by raising chargeback in respect of the transaction in question or reimbursing\nme and crediting my account, for the full amount of these payments, in the total amount of XXXX XXXX USD\n Heres an indisputable fact: had you looked at the wider circumstances surrounding the abovereferenced transaction, this illicit transfer of wealth could have been prevented.\n Executing transactions without proper authority is not only a severe regulatory offense but also\nan irresponsible and reckless disregard for the customers financial safety.\n1 FCA: A more effective approach to combatting financial crime (XX/XX/XXXX)\nPage 2 of 7 XX/XX/XXXX \n2 \n Against this background, and without derogating any of my rights, I hereby hold you liable for\nfinancial and emotional harm as well as medical problems relating to this victimization and\ndemand that you reimburse my account in full within 10 days from the date of this letter.\nINTRODUCTION\nFinancial crimes and fraud investigations often involve a high degree of sophistication, complexity, and \nsensitivity to detail. Accordingly, this letter aims to address the issue at hand as profoundly and fairly as \npossible, by taking into consideration contextual regulations, laws, and bylaws, as well as guidance, \nstandards, and rules promoted by supervisory authorities, relevant codes of practice and (where \nsuitable) what was good industry practice (GIP) at all times relevant hereto. The allegations contained \nherein are predicated either upon knowledge with respect to myself and my own experience or upon \nfacts obtained through investigations conducted by qualified third parties. I strongly believe that \nsubstantive evidence in support of the allegations set forth herein will be found after an appropriate \nopportunity for discovery. Key facts supporting the allegations contained herein are known only to the \nScammer or/and are exclusively within their control.\nI did not know, and through the exercise of reasonable diligence could not have discovered, the \nfraud that was being perpetrated upon myself by the Scammer. Fraud is commonly conceptualized \nas withholding from the weaker party in a financial transaction information which is necessary to make \nan informed, rational or autonomous decision.\nIn this regard, even access to adequate information is insufficient to achieve complete autonomy. A \ncomplication here is that the weaker party might have trouble analyzing the data at hand sufficiently well \nto identify fraudulent schemes. A reasonable solution is that financial institutions would be required \nto promote transparent communication in which they track the understanding of its customers. \nThe false representations and omissions made by the Scammer have a tendency or capacity to deceive \nvictims, such as myself, into unwittingly providing funds that fueled the Scammers fraudulent scheme \nand therefore are, by their very nature immoral, unethical, oppressive, unscrupulous, and substantially \ninjurious to consumersall at once.\nAs a result of the Scammers deceptive practices, I was deceived into transferring my funds to them. The \nfalse statements of material facts and omissions as described above; and the sham transaction(s) the \nScammer perpetrated upon myself; were unfair, unconscionable, and deceptive practices perpetrated on \nme which would have likely tricked a reasonable person under the circumstances.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-06-20T02:01:40.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Virtual currency","zip_code":"92071","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7135443","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2023-06-20T01:04:48.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I \ncomprehensively provided explanations and proof to my claim, even so, CHASE BANK never acknowledged my complaint,\ntherefore, I have approached you CFPB and I would <em>like</em> to receive your assistance on this matter.\nGeneral Obligation:\nCommencing on or about XX/XX/XXXX, I fell victim to a <em>multi</em>-layered scam operation orchestrated by XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, \nand XXXX XXXX (the Scammers), all of which aim at contributing to the goal of robbing and defrauding innocent people."]},"sort":[4.654552,"7135443"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10794902","_score":3.0411458,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"Page XXXX of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) 1500 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Washington, DC XXXX\n[WITHOUT PREJUDICE]\nURGENCY: HIGH\nIMPORTANCE: HIGH\nThis is to complain against U. S. Bank.\nU. S. Bank account ending in: XXXX\nI wish to practice my right as a customer of U. S. Bank to use your organisation's service, seeking a\nformal, impartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute with U. S. Bank.\nIn order to clear up the myriad of letters and correspondences I have hitherto sent to U. S. Bank\nrespecting my complaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding,\nby taking a deeper look at the happenings of my case, and analysing the relevant facts in an objective and\ncomprehensive fashion.\nIt is crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially-engineered and coerced to engage these\nfraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognise that I am the victim of an investment scam.\nMy complaint to the CFPB has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct\nof U. S. Bank to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. They sell a\nservice to look after their customers, protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a\ntraditional relationship and way of working with its customers.\nDuring the complaints process with U. S. Bank, I found their communication ineffective, which further\nhides their conduct to management and diminishes the service offering to their clients. They are\nstruggling to adapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is\npresenting a real problem which they choose to manage in a way which is not in line with rules and\nregulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients.\nGeneral Obligation:\nCommencing on or about XXXX  2024, I fell victim to a multi-layered scam operations run by DML Markets under the domain m.dml-markets.cc which involved me making deposits for a total amount of XXXX  USD from my U. S. Bank account to fraudulent investment firm(s).\nWhen determining whats reasonable and fair, we should focus on the issue of liability; common queries\ninclude, but are not limited to, the following (i) whether U. S. Bank did not take notice of any rule, law, or\nregulation, and/or possibly missed any material elements of the relevant bylaws or codes of conduct, that\nmay have prevented them from protecting my financial safety; (ii) whether by virtue of U. S. Banks\nPage XXXX of XXXX\nXX/XX/2024\ncustodianship over my funds or by its control over them, they owed a fiduciary duty to the me and if so,\nwhether that duty was breached; (iii) whether U. S. Bank promoted the transaction(s) in question despite\nbeing aware of the nature of the transaction(s) in question (iv) whether U. S. Bank was in compliance\nwith its own policies and procedures; (v) whether U. S. Bank owed duties to myself, what the scope of\nthose duties was, and whether U. S. Bank did not uphold those duties; (vi) whether U. S. Banks conduct\nwas unfair; and (vii) whether U. S. Bank has within its power the ability to, and should, compensate me\nfor the harm that has befallen me.\nUpon identification of such unusual or suspicious activity, it is crucial that the relevant staff member\nadequately describe the factors making an activity or transaction suspicious, thoroughly depict the extent\nand nature of this activity and properly communicate to the customer that such activity meets the relevant\ncriteria of fraud.