{"took":1143,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":3,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14413306","_score":13.791424,"_source":{"product":"Prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"URGENT FORMAL COMPLAINT : Gross Negligence, Repeated Fraud, and Unjust Denial of Claims by Bank of America EDD XXXX XXXX XXXX Account XXXX in XXXX Total Stolen : Nearly {$40000.00} Dear Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, I am writing to file an urgent and comprehensive formal complaint against Bank of America XXXX Prepaid Card Services regarding a catastrophic series of events that has resulted in the theft of nearly {$40000.00} of my California unemployment benefits. This ordeal, spanning over five years, is a clear demonstration of gross negligence, egregious corporate misconduct, and a complete disregard for consumer protection that has led to profound personal suffering, including homelessness, eviction, and severe emotional and financial devastation. \nXXXX. Account Establishment and Initial Unresolved Access Issues On XXXX, an unemployment insurance prepaid debit card account was opened on my behalf by the California XXXX XXXX Bank of America to receive my bi-weekly benefits during the pandemic. I was informed a debit card would be sent for access to these funds. \nFrom the very beginning, I never received a physical debit card. This exact scenarionot receiving a card, reporting it lost or stolen to Bank of America, and a new one being re-issuedrepeatedly occurred more than 5, but less than 10 times. Each time, Bank of America representatives reassured me my funds were \" 100 % secured and safe '' and advised me to simply \" keep an eye out '' for the new card. My efforts to protect my mail, including reporting ongoing mail theft to local authorities ( Police Report # XXXX ), were tragically unsuccessful. Despite these repeated warnings and my proactive measures, Bank of America failed to implement any effective security protocols or provide alternative methods for me to access my legitimate funds. \nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX and First Theft of Funds My inability to access funds had devastating consequences. Approximately XXXX months into the lockdown, my fianc, who was financially supporting us, tragically passed away at only XXXX XXXX XXXX on [ approximate date of fianc 's passing ], just one week before our planned wedding. This left me in an unfathomable state of grief and without financial support, while Bank of America continued to withhold my funds with \" the same old story. '' The situation culminated in my eviction from my home on XX/XX/XXXX, at XXXX a.m. This was a direct result of Bank of America holding my money \" UNSAFELY HELD XXXX, '' denying me access to the funds I needed to pay rent. This eviction led to the loss of all my belongings, left an eviction on my record ( severely impacting future housing ), and forced me into homelessness, literally sleeping outside in a park. I was entirely dependent on food stamps to avoid physical starvation. \nDuring this period of extreme vulnerability, I contacted Bank of America again. It was then, to my profound shock, that I was informed my account had been \" completely 100 % emptied to {$0.00} '' by an unauthorized individual. This criminal had illegally accessed one of the physical cards repeatedly stolen from my mailbox and, through research I've gathered, acquired my private identifying credentials to activate it. The emotional distress upon hearing this news was overwhelming, triggering a full-blown XXXX XXXX, immense grief, despair, and a feeling of complete betrayal and fury. Despite my suspicions of fraud, I immediately reported the unauthorized transactions and opened a claim for approximately {$26000.00}. This initial claim was denied without any explanation in the very early days of my homelessness, leaving me utterly destitute. \n3. Undisclosed Claim Reversal and Second Theft of Funds Approximately nine months after relocating to XXXX, California ( where I managed to secure temporary housing with a family friend due to my eviction record ), I received a confusing email from Bank of America about \" recent activity '' on my account. As I believed the account was closed after the initial denial, I was alarmed and contacted them. \nTo my astonishment, I learned that Bank of America had unilaterally reversed the denial of my initial claim and approved it with no communication or notification whatsoever to me. Crucially, despite the account 's documented history of being compromised by mail theft and fraud, Bank of America failed to implement any necessary security precautions. They did not close the compromised account, did not reopen a new account with a new number, and did not consider alternative secure options like sending a check. \nPredictably, and horrifyingly, immediately after these funds were approved and deposited into the previously compromised account, they were \" totally liquidated and spent all the way down to the last penny. '' The only email notification I ever received from Bank of America throughout our entire relationship was after this second theft, informing me the account was empty. \nXXXX. Continuous Denials, Bogus Explanations, and Obvious Stonewalling ( Claim No. XXXX ) Upon discovering this second theft of approximately {$22000.00}, I initiated a new claim ( Claim No. XXXX ) on XX/XX/XXXX. During this process, for the very first time, I actually received a physical debit card, albeit for an account with no funds. \nThis claim has been denied and required reconsideration over XXXX times. Each denial letter is an identical, seemingly automated response stating, \" during our research, we identified multiple factors that indicate that the transaction was authorized by you or made by someone who has permission to use your card or account. '' I have been more than vigilant, providing extensive documentation, including : * Original police report from mail theft. \n* A more current police report. \n* Documentation proving I am a victim of identity theft via an Equifax data breach ( dating back to XXXX ), demonstrating my PII was compromised. \n* A federal IRS identity theft affidavit form. \n* My written