Product: Checking or savings account

PNC Bank is refusing to allow a transaction to be considered a fraud claim because they were unable to retrieve the monies and allowed the transaction to process days after it was reported to PNC as fraudulent and the account was frozen. 

On XXXX XXXX, 2024 unknown information was accessed by bad actors committing a fraudulent act through the use of a XXXX. The act was committed against a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX veteran and was immediately reported to PNC Bank by the Veteran  and his partner as fraud. PNC stated that the account had been frozen and that the transactions were successfully reported as fraudulent. The person conducting the investigation for PNC was " out of the office '' until Wednesday, XXXX XXXX, 2024, a full XXXX  days after the fraud was reported. 

The transaction of {$4600.00} was partially processed by PNC on or about XXXX XXXX, 2024, several days after it was reported as a fraudulent transaction by the Veteran and his partner. The remainder ( a supposed " overdraft '' ) was later processed and taken from the Veteran 's monthly XXXX payment that was on a direct deposit and could not be changed in time to a new account. This caused further distress to the Veteran and his family. 

The Veteran was contacted by the PNC XXXX  XXXX on Friday, XXXX XXXX, 2024, and was told that PNC had concluded the investigation and determined that this was not a case of fraud because some " information had been offered willingly. '' The Veteran explained that no compromising information had been offered " willingly '' and that the Veteran was the victim. Additional evidence of fraud was offered to PNC regarding the transaction in order that they might reconsider, but the Veteran does not believe that PNC will change their position because they stated that they were " unable to retrieve '' the stolen funds reported as part of the fraudulent transaction. Therefore, the ability to " retrieve '' was part of their classification process and was key in their determination that this was a non-fraudulent transaction. These actions by PNC Bank are at a minimum unethical and may be an illegal act by PNC. It is only common sense that a classification would not be based on PNC Bank 's ability to retrieve the stolen funds but on the merit of the fraud itself. This was not the case and PNC continues to cause XXXX XXXX XXXX to the Veteran and his family by maintaining an absurd position simply because they allowed a transaction to process and are now unable to retrieve the funds. 

It is unacceptable that PNC Bank would attempt to classify the transaction as anything but fraudulent with the information provided and since this was reported to the FBI XXXX and the FTC as fraud. PNC also placed an additional burden and strain on the Veteran and his family, not only by allowing the fraudulent transaction to process in the first place but also because on the first of the month, PNC stole additional XXXX XXXX from the Veteran 's account that was supposedly " frozen. '' Another Bank was involved and has already restored funds from the same fraud case, but PNC continues to cause XXXX XXXX XXXX to the Veteran and his family by continuing to withhold funds that were clearly part of a fraudulent transaction simply because PNC Bank, who allowed the transaction to process after it was reported as fraudulent, has currently been " unable to recover the money. '' This is a very disturbing sequence of events that may have widespread ramifications for other vulnerable populations if these are the actual policies of PNC Bank.