\nIn providing its services to a customer, a financial institution is required by law to exercise the care and\nskill of a diligent, prudent banker. In this case, this means that the payment service provider should not\nturn a blind eye to known facts pointing to a real possibility that their customer is being scammed. In\nother words, U. S. Bank must have had special knowledge of what was occurring or been alerted to a real\npossibility of fraud taking place. The financial institution must have known or reasonably ought to have\nknown that I was dealing with a scammer.\nGranted, there is room for diversity of view insofar as reasonableness is concerned. Indeed, there is a\nsense in which the standard of care of the reasonable person involves in its application a subjective\nelement.\nHowever, it must be remembered that the correct test is always reasonable care in all circumstances, not\naverage care. The fact that most people behave in a certain way may be good evidence that the conduct is\nreasonable, but this is not necessarily the case. Although reasonableness is a very fluid concept, all of\nthe evidence suggests that U. S. Bank did not foresee the fraud and disregarded even the most obvious\ndangers in this respect.\nSituations do tend to repeat themselves and it is advisable to examine previous outcomes to see how the\nstandard of the reasonable person should be applied, and that lessons can be learnt from the errors of the\npast.\nU. S. Banks Position:\nOnXX/XX/2024 U. S. Bank wrote in a letter We regret any frustration or inconvenience this matter\nmay have caused you. We understand that being the victim of a scam can be confusing, time consuming,\nand inconvenient.\nUpon receiving your request for assistance, our records confirm two claims were opened with our Wire\nDepartment on XXXX XXXX which debited your account ending XXXX  on XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX in the amounts\nof XXXX and XXXX  A request was sent to the beneficiary bank for recall of these funds.\nPlease know, the receiving institution is not obligated to return these funds or respond to our request. The\nelapsed time from the time of the transfers to the time of the claim submission limits the chances of\nrecalling the funds. We recommend you also continue working directly with your local law enforcement\nofficials to attempt to recover your money from the beneficiary of this payment.\nPage XXXX of XXXX\nXX/XX/2024Refuting U. S. Banks arguments from a purely logical perspective:\nU. S. Banks position is that the features of the situation at hand do not generate a genuine obligation to\nprotect innocent and helpless victims; they are essentially arguing that common-sense-based approaches\nare doomed to fail, leaving their exclusively technical account of the subject matter as the only\nmeaningful choice. For reasons which are unclear, this extremely serious situation barely gets the\nattention it deserves even though ample evidence has been offered in support of this complaint.\nIn U. S. Banks view, it is implied that we should not home in (and consequently rely) on unwritten laws,\npracticality, good judgement, reasonableness, sharpness, sensibleness, past outcomes, and insight, when\ntaking appropriate precautions. To underscore, once again, such views are at odds with common sense\nand are wildly irresponsible.\nImagine a view according to which the one and only thing that can make U. S. Bank morally obligated to\ndo something is having it written down somewhere. Pursuant to this view, if U. S. Bank encounter the\nsuffering of totally naive victims, they are only obligated to intervene in or remedy the situation, to the\ndegree required by written material. This is unbecoming for a reputable establishment such as U. S. Bank.\nI have reviewed the material hereto sent by U. S. Bank carefully, and it unfortunately provides no\nresponse to my fundamental argument concerning the degree of care. Given its size, influence, and the\nresources at its disposal, this establishment clearly had a far greater capacity than an individual such as\nmyself had, to determine the level and likelihood of risk that a client such as myself is subjected to and\nhad a duty to intervene as they now do to query in particular out-of-pattern transactions of this kind.\nIt is perfectly obvious that U. S. Bank, inadvertently, employs a subtle approach in addressing some of the\nkey questions in a manner which neither provides me with adequate support nor protects anything other\nthan its own interests.\nIt is U. S. Bank here, who has the burden of proof, to show that it has exercised the duty of care, that is to\nsay, that U. S. Bank adhered to a standard of reasonable care in relation to the matter at issue given its\nextensive experience compared to mine. It is U. S. Bank that claims that the damages which I have\nsuffered in connection to this matter have not been reasonably foreseeable, and that my proposed degree\nof care is not, and has not been, commensurate with U. S. Banks capacity, experience, expertise, or scope\nof services in any way. To reemphasize, U. S. Banks indisputable overriding purpose is by no means to\npurely execute transactions in a blind and blank fashion, but rather to strike a balance between executing\nthose transactions and capitalising on its undeniably vast capabilities to protect consumers thereby\nenhancing market integrity.\nApropos of the fluidity of the concept of reasonableness, all U. S. Bank has done in this regard is set up a\ndichotomy of having or not having the legal obligation under consideration, however, that does not go\none-inch toward explaining why various regulatory authorities, has maintained that financial institutions\ncan, and should, protect consumers using their systems, advanced technologies, and rich experience.\nU. S. Bank is obliged to take some action if it is sufficiently aware of a real possibility that a fraud may\nbe being perpetuated. If you don't question its customers instructions or raise the possibility of a scam\nwith the customer in these circumstances, it may be liable if the red flags indicate the customer is:\n particularly vulnerable, or\nPage XXXX of XXXX  XX/XX/2024\n if the possibility of fraud was serious or real, not just suspected.\nThere are some recommendations to organisations for protecting customers from financial harm that\nmight occur as a result of fraud or financial abuse; and gives guidance on how to recognise customers\nwho might be at risk, how to assess the potential risks to the individual and how to take the necessary\nactions to prevent or minimise financial harm.\nThese recommendations are established as a general principle, the organisation should deliver a\nservice that:\nXXXX) Takes a proactive approach to minimising risks, impact and incidences of financial harm and it\nsets out systems and tools for the prevention and detection of fraud and financial abuse. As a general\npoint, it says organisations should ensure that all systems are developed using technologies and\nmethodologies that are effective in the prevention of fraud and financial abuse, through authorised\nand unauthorised payments, thereby minimising the risk of financial harm to customers. As regards to\nthe detection of fraud and financial abuse, it says the organisation:\nA) should have measures in place across all payment channels and products to detect suspicious\ntransactions or activities that might indicate fraud or financial abuse. It then lists the following\nexamples of suspicious activity on customer accounts:\na. multiple cheque books;\nb. sudden increased spending;\nc. transfers to other accounts;\nd. multiple password attempts;\ne. logins from new devices, multiple geographical locations;\nf. sudden changes to the operation of the account; Unusual transactions are\ntransactions whose amount, characteristics and frequency bear no relation to the\neconomic activity of the customer, exceed normal market parameters or have no\napparent legal justification.