reconsideration requests as mandated by Bank of America after XX/XX/XXXX, which stipulated new documentation for each appeal. \nDespite repeatedly requesting the specific documentation Bank of America relied upon for their denials, as they are obligated to provide, I have never received any such supporting documents from them. This lack of transparency, coupled with identical denial letters, strongly suggests an automated, AI-generated system that disregards evidence. Supervisors and representatives themselves admit they have never \" seen with their own two eyes '' or spoken to a human from this \" reconsideration team, '' further solidifying my suspicion of a non-existent or automated department designed to deny legitimate claims. \n5. Bank of America 's Own Evidence Contradicts Their Denials On XX/XX/XXXX, in response to a complaint I filed on this website, XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank of America ) provided a denial that at least offered specifics. She claimed denials were based on me being \" in the same place that the transactions were made. Based on account address. '' I directly countered this with irrefutable legal documentation : * Legal eviction documents signed by the sheriff ( XX/XX/XXXX ), proving I was no longer living at the address where they claimed I had on file or where cards were continuously sent and stolen. \n* A one-year lease agreement ( XX/XX/XXXX- XX/XX/XXXX ), proving I was living in an entirely different city and county, far from where any of the disputed transactions occurred. \nDespite this overwhelming evidence, on XX/XX/XXXX, Bank of America issued another denial letter stating, \" your written request didn't include new information or documents supporting your claim. As a result, your claim will continue to remain denied... we identified multiple factors that indicate that the transaction was authorized by you or made by someone who has permission to use your card or account. '' This is a blatant and insulting disregard for concrete legal proof. \nAdding insult to injury, I was evicted a second time from my residence due to non-payment, again directly because Bank of America refused me access to my rightful funds. This second eviction compounded my homelessness, forcing me to live in a tent on a river bottom, further hindering my ability to pursue this case. \nXXXX. Bank of America 's Own Admission of Fault Most critically, after moving to XXXX, California, I received a letter from Bank of America XXXX XXXX Department providing me a check for over {$8100.00}. This check was \" owed to me for the financial harm that I have endured from not having access to my account nor the funds in this account during the impact dated period of XX/XX/XXXX, through XX/XX/XXXX. '' This is Bank of America 's own unequivocal admission that I had no access to my account or funds during the very period when the two major thefts occurred, directly contradicting their repeated denials that transactions were \" authorized by me or someone with my permission. '' I immediately sent this as \" new documentation '' to their claims department, expecting it to finally approve my claim. It was immediately denied again with the same generic \" no new information '' excuse. \n7. Demand for Action I have exhausted all internal avenues with Bank of America. They have consistently stonewalled me, lied, ignored irrefutable evidence, and shown a complete lack of accountability for their role in the theft of my funds and the subsequent devastating impact on my life. My \" 5-year investigation '' into these matters, documented with overwhelming proof that I have provided to Bank of America , makes it unequivocally clear that this institution has no regard for its consumers and actively covers up its failures. \nI demand the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau intervene and compel Bank of America to : * Immediately reimburse me the full amount of all stolen unemployment benefits, totaling nearly {$40000.00}. \n* Provide full compensation for the immense emotional distress, two evictions, homelessness, loss of all belongings, and continued financial and personal devastation directly caused by their gross negligence and predatory practices.\n\n* Conduct a thorough, independent investigation into the Bank of America EDD Prepaid Card Services, specifically addressing their claims process, security failures, and the alleged automated denial system.\n\n* Hold all responsible parties within Bank of America accountable for their actions and inactions.\n\nI have provided Bank of America with every piece of documentation I have acquired. I implore the CFPB to review this egregious case and ensure that justice is served. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-02T23:13:24.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase or transfer","sub_product":"Government benefit card","zip_code":"92604","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14413306","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2025-07-02T22:30:43.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase or transfer"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Despite these repeated <em>warnings</em> and my <em>proactive</em> <em>measures</em>, Bank of <em>America</em> <em>failed</em> to <em>implement</em> any effective security protocols or provide alternative methods for me to access my legitimate funds. \nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX and First Theft of Funds My inability to access funds had devastating consequences."],"company":["BANK OF <em>AMERICA</em>, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION"]},"sort":[13.791424,"14413306"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4555590","_score":10.183759,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Bank of America 's gross incompetence has cost me my livelihood and my business. This all started with my business account being hacked in XXXX of 2020. I immediately took action when I noticed the issue and proactively contacted Bank of America XXXX BOA ). While in the process of trying to resolve this incident, my account was hacked for a second time in XXXX of 2020. BOA was quick to return my money that had been stolen in the XXXX incident. While