Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Greetings, XXXX, et al! 

I hope you're doing better than the imps at Wells Fargo ( XXXX ), because this purported overdrawn account XX/XX/XXXX line item on page XXXX of XXXX of my XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX  ) Deposit Account Report ( XXXX ) Consumer # XXXX is preposterous. It doesn't by any stretch of the imagination makes any sense other than greed, incompetence, or defamation that they would report that when ( 1 ) they never charged an overdraft fee on my XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, or XXXX statement for that XX/XX/XXXX purported overdraft. The attachments proved that my Everyday Checking account did NOT have Overdraft Service, so if there was an overdraft that caused the account to be overdrawn then there should have been an overdraft fee, but there was never an overdraft fee. These are things your staff should inspect before allowing clients especially those with the historical reputation of habitually unscrupulous behavior that Wells Fargo has earned and apparently will NEVER shake to post slander and defamation that cause reputational harm to citizens. In addition, an attachment also proves much to the contrary that I ever had a negative balance during the XX/XX/XXXX statement. The attachment captures the {$290.00} internal transfer in question; depicting that transfers within the same banking system often compute immediately ; meaning that the result or new balance from the attempted transaction shows before the transaction is completed. It has been very interesting to see how many mathematical/accounting steps banks have been skipping trying to make material misstatements immaterial, based on frequency. They or you think that if no one gets hurt then, it is okay. Well it is NOT! And this is a prime example of it. Based on the transfer confirmation I Saved as a PDF on XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX, I had {$1000.00} in my checking account and transferred {$290.00} into my Wells Fargo XXXX savings account. As aforementioned, this balance of {$720.00} as a result was presented at the confirmation stage of the transfer. To further support this, XXXX, like many banks have something called XXXX XXXX XXXX of which the record will show that I never use. However, on Tuesday XX/XX/XXXX, I was informed that my direct deposit in the amount of {$980.00} almost XXXX times the amount of the {$290.00} internal transfer was on was made available on Tuesday, XX/XX/XXXX, which is how I had {$1000.00} in my checking account on XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX. Apparently, XXXX has computation and/or ethical issues. Total deposits for the XX/XX/XXXX statement were {$1500.00} and total withdrawals were {$290.00}. THERE WAS NO OVERDRAFT. Thus, no overdraft shouldve been reported. XXXX is simply manipulating transactions so as to create a demand or opportunity to try to convince me to add a service that I/we dont need ( i.e., XXXX XXXX )! Instead of providing excellence service experience, most banks are trying so hard to indentify or create ways to prove that we need them, than the fact that THEY NEED XXXX. Like racism, this is a moral problem. Additionally, it is NOT beyond a reasonable doubt that someone I found incompetent about previous problems they have presented to me used my voice or a XXXX search to implement this hateful action. These types of things waste our lifetime ( i.e., suppression ). This experience that I have inured is XXXX of the reasons why I closed my XXXX accounts, because XXXX has proved to be the most XXXX of the most unscrupulous banks that I've ever known. There is no wonder that they were forced to leave almost every state around the XXXX XXXX. As such, someone either at EWS and/or WF must remove the defamatory libel from my EWS XXXX Consumer # XXXX. 

Thanks for reading. I look forward to speaking with you soon. 

Appreciatively, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX that be