\ng. a withdrawal or payment for a large amount;\nh. a payment or series of payments to a new payee;\ni. financial activity that matches a known method of fraud or financial abuse.\nB) organisations should have a process in place to ensure that staff make contact with the\ncustomer to verify the financial activity, challenge its authenticity, explain the nature of the\nsuspected or detected fraud and discuss an appropriate plan of action.\nU. S. Bank are yet to show, or otherwise provide me with, a compelling argument that their wide-ranging\nexperience and wealth of specialist knowledge in detecting transactional anomalies were not sufficient to\navert the fraud at issue. By contrast, I have provided a multitude of sound and powerful reasons by which\nPage XXXX of XXXX\nXX/XX/2024requiring their involvement has not only been pressingly relevant but also eminently reasonable and well-\njustified.\nRather than empathising with and undertaking substantial efforts to convey their knowledge of the\nexistence of such regulations abroad and thereafter use it to protect and proactively relieve the plight of\nconsumers who have been cheated out of their money and whose role in society is properly fulfilled,\npositively contributing to local economic growth, development and sustainability  U. S. Bank adopts a\nrather insouciant attitude toward my financial predicament portrayed herein.\nI am deeply convinced that the disastrous results that I have previously elaborated upon will continue to\nensue if no responsibility is adopted by U. S. Bank in relation to this matter. I have also thoroughly\ndetailed why they cannot simply dismiss this problem by strictly adhering to legal technicalities which,\nafter careful reflection, struck me as being nothing more than self-interest. Indeed, it seems to me utterly\nunfair to disregard fragile, sensitive, and vulnerable consumers who are afflicted by such allegedly\nmalevolent acts, thereby keeping an unjust status-quo that is corrupting our society at its core.\nConclusion:\nBased on my analysis, and as confirmed by various authorities concerned with such matters, there is\nabundant evidence that forward-thinking financial institutions ought to take reasonable steps to forestall\nfraud, or at least mitigate its risk by using an effective risk management system, demonstrating their\nundisputed ability to responsibly and pre-emptively respond to questionable transactions in the digital\narena. The use of such systems, largely based on newly adopted technologies aimed at effectively\nnavigating the evolving threat landscape, is only one of a number of possible endeavours undertaken in\nthis connection, alongside the application of past knowledge and experience related to popular fraudulent\npractices.\nAstonishingly, I am pondering how it is that, despite being shown that U. S. Banks business conduct was\ninsufficient insofar as background checks are concerned, they keep refuting their indisputable role and\nresponsibility in connection with the matter herein discussed. The points that I have hitherto made are too\ncrucial to be taken lightly. U. S. Banks non-observance of the fundamental principles of justice  that is,\nto completely overlook and not even remotely try to mitigate the suffering of vulnerable consumers is\ninexcusable given the size of the establishment and the vast resources at its disposal as the direct result of\nthe patronage of clients like myself.\nIf it was, indeed, solely my responsibility, we must then believe at least one of the following clauses: a)\nfinancial institutions have absolutely no role whatsoever in preventing and detecting fraud, b) the fraud in\nquestion was not reasonably foreseeable, or c) the transactions in question were not sufficiently alarming.\nIt is extremely unfortunate that U. S. Bank pushes quite hard for me to believe all three of these things\ndespite evidence to the contrary.\nIn summary, I respectively ask your organisation to consider my points, given your personal and\ncompanywide obligation to provide a fair and reasonable investigation into the complaint.\nI look forward to your input and would gladly cooperate to reach a fair and reasonable outcome.\nThank you.\nXXXX XXXX XXXX  Page XXXX of XXXXXX/XX/2024\nTHE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK\nDemand for Return of Funds\nXX/XX/2024\nU.S. Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX MN XXXX Re: XXXX XXXX XXXX Account number: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Demand for Return of Funds Dear XXXX  or XXXX, I am writing to you concerning my account referenced above to notify you that the transactions described below were fraudulent, and to demand that funds in the amount of XXXX  be returned immediately.\nThe Transactions\nI made the following transfers from the Account:\nDate Amount Recipient InstitutionXX/XX/2024 XXXX XXXX  XX/XX/2024 XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\nAll of the foregoing transfers were the result of fraud. Specifically, I bonded with an individual online and\ngot introduced to investing in a seemingly innocent manner. She directed me to a carefully replicated\nXXXX  Markets website, under the domain m.dml-markets.cc. Initially, I seemed to be profiting from my\ninvestments, according to their platform. However, I was later notified that my account and funds had\nbeen frozen due to suspicious activity and leveraged on my trust and fear of slipping into an unfortunate\nfinancial situation, successfully tricking me into depositing additional funds in order to resolve the issue.\nUltimately, I was unable to complete further transfer requests they made. Despite the highly irregular\nnature of these transactions compared to my usual patterns, I was never approached for clarification by\nany institution involved.\nPlease note the following:\n I have never transacted with cryptocurrency in such a manner before.\n The pattern of the Transactions fits within well-known fraudulent schemes.\n I am an elderly individual.\n The bank failed to implement adequate safeguards to protect elderly customers from known fraud\nschemes, potentially violating the \"reasonable security\" standard under various state laws.\n The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's guidelines on preventing elder financial abuse\nsuggest that banks should have systems in place to detect and prevent this type of fraud\n The bank did not attempt to contact me to verify this large, unusual transaction before processing\nit, which may be considered a failure in their duty of care.\nDemand for Return of Funds\nBasis For Demand\nThe foregoing Transactions were fraudulent, and I am therefore entitled to have the amounts set forth\nabove returned to my account pursuant to the representations made by you. See XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX. Further, the Transactions had all the clear markings of well-known scams, about which you have been\nrepeatedly warned by law enforcement and other government agencies. Your facilitation of the\nTransactions is another basis for the return of the Funds. See XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX (applying the should have known standard under statute); see alsoXXXX 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 XXXXXX/XX/XXXX).\nRight to File Claim\nNothing in this letter should be construed as a waiver of my rights to damages not expressly set forth\nherein. It is my hope that the Funds are returned quickly, and that no further action is necessary.\nIf we cannot reach a resolution, then I will have no choice but to file an arbitration claim pursuant to your\nterms and conditions.