being fully aware of the XXXX incident, BOA punished me for the second incident which as I said, took place while working to resolve the first one. They tried to blame me for the XXXX hacking and punished me by taking almost 2 months to return my money. They knew that my information was compromised in XXXX, and yet they failed to take the proper actions to ensure protection of my account and personal information. They're grossly negligent in not upholding the most basic of industry standards of account security. In addition, my XXXX and XXXX XXXX accounts were hacked through the lackadaisical security from BOA. It is solely their fault due to their gross negligence and neglect that XXXX has sent collection people after me and that both XXXX and XXXX XXXX have closed my accounts. There inaction has resulted in the loss of these two tools/apps that I use with my business. This has also cause major damaged to my credit score. \n\nIn XXXX, via phone, I spoke with and worked directly with their headquarters fraud department to make sure that my account was secure. They instructed me to change my password and to turn on 2-step verification. They said that by taking these actions, my account would now be secure again. I immediately complied with all of their instructions. BOA is supposed to be the banking experts therefore I as a member of the general public relied solely on their expertise. The instructions and advice I received was both false and misleading. Beyond that it was negligent and not the standard of care for the industry. BOAs headquarters fraud department failed miserably to protect my account and my personal sensitive information in which they were entrusted with. \n\nIn XXXX, BOA calls to inform me that my account is frozen, being closed immediately and that they are seizing all my funds. This is my business account and I was given no warning. All the measures and instructions directly provided by the BOA fraud department were dangerously inaccurate and blatantly incorrect. Hackers gained access to my account again. This time instead of stealing my money, the hackers processes what appears to be stolen money from others through my account. This was all done without my knowledge in any way. BOA is working to cover up their incompetence by trying to blame me, their customer. This whole situation is 100 % their fault. It is completely their fault that my account was not secured. I called and asked them for help before it became a bigger issue. \n\nBOA knew full well that my account was previously hacked. A basic standard of care would be to watch and monitor my account with greater scrutiny. Instead, they did nothing to protect me and sat back watching this happen. The day after BOA froze and closed my account, I went to a local branch office. The BOA personnel at the branch office knew more about fraud and hacking protection than the BOA headquarters fraud department. They questioned why BOA HQ had failed to close my account after the first incident in XXXX. They went on to say that its standard procedure and practice that when an account has been compromised, it should be closed immediately and new account opened. These BOA employees told me that once a persons account number and information is no longer secure and out there that things like changing passwords and putting on 2-step verification is useless. The BOA HQ people should know this and not knowing is not an excuse.\n\nOnce again, BOAs is negligent, and their behavior directly put my account and personal information in harms way. They didnt follow standard industry procedures and their own protocols. Procedures and protocols that are in place to protect the public. BOA closed my account and left me no access to it in any way. After the account is permanently closed, BOA allowed XXXX different checks to be deposited totaling {$7400.00}. BOA illegally allowed checks to be deposited into a closed account. Those check that were deposited were NOT made out to my business. They were clearly made out to my wife and I as part of the Covid relief package. BOA accepted checks into my closed business account that were clearly not business related in any way. BOA should be charged with fraud and theft as they illegally deposited personal checks into my closed business account. The deposits were clearly marked as being made out to XXXX and XXXX XXXX. They were not made out to my business, XXXX XXXX XXXX. Knowingly depositing someone elses check is uttering a forged instrument. It is grand theft and bank fraud along with being a felony in all states. \n\nBOA ignored Federal regulations and laws by not informing me to the extent of the hacking and how much of my sensitive information had been compromised. This is blatant willful misconduct and intentional harm. They have ignored all standards of care for banking and their industry as a whole. They are well informed as to all of the proper steps to take and laws to follow. Their inaction is equivalent to them being complicit in the hacking and fraud that occurred. Due to their gross negligence, Ive been fielding multiple fraud attempts utilizing my now compromised information. These fraud attempts are coming in the form of attempts to file unemployment claims in other states. The ones Ive found out about are multiple attempts in Colorado along with a few attempts in Ohio and Virginia. In as many cases as possible, Ive reached out to each states fraud division to let them know. What I dont know is how many more are out there. \n\nBOA ignored their simplest and most basic duty of assuming reasonable care, their fiduciary responsibility and the protection of their customers. Instead of addressing the string of errors, gross negligence, and incompetence in their response to my account being compromised, theyve chosen to try to push the blame on me. As part of their dishonorable, illegal, and callous behavior, theyve illegally stolen funds that are rightfully mine. Theyve illegally seized my money to cover up and hide their willful misconduct and breach of duty. \n\nAt the first sign of trouble, I reached out to BOA for their expertise and assistance. I needed help from experts to stop all unauthorized activity regarding my account. Im the one who filed police reports