Product: Checking or savings account

Wells Fargo Bank its claim number XXXX On XX/XX/XXXX, at about XXXX XXXX. I left the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( hereafter referred to as XXXX ) with XXXX XXXX for XXXX. I did not arrive at my destination in XXXX until the early morning of XX/XX/XXXX. I was tired and did not check my e-mail on XX/XX/XXXX. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, at about XXXX XXXX. ( EST Eastern Standard Time ), I signed into my Wells Fargo account and noticed one electronic wire transfer ( hereafter referred to as EWT ) for {$9200.00} made on XX/XX/XXXX, at XXXX XXXX. and two pending EWTs ( {$8100.00} and {$6200.00} ) initiated on XX/XX/XXXX, at XXXX XXXX. and XXXX XXXX. respectively. These EWTs were not made by me or authorized by me. 
I immediately called Wells Fargo Bank ( hereafter referred to as WFB ) and spoke to XXXX XXXX. He told me nothing could be done about it. He transferred me to XXXX  XXXX. She told me the same thing. 
I hung up and called again. This time I spoke to XXXX ( wont give last name ). He took my information and gave me claim number XXXX. He told me it would take 10 business days to know anything. He told me two of the EWTs went to Idaho and one to Florida. He asked me if I knew these people and if I had sent money to them before. I told him no to both. I told him that WFB has a history of the people to whom I have sent EWT in the past, and it can determine to whom I have sent EWT in the past and that is

one person. I live alone and I don't
share my personal information with anybody except the Internal Revenue Service, my bank, my doctor, my dentist, etc. I don't share my passwords nor loan my phone to anybody. 
I checked my e-mail on XX/XX/XXXX, in the evening at about XXXX XXXX. ( EST ) after reporting to WFB the unauthorized wire transfers. My e-mail shows WFB sent me a confirmation a Wire Electronic Funds ( hereafter referred to as EWT ) for {$9200.00} was initiated on Thursday, XX/XX/XXXX, at XXXX XXXX. The e-mail also shows one EWT initiation for {$8100.00}. This EWT was initiated on Friday, XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX., and an EWT  for the {$6200.00} was initiated on Friday, XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX. 
On Tuesday, XX/XX/XXXX, I called to inquire about my claim. I spoke to XXXX. She looked it up and told me the claim was denied by the investigator. She also told me the reason, as stated by the investigator, is that WFB had sent me a code via text message to be imputed into the computer, and the codes were imputed by the sender. She also told me that a computer was used that I had not used before. She left a message for the investigator to call me. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, at about XXXX XXXX  EST, the investigator, XXXX XXXX XXXX, called me. He repeated the sending and imputing of the codes. He also told me that the EWT initiator was in XXXX, Texas at the time. He told me to call XXXX and request their records about my cell phone being hacked. 
I told XXXX XXXX that I was not in the XXXX on the relevant days, and I received no text from WFB during the relevant times on the relevant days ( XX/XX/XXXX ). XXXX XXXX told me to fax any documents I have to him. I told him I was in a foreign country and didnt have access to a fax machine. He told me he would talk to his supervisor and call me back on Friday, XX/XX/XXXX. He never called me. I recorded my conversation with XXXX XXXX XXXX under 18 U.S.C. 2511 ( 2 ) ( d ). 
On XX/XX/XXXX, I called XXXX legal department ( XXXX ), and it referred me to the technical department. I called the technical department ( XXXX ) and spoke to XXXX XXXX ( cant give her last name ). She told me their system is not set up to record when an individual cell phone has been hacked. The system does record a log of incoming and outgoing text messages. I can access this log by signing into my XXXX account under Usage. 
The log shows the number sending the text and the time. Anytime I received a text on my cell phone from WFB, it showed the number XXXX. The log shows I received no text from WFB on XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, the text I received was in the evening when I signed in to my account and not before. 
In the past, I have sent EWT numerous times to one person in XXXX via computer. This is the only person I have sent EWT to. During the process of sending the EWT a message would come up on the computer screen to call the Fraud Department with a phone number to call. The Fraud Department would approve the sending of the EWT after verifying I am the account holder. WFB changed its procedure to require the input of a code text to the phone of record. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, I remembered that you can send faxes online. I faxed XXXX XXXX a copy of the relevant pages of my passport to show I had not been in the XXXX since XX/XX/XXXX ; a copy of the text log from the XXXX Website of the relevant days to show I received no text with codes from WFB ; and two screenshots of my cell phone of text messages received XX/XX/XXXX to show the number XXXX shows on my phone when I received a text from WFB. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, I called XXXX XXXX, as he did not call me on XX/XX/XXXX ( XXXX ). XXXX XXXX XXXX answered the phone. I asked to be transferred to XXXX XXXX XXXX. He told me he couldnt transfer the call to him. I told him about the documents I had previously faxed to XXXX XXXX. He told me that he would relay a message to XXXX XXXX to call me within one to two business days. I told him I would send the documents again, and I did so. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, I did not hear from the investigator, XXXX XXXX XXXX. I called him at the claim department ( phone number : XXXX ). XXXX XXXX answered the phone. She refused to give me her last name. I told her I wanted to speak to XXXX XXXX. She told me she couldnt transfer the call. I asked to speak to his supervisor, but she wouldnt give me the supervisors direct number or transfer the call. She said XXXX XXXX did receive the documents I faxed to him, and he is reviewing them. He will call me when he finishes his review. She could not tell me when he would call. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, I called the claims department ( XXXX ) to obtain an update on my claim. XXXX XXXX answered the phone. She told me a team of investigators is reviewing the documents, and she will leave a note for them to call me within XXXX to XXXX business days. 
As of XX/XX/XXXX, or thereafter, I had received no call from the investigator ( s ). In effect, Wells Fargo Bank refused to talk to me ; it refused to give me provisional credit for the money ; it refused to tell me if it had completed its investigation and the results of it. 
Congress enacted the EFTA as a " remedial consumer protection statute '' that courts " read liberally to achieve the goals of protecting consumers. '' XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 
If a consumer has provided timely notice of an error under 12 CFR 1005.11 ( b ) ( 1 ) and the financial institution determines that the error was an unauthorized EFT, the liability protections in Regulation E section 1005.6 would apply. Depending on the circumstances regarding the unauthorized EFT and the timing of the reporting, a consumer may or may not have some liability for the unauthorized EFT. See 12 CFR 1005.6 ( b ). Updated XX/XX/XXXX Regulation E defines an unauthorized EFT as a transfer from a consumers account initiated by a person other than the consumer without actual authority to initiate the transfer and from which the consumer receives no benefit. 12 CFR 1005.2 ( m ). When a consumers account access information is obtained from a third party through fraudulent means such as computer hacking, and a hacker uses that information to make an EFT from the consumers account, the transfer is an unauthorized EFT under Regulation.

An unauthorized EFT is an EFT from a consumers account initiated by a person other than the consumer without actual authority to initiate the transfer and from which the consumer receives no benefit. 12 CFR 1005.2 ( m ). Unauthorized EFTs include transfers initiated by a person who obtained a consumers access device through fraud or robbery and consumer transfers at an ATM that were induced by force. Comments 2 ( m ) -3 and