\n\nu s D a n K . XXXX XXXX  CA XXXX U.S. BANK SMARTLY CHECKING U.S. Bank National Association Card Withdrawals (continued) Card Number: XXXX Date Description of Transaction R e f Number Uni-Statement Account Number: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Statement Period: XXXX XXXX XXXX through XXXX XXXX XXXX\nPage XXXX of XXXX\n(CONTINUED)\nAccount Number XXXX\nAmount\nCard XXXX Withdrawals Subtotal\nTotal Card Withdrawals\nRef Number\nXXXX XXXX\nOther Withdrawals\nDate Description of Transaction XXXX XXXX Electronic Withdrawal\nREF=XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX  Electronic Withdrawal\nREF=XXXX XXXX XXXX Wire Transfer Fee XXXX XXXX Wire  Debit XXXX\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX SA\nChecks Presented Conventionally\nCheck\nXXXX\nDate Ref Number XXXX XXXX XXXX  Amount XXXX  Check\nXXXX  Total Other Withdrawals\nDate\nXXXX XXXX  $\nRef NumbeXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Amount XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX-\nAmount XXXX\nu s b a n k JXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CA XXXXXXXX\nU.S. BANK SMARTLY CHECKING\nU.S. Bank National Association\nCard Withdrawals (continued)\nCard Number: XXXXXXXX\nDate Description of Transaction Ref Number\nUni-Statement\nAccount Number:\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\nStatement Period:\nXXXX XXXX XXXX through\nXXXX XXXX XXXX\nPage XXXX of XXXX XXXXCONTINUED)\nAccount Number XXXX\nAmount\nOther Withdrawals\nDate Description of Transaction\nXXXX XXXX Electronic Withdrawal\nREF=XXXX\nCard XXXX  Withdrawals Subtotal\nTotal Card Withdrawals\nRef Number\nTo XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX-\nA m o u n t\nXXXX XXXX XXXX  Wire Transier Fee XXXX XXXX  Wire Debit REFXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Electronic Withdrawal\nREF=XXXX XXXX XXXX Electronic Withdrawal\nREF=XXXX\nXXXX XXXX Electronic Withdrawal\nREF=XXXX XXXX\nChecks Presented Conventionally\nCheck Date Ref Number\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  Total Other Withdrawals\nAmount\nXXXX  Check XXXX Date Ref Number\nXXXX XXXX XXXX  Conventional Checks Paid (2)\n\n\nu s b a n k .\nusbankXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CA XXXX  Re: Account ending in XXXX\nDear XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX:\nThe Office of the President received your request for assistance. We appreciate the opportunity to respond to your\nc o n c e r n s .\nWe regret any frustration or inconvenience this matter may have caused you. We understand that being the victim of a\nscam can be confusing, time consuming, and inconvenient.\nUpon receiving your request for assistance, our records confirm two claims were opened with our Wire Department on\nXXXX XXXX  which debited your account ending XXXX on XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in the amounts of XXXX XXXX XXXX. A\nrequest was sent to the beneficiary bank for recall of these funds.\nPlease know, the receiving institution is not obligated to return these funds or respond to our request. The elapsed time\nfrom the time of the transfers to the time of the claim submission limits the chances of recalling the funds. We\nrecommend you also continue working directly with your local law enforcement officials to attempt to recover your\nmoney from the beneficiary of this payment.\nPlease refer to the section of the Your Deposit Account Agreement (Agreement) titled Funds Transfers, which states, \"A\nwire transfer is irrevocable once payment has been transmitted to the beneficiary's bank. At your request, we may\nrequest that the beneficiary's bank return funds previously transferred. However, you acknowledge that the beneficiary's\nbank is under no obligation to comply with this request.\" The most current copy of the Agreement is available on\nusbank.com or at your local U.S. Bank branch. The Agreement is also included with the documentation provided when a\nnew account is opened.\nOur customers are generally protected from liability for unauthorized transactions or fraud. Any transactions you initiate\nare considered authorized by you. Also, if you send funds to someone for products or services, and they fail to deliver the\ndesired service, it becomes a civil matter and unfortunately falls outside of our ability to recover those funds. We\nrecommend you continue to work with the recipient of the funds to request a refund. You may also consider working with\nyour local law enforcement officials to attempt to recover your money from the beneficiary of this payment.\nIn your correspondence you enclosed a statement and mention four additional fraudulent transfers on your account\nending XXXX  in the amounts oXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Please note, we were unable to locate any claims on\nthe transactions mentioned above. If there are transactions you believe should be disputed, please contact our Fraud\nDispute Intake team at XXXX to file a claim, where representatives are available to assist you XXXX  hours a day,\nseven days a week (we accept relay calls).\nAdditionally, in your correspondence you also expressed concern regarding our alleged failure to prevent the above\ntransactions from occurring. A review of the wire interaction confirmed the branch representative asked appropriate\nverification questions and determined you had previously sent similar wires.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-11-14T21:28:16.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Mobile or digital wallet","zip_code":"92027","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10794902","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"U.S. BANCORP","date_received":"2024-11-14T21:06:04.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The bank failed to implement adequate safeguards to protect elderly customers from known fraud\nschemes, potentially violating the \"reasonable <em>security</em>\" standard under various state laws."]},"sort":[3.0411458,"10794902"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"20096492","_score":2.8728466,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"XXXXNelnet, my student loan provider, has continued to get away with breaking the federal law that relates to student loan borrowers with disabilities. Living in a state that\\'s already currently under investigation for billions of dollars in XXXX  fraud (XXXX), it\\'s already difficult and impossible for me to have to defend my civil rights from Nelnet when every single day of my life I have to defend my civil rights 1 million + ways from predatory corrupt neurotypical individuals who are deliberately trying to financially exploit neurodivergent vulnerable adults, while I already have multiple disabilities that have long been documented and which make it extremely difficult to balance multiple tasks simultaneously. \\n\\nAs I\\'m still currently enrolled in a 4-credit college course, trying to finish my college degree, neurotypical college students don\\'t end up getting illegally evicted from 5 different apartments simply for doing their assigned college homework. I\\'ve been evicted from 5 different apartment programs in my state that exclusively only house neurodivergent residents who at a bare minimum at least receive state XXXX, oftentimes Social Security and XXXX as well. Residents are then forced to have multiple mental healthcare meetings each week with numerous service providers, meetings that are specifically designed to waste their time and not work to improve their disabling conditions. By ensuring that every spare second of our time is bombarded with pointless meetings that do absolutely nothing to improve our disabling conditions, residents continue to stay in the same disability housing setting (termed ICS, or Integrated Community Supports, a statewide housing program for disabled citizens in the state of XXXX  who receive XXXX  from the state; just last week during XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXestimony in front of Congress, ICS was verbally cited as being one of the many programs riddled with fraudulent XXXX  practices). \\n\\nWhen residents remain in the same ICS housing settings for years on end, forced to go absolutely nowhere with their life, this allows all kinds of corrupt service providers to continue a long pattern of years and years of fraudulent XXXX  billing. When residents such as myself attempt to engage in activities that would see them graduate and leave from these type of ICS settings within a small handful of years, (e.g. trying to earn a college education), such residents are punished illegally with eviction, which subsequently allows the service provider to house a different neurodivergent Medicaid recipient, perhaps one who has no qualms with receiving the same corrupt services for decades on end so as to ensure the XXXX fraud continues long term. I can\\'t succeed at college when I have 6-7+ assigned corrupt service providers all repeatedly harassing me for 10+ hours of meetings each and every week (totaling to more than 60-70+ hours of meetings every week, with each of these service providers actively engaged in committing XXXX  fraud).