for all of the incidents with my local police, XXXX PD. BOAs representatives didnt follow proper protocol and procedures. It is all due to their lack of proper care that this situation exists at all. \n\nIn addition and not to be overlooked ; there is a huge amount of added stress put upon me due to their behavior. It has directly had a negative impact to my business and the decline of my other financial involvement, i.e., personal and company. BOAs incompetence, negligence and disregard for their fiduciary responsibility has resulted in collections people contacting me, damaged my credit and exposed my personal and sensitive information. Their causation and willful misconduct regarding security breaches has others attempting to use my information to create more fraudulent situations. \n\nBOA has illegally seized my funds to cover up their failings. Theyve effectively committed grand theft and stolen money that was clearly not intended to go to my business. They failed to implement and completely disregarded proper protocols and industry standards and must be held accountable for their actions and the damage they have caused. Enough with forcing me to succumb to their timeline and schedule as it just increases the pain and suffering that Im facing. Working through Covid has been difficult enough. BOAs actions have left me penniless and unable to operate my business. Im demanding that they be held accountable for their negligence, failure of reasonable care and incompetence. All my money should be returned to be immediately. Im on the verge of being forced to close my business and lose my livelihood directly due to their gross negligence. They should be forced to pay me damages, interest plus additional monies for pain and suffering that they singly created. BOA should be assessed fines for their multitude of failures along with being publicly reprimanded. Theyve violated basic security breach laws at both state and federal levels. Id prefer not to take the legal route. If thats what must happen to get both justice and satisfaction ; so be it. \n\nBOA should know upfront that I will make this incident as public as possible. I will be a thorn in their side for the foreseeable future on wide variety of platforms. I will showcase their blatant disregard for their customers along with their numerous failings both regulatory and within the industry. From my research BOA has a long track record for causing harm to their customers and gross incompetence. BOA has been allowed to continue unchecked with their unscrupulous, harmful, negligent, and illegal behaviors. Im formally requesting that BOA be forced to finally end their ability to act with complete impunity and with total disregarding their fiduciary responsibilities to the general public. Thank you in advance, I look forward to hearing from you.","date_sent_to_company":"2021-07-19T18:25:36.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"070XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4555590","timely":"No","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2021-07-19T17:46:03.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Deposits and withdrawals"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Bank of <em>America</em> 's gross incompetence has cost me my livelihood and my business. This all started with my business account being hacked in XXXX of 2020. I immediately took action when I noticed the issue and <em>proactively</em> contacted Bank of <em>America</em> XXXX BOA ). While in the process of trying to resolve this incident, my account was hacked for a second time in XXXX of 2020. BOA was quick to return my money that had been stolen in the XXXX incident."],"company":["BANK OF <em>AMERICA</em>, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION"]},"sort":[10.183759,"4555590"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6736230","_score":8.85366,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"Office of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) 1700 G Street NW.,\nWashington, DC\nDC 20552\nThis is to complain against the Bank of America\nURGENCY: HIGH IMPORTANCE: HIGH\n[WITHOUT PREJUDICE]\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX.\n I would like to draw your attention to XXXX XXXX XXXX - I had sent my complaint letter to Bank of America, in which I clearly stated how this scam has affected me personally, psychologically and financially.\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 show their complaints department in a good light, to say the least; and certainly, does not contribute tomyoverall satisfaction and peace of mind. My complaint is against the bank that did not do its job properly (could not prevent/foreseen fraud and could not conduct a proper investigation) 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\npractice their duty of care, therefore I only request what I believe to be rightfully mine, as all institutions were more than negligent in protecting my account and handling the complaints. I comprehensively provided explanations and proof to my claim, even so, Bank of America never acknowledge my complaint, therefore, I have approached you CFPB and I would like to receive your assistance on this matter.\nGeneral Obligation:\nCommencing on or around XXXX XXXX XXXX I fell victim to two multi-layered scam operations run by hackers which involved me making deposits for a total amount of XXXX XXXX from my Bank of America account to fraudulent investment firms.\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 Bank of America 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 Bank of Americas 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 Bank of America promoted the transaction(s) in question despite being aware of the\n \nnature of the transaction(s) in question (iv) whether Bank of America was in compliance with its own policies and procedures; (v) whether Bank of America owed duties to myself, what the scope of those duties was, and whether Bank of America did not uphold those duties; (vi) whether Bank of Americas conduct was unfair; and (vii) whether Bank of America has within its power the ability to, and should, compensate me for 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 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, Bank of America 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 Bank of America 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.\nApropos of the fluidity of the concept of reasonableness, all Bank of America 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.\nBank of America 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:\n particularly vulnerable, or\n\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 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:\n1) 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:\nA) 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:\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, 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;\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 activity, 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 adopted by Bank of America in relation to this matter. I have also thoroughly detailed why they cannot simply dismiss this problem by strictly adhering to legal technicalities which, after careful reflection, struck me as being nothing more than self-\n  \ninterest. 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:\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 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\n \nadopted technologies aimed at effectively navigating the evolving threat landscape, is only one of a number of possible endeavours undertaken in this connection, alongside the application of past knowledge and experience related to popular fraudulent practices.\nBank of Americas 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.\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. Thank you.\nXXXX XXXX\nTHE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK\n \nPage 1 of 7\nXXXX XXXX XXXX Bank of America XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX NC XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  Re: Demand Letter\nAttn: Claims/Fraud Dept.\nDear Sir/Madam,\nFor negotiation purposes only, without effect as to any and all rights\n  The goal of this letter is twofold: first, it aims to establish that a duty of care was breached, inasmuch as you have failed to perform adequate due diligence or/and not acted in a reasonable and prudent manner to prevent foreseeable substantial damages I suffered as a result of a fraud [ 1]. Second, it shall serve as formal written demand for reimbursement based on the aforementioned grounds, among others.\nA very comprehensive analysis of fraud prevention suggests that by processing atypical, non-routine transactions, and/or by being aware of other fraudulent schemes similar to the one alleged herein and/or ignorance of obvious warning signs of fraud, you engaged in/ is a pattern or a practice of a wrongful and negligent conduct which provided substantial assistance to advance the commission of a fraud that resulted in my financial and psychological damages. The facts and details concerning the actions in question are set forth hereunder.\nOVERVIEW\n Commencing on or about XXXX XXXX XXXX, I fell victim to a multilayered scam operation orchestrated Hackers (the Scammer), all of which aim at 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 XXXX  in the\ntotal amount of XXXX XXXX utilizing your services.\n This letter shall thrust into the spotlight, inter alia, the increasingly important role financial institutions play in\nthe fight against financial crime and fraud, and the pressing need for higher levels of supervision and vigilance\nwithin your organization.\n Additionally, it is vital that you will immediately take all actions within your power to remedy the situation,\nwhether by raising chargeback in respect of the transactions in question or reimburse me and credit my account, for the full amount of these payments, in the total amount of XXXX XXXX\n1 FCA: A more effective approach to combatting financial crime XXXX XXXX XXXX 1\n   \nPage 2 of 7 XXXX XXXX XXXX   Heres an indisputable fact: had you looked at the wider circumstances surrounding the above-referenced transactions, this illicit transfer of wealth could have been prevented.\n Executing transactions without proper authority is not only a severe regulatory offense but also an irresponsible and reckless disregard of the customers financial safety.\n Against this background, and without derogating any of my rights, I hereby hold you liable for financial and emotional harm as well as medical problems relating to this victimization and demand 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 sensitiveness to detail. Accordingly, this letter aims to address the issue at hand as profoundly and fairly as possible, by taking into consideration contextual regulations, laws, and bylaws, as well as guidance, standards and rules promoted by supervisory authorities, relevant codes of practice and (where suitable) what was good industry practice (GIP) at all times relevant hereto. The allegations contained herein are predicated either upon knowledge with respect to myself and my own experience, or upon facts obtained through investigations conducted by qualified third parties. I strongly believe that substantive evidence in support of the allegations set forth herein will be found after an appropriate opportunity for discovery. Key facts supporting the allegations contained herein are known only to the Scammer or/and are exclusively within their control.\nI did not know, and through the exercise of reasonable diligence could not have discovered, the fraud that was being perpetrated upon myself by the Scammer. Fraud is commonly conceptualized as withholding from the weaker party in a financial transaction information which is necessary to make an informed, rational or autonomous decision.\nIn this regard, even access to adequate information is insufficient to achieve complete autonomy. A complication here is that the weaker party might have trouble analyzing the data at hand sufficiently well to identify fraudulent schemes. A reasonable solution is that financial institutions would be required to 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 victims, such as myself, into unwittingly providing funds that fueled the Scammers fraudulent scheme and therefore are, by their very nature immoral, unethical, oppressive, unscrupulous, and substantially injurious to consumersall at once.