\\n\\nMedicaid fraud isn\\'t only committed in cases where XXXX  has been billed without any services having actually been rendered to the disabled client; in cases where services have been received, but the stated and documented goals and outcomes of those services are completely ignored in favor of creating a scenario that ensures the disabled recipient remains a sitting duck for decades on end so as not to disrupt Medicaid billing, such behavior should be considered fraudulent XXXX  billing practices as well.\\n\\nAside from being retaliated against for doing my college homework, I\\'ve also had to put up with a state ICS program run by sexual predators, as both the ICS group homes and supportive apartment settings are commonly staffed by previously registered and convicted sex offenders who go frequently go unpunished for commonplace abuses such as the forceful rape and impregnation of neurodiverse residents, ICS staff who come to work and physically choke neurodiverse residents while said ICS staff member is high on illegal drugs such as cocaine. While receiving Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) from 2011-2024, I\\'ve had numerous corrupt, large-size employers who have deliberately gotten away with interfering with my ability to attend my scheduled college courses, college courses that were being paid with student loan money. I highly doubt neurotypical college students have had to endure threats of \"I\\'ll shoot you dead with a gun if you punch out and leave at the end of your shift\" from management while working at a Potbelly Sandwich Shop, simply because they\\'re trying to punch out at the end of their scheduled work shift so that they can get to their classes at their local community college on time. Time and again I\\'ve come across corrupt employers who have deliberately tried to interfere with my ability to make it to my scheduled college classes in a timely manner, while also simultaneously getting away with repeat serious violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act, under which I\\'ve been covered (and continued to be covered this entire time). Guns being physically held to my head by neurotypical gang members who were allowed to erroneously infiltrate my first ICS apartment, having upwards of 6-7+ corrupt social workers who each engage in repeat, unreasonable harassment tactics whenever I\\'m unable to immediately answer their phone calls: assigned job coaches who  work exclusively with neurodivergent individuals and who are paid exclusively via their neurodivergent client\\'s XXXX package, leaving a total of two voicemails, one text message to my phone, one email sent to me directly, and yet a separate email sent to another one of my service providers (thus attempting to complain and have a third party service provider step in and join the barrage of repeat harassment), all within a time span of less than 24 hours. Even when I\\'m on punched-in, on the clock in the middle of a shift at work, working a part-time job as a part of XXXX designated Ticket to Work program for Medicaid recipients, with managers complaining about how I could get potentially be fired for using my phone while on the clock at work.\\n\\nI\\'ve had to deal with all of the above aforementioned civil rights abuses and much, much more, to the point where there isn\\'t adequate space and time to list all of the myriad examples of civil rights abuses I end up having to endure on any given day of any week. And then I have Nelnet deliberately choosing to waste and abuse my time, while also adding to the list of neurotypical predators trying to exploit neurodivergent vulnerable adults (as I\\'ve officially been considered a vulnerable adult by the state of XXXX  since XXXX, and continuing). From XXXX, I\\'d sent Nelnet numerous benefit verification letters which I\\'d directly downloaded from XXXX. These letters not only feature official stationery letterheads from the Social Security Administration, but also detailed the exact amounts monthly SSDI benefits I\\'d been receiving at the time, as well as the most recent date (the exact day that download of the verification letter had occurred). Not once in that time period did Nelnet keep such documentation on file. Not once from XXXX did Nelent bother to inquire as to whether or not I was still receiving SSDI, XXXX  and XXXX  on an annual basis. The only documentation that Nelnet ever bothered to provide me with, outside of verification from Nelnet that payment of my student loans either been placed into in-school forbearance, or during the numerous instances in which Id been academically suspended as a result of the numerous unfair civil rights violations Im forced to endure repeatedly (e.g. I cant earn good grades when Im suddenly evicted from my apartment and made to be homeless in the middle of an academic semester, simply for trying to do my assigned college homework)  Nelnet would send official notices/documentation that my account had been placed on some sort of temporary pause of payments.\\n\\nEither way, Nelnets behavior repeatedly worked to deliberately ensure that most amount of capital interest could be applied on the student loans that I owe. When I would inquire about student loan dismissal for long-term neurodivergent borrowers receiving government assistance such as SSDI, XXXX  and XXXX  for long-term, extended periods (such as myself), Nelnet would repeatedly and deliberately tell me lies and provide me with inaccurate information about the loan dismissal program. Today, Nelnet is repeatedly continuing to violate my civil rights and harass me for XXXX per month in student loan payments that clearly are well-aware that I cant afford. All of these disability government programs  SSDI, XXXX  and XXXX   have set gross monthly income limits that recipients are allowed to earn. Thanks to Nelnets repeated lies and harassment tactics, Ive officially been illegally kicked off SSDI, forced to participate in an education program that has my current employer, Starbucks, pay 100% of my tuition provided that I work a minimum of 22 hours per week on average. \\nThanks to Nelnets repeated lies over the years concerning disability dismissal of my student loans (as well as their repeat harassment whenever Im not enrolled in college courses for at least 6 credits, most likely due to a combination of civil rights violations/unfair time bombardment/eviction as a result of attempting to do my college homework), Ive been forced to participate in the education program XXXX  has to offer. I have no undergraduate funding left available to me when it comes to student loans. Although I frequently experience numerous weeks on end where I only receive as little as 10 hours of sleep per week, as a direct result of a combination of my having to put up with an unfair combination of weekly-assigned college homework/numerous civil rights infractions/unfair time bombardment/repeat homelessness. Ive had to work harder than any neurotypical college student who in this country who has