\nAs a result of the Scammers deceptive practices, I was deceived into transferring my funds to them. The false statements of material facts and omissions as described above; and the sham transactions the Scammer perpetrated upon myself; were unfair, unconscionable, and deceptive practices perpetrated on me which would have likely tricked a reasonable person under the circumstances.\n  2\n\nPage 3 of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\nSCAMMERS FRAUD SCHEME  ALLEGATIONS\n Please take notice that my funds were transferred through means of coercion and under false pretenses all along! Attached, please find supportive statements, screenshots, and further evidence.\nEXPOSING YOUR ORGANIZATIONS MISCONDUCT\nI hereby allege that your organization had breached the duty of care that is owed by a financial institution to its clients in circumstances where there are reasonable grounds to suspect that the sole purpose of a payment instruction is to defraud the client. Under such circumstances, you are obliged to refrain from executing the payment instruction until you have been able to satisfy yourself that there is a legitimate basis for the instruction. Once the duty is engaged, the duty takes priority over the usual obligation on a financial institution to execute customer instructions promptly. The duty in question is often referred to as the Quincecare duty, because it was established in the case of Barclays Bank plc v Quincecare Ltd. (the Quincecare duty)\nThe Quincecare duty is well-established and requires financial institutions to take reasonable care and skill when executing clients instructions. It is recognized as authoritative by leading academic texts [2]. The duty arises in cases where it can be argued that an ordinary prudent staff member of a financial institution would have a reasonable basis for suspicion that a particular payment instruction would result in the misappropriation of the clients funds.\nWhen the duty does arise, it can be discharged simply by refraining from executing the instruction unless and until such time as the financial institution has been able to establish that the instruction relates to a lawful obligation. The financial institution shall seek further information or/and documentation from the client in order to help establish this.\nBased on the above, and after conducting a comprehensive review of our communication/interactions, it became glaringly obvious to me that no adequate information or/and documentation were sought by your organization, at best, and at worst no appropriate safeguards were implemented at all.\nIf a bank executed a customers order to transfer money knowing it to be dishonestly given, shutting its eyes to the obvious fact of the dishonesty or acting recklessly in failing to make such inquiries as an honest and reasonable man would make, it would be in breach of its duty of care, even if the payment was made in accordance with the terms of the mandate and the bank shall be liable to its client for damages in negligence.\nCompliance departments should ensure that staff understand the legal requirements and that where there are suspicions, these suspicions must be communicated to all relevant personnel whilst they are investigated.\n2 (XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Ellinger's Modern Banking Law XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX.)\n    3\n\nPage 4 of 7 XXXX XXXX XXXX\nFor the avoidance of doubt, reasonable grounds shall not necessarily be interpreted as proof. On the basis of various signs, you should have assumed that something fishy was going on and suspended transactions until you had made reasonable enquiries to satisfy yourself that the transactions was/were properly to be executed. In other words, I have been a victim of your negligence for facilitating the misappropriation of funds, and doing little to safeguard my financial interests. Any reasonable banker would have realized that there were many obvious, even glaring, signs that I was a fraud victim (Singularis Holdings Limited (in liquidation) v Daiwa Capital Markets Europe Limited [XXXX] UKSC 50) [ 3].\nA financial institution which wrongly pays money away when it has no authority to do so will usually be treated as if it had paid using its own funds, not those of its customer. The debits made to my account should be reversed out, and damages to compensate me for any reasonably foreseeable losses incurred as a result of your failure to state the balance of my account accurately and properly. It is also libelous/defamatory to make false statements about someone that adversely affect their credit rating.\nWhen discussing the responsibilities that a bank might incur, it is crucial not to forget the fact that a legitimate complaint by, or cause of action on the part of, a client might generate/give rise to further statutory cause of action or/and additional responsibilities or liabilities owed by a financial institution to the relevant regulatory authority. Obligations/duties owed by a bank to a regulator are distinct from those owed to the customer. On top of that, please remember you may owe liabilities to more than one regulator.\nMore often than not, such legal duties spring from the very facts that gave rise to the liabilities to your clients in the first place. Similarly to the foregoing, I may also have a cause of action against you for breach of mandate as you have negligently transferred my funds without proper authorization or enquiry.\nInstead, you should have been working hard with Artificial Intelligence [4] / Big data technologies to discover automated and effective ways not only to detect fraud but also to prevent it. Furthermore, the tremendous amount of data you possess is by no means self-evident let alone to be overlooked, hence by not utilizing it systematically and effectively to pinpoint irregular and suspicious activities you are misleading your customers, who have taken the leap of faith and placed trust and confidence in your honesty, authority, and competence.\nA plausible assumption here would be that the pattern of the above-mentioned transactions was sufficiently suspicious that it should have been flagged and blocked by your staff, even if you have never encountered similar situations.\nAccording to the FCA [5]: XXXXXXXX  could do more to identify fraudulent incoming payments and prevent accounts from being compromised by fraudsters. XXXX fraud is where a fraudster tricks a payer into making an XXXX  to an account controlled by that fraudster under false pretenses, similarly to the above-described victimization.\n3 Singularis Holdings Limited (in liquidation) v Daiwa Capital Markets Europe Limited [XXXX] UKSC 50\n4 Using AI in the fight against fraud XXXX XXXX XXXX\n5 FCA introduces new rules on handling complaints about Authorised Push Payment fraud (XXXX XXXX XXXX)\n    4\n\nPage 5 of 7 XXXX XXXX XXXX\nMoreover, I argue that you should also make a reasonable estimate on the basis of relevant historical data of my account.\n\"Given XXXX fraud is currently a XXXX million problem and growing, the potential exposure for banks is very large indeed. This is yet another reason why the banking industry must do all it can to use the data available to it to detect and stop fraud.\"\nPractically speaking, effective steps to prevent bad actors from taking advantage of future victims (or at least to minimize this possibility) are abundant:\n The use of automated and human review of irregular or suspicious transactions and traffic patterns to identify financial crimes in general and common fraudulent schemes in specific;\n Human review of complaints from the public and law enforcement in connection with rapidly-growing, recurring, and popular fraudulent practices as well as suspicious merchants, including creating special channels for such complaints;\n Cross-checking warnings, notices, cautionary announcements, and reports concerning beneficiaries, merchants, associations, or countries often suspected to be associated with cyber-fraud from governments, central banks, regulatory bodies, law enforcement agencies, and watchdogs.\n Artificial Intelligence & XXXX embrace and leverage Machine Learning technologies and Big Data Analytics to identify fraudulent, or potentially fraudulent merchants by scrutinizing publications and reports about such merchants in the digital sphere (e.g. on forums, social media, et cetera.)\n Establishing contact with the recipient institution of fraud victims: any holds in place on new related activities, or similar blockers that prevent rapid rebranding of related/similar merchants.\nIt would also be wise to consider implementing additional safeguards where the movement of large sums of monies are concerned. For instance, you could specify additional prerequisites for executing the transfer of large sums such as: (1) requiring multiple levels of approval; (2) requesting more information concerning the intended purpose of the transfers and cross-checking for similar patterns of transfer; and (3) checking on my capacity to make such transfers. While such measures entail additional compliance costs, it would be sensible for you to err on the side of caution.\n5\n\nPage 6 of 7 XXXX XXXX XXXX  CONCLUSION\n If a full refund is not administered within 10 days from the date of this letter, in addition to a refund amount, a request for reimbursement of attorneys fees, filing fees, and any further costs associated with obtaining the refund amount may be pursued.\nIn the event of non-compliance with the demand mentioned above, your organization, knowingly or unknowingly, manifestly jeopardize its business through its association with the Criminals: those who are not direct accomplices to the commission of a crime but rather are permissive of the criminal behavior after the crime has been committed can also be charged with a crime. Being permissive, even if not present when the crime was committed, by not reporting the crime to the authorities and not trying to do your part in remedying the situation, makes you an accessory to the crime. If you unknowingly assist criminal behavior and remain impartial after discovering such, you are seen as obstructing justice.\nThis letter does not realize the full extent of my claims, rights, and remedies against you or any of your affiliates, parents and subsidiary corporations, including, without limitation, your representative managing partners, officers, directors, shareholders, employees, agents, attorneys, assigns, successors, servants, insurers, and representatives, in any matter whatsoever, including the present context of this letter, as that will not detract from my rights and claims in any form or manner whatsoever, or constitute any concessions on my behalf against you and against others.\nFor more information, please reread.\nXXXX XXXX  6\n\nPage 7 of 7\nXXXX XXXX XXXX\nDEMAND FOR DISCLOSURE\nThe individuals who directed and enjoyed the fruits of these illegal and unlawful activities shall be exposed in full. This means that any and all contextual documents and/or information at your disposal shall be disclosed in a timely and equitable manner, in a reply to this letter.\nHence, I hereby demand that you disclose the following within 10 days from the date of this letter:\nReports, instructions, transmittal letters, statements, notices, and other documents, related to the relevant participants and beneficiaries, whether involved directly or indirectly, in accordance with the applicable regulations and guidelines. It also includes the correct and true names of the parties to the lawsuit, their ID NO., addresses, and telephone numbers, as well as information and documents of any potential party or of persons having knowledge of relevant facts, and a brief statement of each identified persons connection with the case, including information and documents concerning their beneficiary bank accounts, if available.\n 7\n\nTo: Bank of America\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX NC XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  Subject: XXXX XXXX XXXX  complain to Bank of America\nFAO: Bank of Americas complaints dept.\nDear Sir / Madam,\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\n This is my subsequent letter pursuant to the original, unanswered disputed letter sent to Bank of America on the XXXX XXXX XXXX\nWith this letter, I hereby express my utmost dissatisfaction with your lack of reply to the above referenced letter and reiterate key points that were raised and left unanswered previously supporting my request for your cooperation.