had the fortune of having their civil rights protected, yet I have no college degree to show for all of my ridiculously insane degree of responsibility and effort put forth. One might easily see how XXXX in student loan undergraduate funding rapidly gets used up when civil rights issues that directly impact the usefulness of such funds arent being protected (e.g. Im being threatened with gun violence from my employer because Im trying to leave at the end of my scheduled work shift so that I can attend my college courses on-campus; being evicted from my apartment for doing my assigned college homework). \\nWhile having to work a total of 22 hours per week in order to maintain my scholarship from XXXX, the state of XXXX, already as corrupt as it is when it comes to disability services rendered within the state, has continued to mandate small incremental involuntary pay raises for the position that I hold at XXXX (XXXX). These pay raises were received regardless of the fact that in the five years that Ive been employed with XXXX, neither my job title nor my responsibilities have increased. Furthermore, every single day which Im scheduled to work, my disabilities cause myriad problems just in terms of my ability to even be able to perform all of the normal duties and tasks generally assigned to the role of XXXX  at XXXX. I cant make drinks due to an unfair combination of the extremely fast-paced working environment which places extreme amounts of strain on documented disabilities such as XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. As is commonplace among individuals diagnosed with XXXX, my short-term memory is completely shot. Because my long-term memory is extremely acute (to the point where Ive had to remind my own mother of incidents that occurred at the young age of XXXX XXXX XXXX, down to the specific smells, colors of and textures of various objects, etc., [while neurotypicals habitually struggle to recall even a generic outline of events that occurred before they were aged XXXX XXXX XXXX, let alone myriad details such as remembering specific colors, textures, smells, etc.]), which is considered a commonplace trait of XXXX, my short-term memory is extremely inadequate and lacking as a result. \\n\\nWhile Ive been trying to earn a degree heavily focused on developing AI systems and working with AI Agents (work that would fall more in-line/be far easier for an individual who possesses extreme acute long-term memory), working as a XXXX  at XXXX  means that I frequently forget long lists of verbal drink modifications or instructions that might be spouted off to me by customers after theyve already placed their orders. Short-term memory (or working memory, as its officially called), directly governs ones ability to both interpret and successfully recall verbal instructions. Pair this with the fact that having an extremely fast-paced working environment that places emphasis on ones ability to multi-task is an extremely difficult and disastrous environment for anyone formally diagnosed with XXXX, let alone just XXXX, and one might begin to understand why its difficult for me to work the type of jobs Im eligible to apply for without having received a successful college education and training. And hence why earning my college degree would most likely make work much easier for me, work thats tailored to my specific conditions and talents. \\n\\nAs such, XXXX  has been forced to provide me with small incremental pay raises, while at the exact same time Im unable to perform more than 10% of the descriptive job duties for my assigned position/role within the company (XXXX). Each day that I work, Im relegated to handing out change and beverages and food at the Drive-Thru window or doing cleaning tasks around my store. Other XXXX  receiving the same level of hourly pay I receive are able to complete these same tasks and more, namely make drinks, which constitutes the sole major function of the role of XXXX, and would undoubtedly serve as the chief business stratagem of the company (the ability to make coffee drinks for a fast-paced coffee restaurant/coffeehouse whose chief products of sale revolve around various flavors of coffee). This is the scenario that ended up getting me kicked off my SSDI benefits in XXXX XXXX, a scenario exacerbated just as much by Nelnets repeated lies as it is the fraudulent XXXX  practices that have been continuing to occur in my state for decades on end.\\n\\nAs of todays date, I currently still receive both XXXX  and XXXX. My rent has continued to increase annually every single XXXX  for the same one-bedroom apartment that Ive been renting from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  for the last four years, with XXXX working in partnership with ICS provider XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  to provide apartments exclusively to XXXX  clientele. My rent has now skyrocketed to the point where it conflicts with the limited earned income guidelines for my XXXX  package. My XXXX  package is also used to pay for such services as the new pair of eyeglasses I just picked up last week, eyeglasses which I would be unable to afford without my XXXX, and which would also end being another factor that would limit both my ability to successfully work a job or succeed in school (not having access to eyeglasses that adequately correct my vision problems). My XXXX  package is also used to pay for all of the XXXX  rides (rideshare) that I take to and from work each day that Im scheduled to work, as Im currently enrolled in a program known as XXXX  XXXX, a program that sees XXXX  County provide a given amount of XXXX  rideshare funds each month ($1,500) so that I can have access to get back-and-forth to work and other places that I need to go. My job is approximately a 30-minute drive from my current apartment. While I could try to apply for working at a XXXX  location thats closer to my current apartment, the corrupt and fraudulent behavior perpetrated by mental health care and other XXXX  service providers in my state, namely the behavior of the corrupt job coaches Id cited above (who themselves receive payment via my XXXX  package), my relocating to a different store means that I would potentially be exposed to insensitive and corrupt co-workers and management, while of course XXXX  has a long track record of failing to protect my civil rights when it comes to matters of employment, just as well.\\n\\nToday, Im currently looking for more affordable ICS housing options. Im currently paying being forced to pay out of pocket for one class per semester at one of my local community colleges (as thats all I can currently afford to pay, while Nelnet, just like everyone else, has continued to get away with civil rights violations of neurodivergent borrowers). Unfortunately, I lost my XXXX  scholarship to XXXX, thanks half in part to my having to deal with faulty laptop equipment that Id used part of the very last of my undergraduate loans to purchase a laptop from Dell, as well as on the part of Nelnets deceitful practices. XXXX  partners with AXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for its educational program. Thus, XXXX educational program only pays 100% tuition for XXXX  employees who specifically attend XXXX  through their online platforms only; XXXX  doesnt pay for any on-campus classes taken at XXXX. XXXX online programs are all accelerated programs; each program takes the exact same amount of a complete, full, four-month semester of classwork and then crams this four-month semester worth of work into 7.5 week-long trimesters for XXXX  online students.\\n\\nIn the latter half of my online Bachelors in IT program, the portion that assigns me direct lab work with AI agents, Big Data analyzation and whatnot, Im allowed to take online courses at the four-month semester format. Until I get to those types of classes within my undergraduate program, classes found to be at the 400-numbered level of classwork, my only option is to take classes at the crammed 7.5 week-long trimester format. While attending XXXX  online, I was just barely able to reach the 200-level of course work within my degree program thanks largely in part to my having to ship my laptop back to XXXX  for repairs literally every 3-4 months over that duration of the last 1.5 years.  