\nAs I mentioned I fell victim to a multilayered scam operation orchestrated by hackers (the Company) and innocently lost XXXX XXXX  of my hard-earned life-savings due to your misadministration.\nThis complex issue has caused substantial harm to me, and if not appropriately addressed, will cause substantial harm to others, we must therefore conduct an in-depth and comprehensive review of all of the contributing factors that have led to an outcome as horrendous as the one described herein.\nDue to personal circumstances, I was particularly vulnerable during the victimization period; I was also relatively financially illiterate and very inexperienced in the finance sector which made me a prime target for criminal enterprises in this field.\nFinancial institutions are well aware of the scope and nature of such crimes and the risks that these pose to their clients, who, in contrast, mostly have limited knowledge of these dangers.\nTo be clear, people who have been scammed such as myself, are not individuals who have made poor investment decisions. They are people who have been tricked, lied to, deceived and emotionally manipulated. Sophisticated, aggressive sales techniques end up trapping the uninformed and unsuspecting victim who once in the clutches of the scammer cannot get out until most or all of the funds have been lost (stolen) by the scammers. A good comparison is a XXXX who XXXX  his victim whilst at the same time XXXX XXXX  and prevents them from escaping.\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 management\n\nsystem, demonstrating their undisputed ability to responsibly and preemptively 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 one of a number of possible endeavors undertaken in this connection, alongside the application of past knowledge and experience related to popular fraudulent practices.\nWhat can Bank of America do?\nPlease be noted that I will not in any way quietly tolerate the consequences of your actions (or more precisely, the lack thereof). It is perfectly obvious that you could have, and should have, utilized various risk-based examination procedures and techniques, all of which are within your purview and could have entirely prevented this disastrous outcome.\nAs previously advised, you should have known, suspected, or had reason to suspect that the transactions (or pattern of transactions):\n involve funds the ultimate purpose of which was to fuel an illegal enterprise;\n is intended to disguise funds the ultimate purpose of which was to fuel an illegal\nenterprise, in an attempt to avoid and thus violate regulations;\n is intentionally designed to defraud your customer;\n serves no legitimate or lawful purpose; and\n involve the use of your services to facilitate criminal activity.\nThere are so many other ways in which measures related to fraud prevention and mitigation could have been useful. Further factors that should have been taken into consideration include, but are not limited to, the following:\n The timing, volume, frequency, and nature of the transactions in question;\n The abnormality of such transactions against the background of your experience with me\nas a customer and other entities associated with the transactions (if any);\n The suspicious nature of such transactions based on my overall risk profile including\nvulnerability and identification and research of high-risk services/products;\n Systemic filtering mechanisms, whether manual or automatic, for the identification of\nunusual activities; and\n Periodic evaluation of the usefulness, appropriateness and effectiveness of anti-fraud\nprograms, and other associated policies and procedures.\nRelevant industry practices at the time of the victimisation:\nYour Organization 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:\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","date_sent_to_company":"2023-04-21T20:26:34.000Z","issue":"Other transaction problem","sub_product":"Virtual currency","zip_code":"33908","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6736230","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2023-03-22T23:52:24.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["to Bank of <em>America</em>\nFAO: Bank of <em>Americas</em> complaints dept."],"company":["BANK OF <em>AMERICA</em>, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION"]},"sort":[8.85366,"6736230"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":3,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":3}]}},"product":{"doc_count":3,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Virtual currency","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Prepaid card","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Government benefit card","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":3,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Deposits and withdrawals","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 purchase or transfer","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase or transfer","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":3,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":2},{"key":"No","doc_count":1}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":3,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":2},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":1}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":3,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":3}]}},"company":{"doc_count":3,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":3}]}},"state":{"doc_count":3,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"CA","doc_count":1},{"key":"FL","doc_count":1},{"key":"NJ","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":3,"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":3}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":3,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-15T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-15T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16469162,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{}}}