The scenario would be that at any given time, I would be enrolled in the middle of a trimester of multiple accelerated classes two separate 3-credit courses simultaneously each 7.5 week-long trimester to be exact. Id have either a high grade of around B+ or A- going at any given time within any trimester, when all of a sudden, the internal cabling in my laptop would go out, or one of the USB drives on my laptop would stop working, the BIOS of my laptop would no longer be able to receive necessary updates, etc. These incidents would often occur in the middle of a trimester, in which case Id have to wait to have a pre-packaged box sent out to me by XXXX, then I would have to ship my laptop in for repairs down to their headquarters in XXXX (thus sufficient time would have to be considered for my laptop to reach XXXX  headquarters all the way in XXXX, shipped from where I live in XXXX), then XXXX  would have to spend time performing any needed repairs, finally with subsequent time needed for me to receive my laptop shipped back to me from XXXX. \\n\\nBy that time, even if only lasting the duration of 1.5  2 weeks, my XXXX  grades would fall from circa an 88%- 95% B+ or A to well below the threshold for a 60% grade of D-. Seeing as how I needed at least a grade of C to pass all of my assigned classes, by the tie I would receive my laptop back from XXXX, Id have had to withdraw from my classes, as their wouldnt be enough time left for me to at least earn a passing grade of D-, let alone a C average. Even my repeatedly earning a borderline passing grade of D- (which wouldve ultimately served as an insufficient grade for me to be able to move onto the next set of classes, meaning I wouldve had to repeat such a class), wouldve eventually worked to see me placed on academic suspension from XXXX  along with subsequent loss of my XXXX  scholarship solely on account of low a low GPA. On the other hand, repeatedly withdrawing from the classes Id signed up for at the beginning of the trimester (which is the route I chose, given my two limited choices), eventually meant that Id ultimately end up on academic suspension with loss of my XXXX  scholarship solely on account of inadequate pace rate (completion rate of the classes Id originally signed up for at the beginning of each trimester).\\n\\nAs XXXX  does also offer a XXXX  plan to all of its full-time and part-time employees, a XXXX  plan which sees the company make substantial annual deposits of company stocks (termed RSUs, or Restricted Stock Units), any RSUs received from XXXX  dont vest until November of each year. This means that Im unable to turn my RSU units into cash until November of each year, something I planned to do so that I could purchase a backup laptop for school. This is where, yet again, Nelnets deceitful practices begin to unfairly come into play yet again. If Id simply tried to wait and refrain from signing up for any future classes at XXXX  until I could amass enough money from my XXXX  so that I could purchase a backup laptop (given the fact that my undergrad program at XXXX  has me working with all manner of complex and technically advance systems in order for me to complete my weekly assigned lab work, such requirements as running multiple virtual machines, cloud computing software and services from XXXX  and XXXX, Big Data software, and the running, processing and working with of AI agents [among many other technical requirements], I need a laptop with adequate RAM, VRAM, CPU processing power and GPU running and handing power). \\n\\nIn short, a XXXX  definitely would not have cut it. Just the  training, running and deployment of AI agents alone means someone would have to have a bare minimum some the lower-level of offerings in the line of the latest and greatest in GPU cards installed inside their laptop, along with the substantial amount of computer memory (both RAM and VRAM) needed for the training of complex AI agents. This means that I would usually have to spend upwards of XXXX XXXX on a laptop deemed adequate enough for my program. I didnt have the option of just sitting out for a couple of years so that Id be able pull ~ XXXX from my XXXX  to purchase a dependable, yet viable laptop sufficient for the type of work and purposes for which Id be using said laptop. Every time I wanted to wait and save enough money so that I could purchase another laptop, Nelnet would repeatedly harass me for monthly payments, already knowing full well that Id been continuing to receive SSDI, Medicare and Medicaid on a long-term basis. \\n\\nHere today, Nelnet still continues to harass me for monthly payments, even though Ive been struggling to pay for increase in rent for my apartment while having to limit my gross (not net, mind you) monthly earnings so that I can keep my apparently much needed Medicaid. Nelnet has deliberately trying to cheat  and exploit me out of every single one of my needed disability services. Instead of using my XXXX money to save for a the purchase of a reputable backup laptop (Ive since been able to purchase a light-weight HP laptop that had gone on sale for Black Friday in XXXX, as my XXXX  laptop is completely out of warranty and now longer functionable), Im currently using all of the money in my XXXX  each semester to pay for one class per semester at my local community college (as XXXX  wants me to pay out of pocket for 18 credits, which I can take at the community college level for far cheaper and subsequently transfer them in, before being allowed to once again use my XXXX  scholarship). XXXXXXXX  is trying to blame me for technical problems beyond my or any students control, let alone a disabled, low-income student at that. The community college at which Im currently enrolled does offer a full-ride scholarship that pays for 100% of a students tuition up to receipt of a  four-year Bachelors degree (a program which had not been offered the last time Id attended community college several years earlier, circa XXXX XXXX XXXX). Im having trouble with my local state community college system allowing me access to that scholarship, as they want to take for granted that all of my civil rights have been unfairly and unjustly violated time and again over the years, just for my having diligently trying to earn a college degree. My local community college wants to try to look at my historical academic record and try to hold me responsible for being put into unfair scenarios that neurotypical college students (against whom they unfairly compare and contrast my academic performance to) never have to endure a day in their life, such as being evicted and subsequently made to be homeless in the middle of an academic term simply for doing their assigned college homework. Then along comes Nelnet with their brand of civil rights violations against neurodivergent Americans who already have it hard and unfair enough to begin with in life. My monthly payment from Nelnet should be $0, and they should be forced to acknowledge the fact that my rent has continued to climb higher each year, while I frequently have a limited cap on the amount of monthly income I can earn as a result of services I need in order for me to be successful as a person with substantially documented disabilities. Nelnet is deliberately and repeatedly actively doing their part to make sure that fail whichever classes I most currently enrolled at the time, working alongside everyone else trying to violate my civil rights.\\n\\nAlong with this complaint, Ive attached an official verification letter from the Social Security Administration (again, this letter has todays date at the top, the same date  said verification letter was downloaded from their website, ssa.gov). Ive also attached my official ICS and service plan that is currently covered via my XXXX  package and rendered via services from the state of XXXX. Ive also attached a documentation from XXXX, the company that provides my XXXX  services here in the state of XXXX. Furthermore, Ive attached a picture of the most recent annual letter from my landlord, XXXX, stating  my annual increase in rental payments, as habitually increased every XXXX. Ive also sent a photo of a recent eviction letter I received from this same landlord as of last month as a result of my constant struggles to pay rent. Finally, Ive attached a picture of the schedule weekly schedule of assigned meeting hours Im supposed to have scheduled with ICS staff from my ICS provider XXXX, scheduled for this week (starting on todays daye of 3/9/2026). Keep in mind while all of the hours shown only add up to only 21 hours per week, such a schedule would be completely irrespective of the same amount of meeting hours unfairly demanded by my XXXX worker, two separate case managers, Housing Support coordinator (the state of Minnesota was recently forced to terminate its statewide Housing Support Program this past fall, a program that targeted neurodivergent XXXX  recipients, due to the sheer amount of XXXX  fraud having been committed in just the Housing Support Program alone). \\n\\nAs of the present, Ive fired  the majority of my service providers, as there currently isnt much these service providers can do in terms of further violating my civil rights, now that multiple public uproars and ensuing investigations have now been made and are continuing to be made at both the local state level, Federal national level and as well as the national mass media level concerning the ongoing XXXX  fraud being perpetrated in this country on a daily basis, with states such as XXXX  currently being brought to the forefront of such investigations. Additionally, my firsthand experience has only work to showcase how people often take for granted the civil rights and liberties they have personally afforded for them, and only care to see someone elses completely different and unique situation from the vantage point of their own privileged life circumstances (e.g. neither the people at Nelnet nor the neurotypical individuals staffed on the academic committees that governing both the academic and pace rate success of students at Americas post-secondary institutions care to take into consideration unjust, discriminatory and impossible scenarios which they themselves havent had to endure). \\nI have also uploaded a screenshot from my diagnostic packet received from XXXX  of XXXX, showcasing the late diagnoses I received in 2019 (the state of Minnesota had previously and illegally misdiagnosed me without having once communicated with me the extent of my original diagnoses, which have all been successfully refuted by XXXX  in XXXX). Also noteworthy is the fact that while XXXX  had spent a full 1.5 months of conducting both professional and official clinical tests, holding phone conversations with my parents so they could properly gauge the full onset of displayed symptoms (which has been missed and shouldve originally been diagnosed at the age of 5), not once had any of my previous medical doctors or therapists (the medical professionals whod originally diagnosed me) bothered to conduct any manner of clinical testing, bothered to contact family members, or lift a finger in the name of conducting any veritable research in the name of substantiating their diagnoses. As such, Ive provided a screenshot of the diagnostic summary received from XXXX  as well as a copy of the full clinical packet/diagnoses from XXXX, which chronologically and painstakingly work to detail all clinical tests performed as well as the outcome of each individual test, and each test directly relates to my diagnoses received from XXXX.\\n\\nThank you for your time and help with this unfair matter of prejudice.'","date_sent_to_company":"2026-03-09T17:12:04.000Z","issue":"Struggling to repay your loan","sub_product":"Federal student loan servicing","zip_code":"55075","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"20096492","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Nelnet, Inc.","date_received":"2026-03-09T16:31:04.000Z","state":"MN","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem lowering your monthly payments"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Each day that I work, Im relegated to handing out <em>change</em> and beverages and food at the Drive-Thru window or doing cleaning tasks around my store."]},"sort":[2.8728466,"20096492"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":13,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":13}]}},"product":{"doc_count":13,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","doc_count":6,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Virtual currency","doc_count":5},{"key":"Mobile or digital wallet","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":4,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":3},{"key":"Savings account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Other type of mortgage","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Student loan","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Federal student loan servicing","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":13,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Fraud or scam","doc_count":5,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Deposits and withdrawals","doc_count":1},{"key":"Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Information belongs to someone else","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Opening an account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Account opened without my consent or knowledge","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Other transaction problem","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"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":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Transaction was not authorized","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Struggling to repay your loan","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem lowering your monthly payments","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue while managing or servicing your loan","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":13,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":13}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":13,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":10},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":2},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":1}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":13,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":13}]}},"company":{"doc_count":13,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":4},{"key":"Coinbase, Inc.","doc_count":2},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":2},{"key":"CrossCountry Mortgage LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Foris DAX, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Nelnet, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"U.S. BANCORP","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":13,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"CA","doc_count":4},{"key":"GA","doc_count":2},{"key":"FL","doc_count":1},{"key":"MA","doc_count":1},{"key":"MN","doc_count":1},{"key":"NC","doc_count":1},{"key":"NJ","doc_count":1},{"key":"NY","doc_count":1},{"key":"WA","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":13,"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":4}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":13,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Older American","doc_count":2},{"key":"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":{}}}