Product: Credit card or prepaid card

Recently, I noticed several fraudulent charges totaling {$3000.00} to my account. The fraud was reported over the phone as soon as I noticed it, on XX/XX/XXXX. Bank of America issued a temporary credit and opened an investigation. However, my claim was denied in a letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, which I received and opened on XX/XX/XXXX. There was almost no reasoning or information in the letter. The key phrase denying the claim is : Based on your account history, this charge is consistent with previous charges with this merchant. 

This raises more questions than it answers. With 13 fraudulent transactions spread over 9 merchants ( listed below ), why is the letter using the singular for merchant? Does Bank of America really believe Im paying multiple utility bills in areas I have no presence? XXXX and XXXX are both utilities. Ive never heard of XXXX before, and I believe XXXX services the XXXX area. My utility provider is XXXX XXXX  XXXX ( XXXX ), which Bank of America should know both from the recouping charges ( I had my XXXX  bill set to auto pay on another Bank of America credit card ), and my address. Since XXXX is a municipal origination, it is not possible for anyone in XXXX TX to use another electric service provider. They also did not address why I or anybody would pay over {$700.00} in a 3 day span for utilities in places where I do not live or have any presence. Not to mention, how this could not trigger a fraud alert, when Ive had my card declined in the past while trying to buy gas on road trips because I was too far away from home. 

Statement Date Description Reference Number Amount XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX PAYMENT XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX PAYMENT XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX   XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX *PAYMENT XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX* XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX* XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Total XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX  XXXX  XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX  XXXX  TEMP XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Total XXXX Overall Total XXXX I dont know what XXXX XXXX is , and I dont know why a transaction date from XXXX wouldnt raise a red flag. 

I had an account with XXXX sometime around XXXX that I closed sometime around XXXX. Ive never done business with them since. 

Ive never heard of or had any dealings with XXXX XXXX. 

Ive never had any dealings with XXXX. My insurance is through XXXX XXXX, as Bank of America could see since I regularly used the Bank of America accounts to pay my XXXX  XXXX  Bills. 

XXXX* is apparently XXXX  XXXX, and XXXX XXXX is apparently a rapper. Its been years since Ive been to a concert or used XXXX  XXXX. Ive never heard of XXXX  XXXX  before this. Somehow, I doubt his music is to my taste. 

Ive never had any dealings with XXXX  XXXX. This is apparently automobile insurance, which I already have through XXXX XXXX. 

The only company I have any legitimate business with is XXXX XXXX XXXX. They provide my cell phone service, which has a monthly bill of about {$80.00}, varying slightly depending upon data usage, that was billed to another account I had with Bank of America. However, I do not have cable TV through XXXX XXXX XXXX as mentioned in the description for the transaction with reference number XXXX. While I can not tell what the other transaction ( reference number XXXX ) is for, I am certain neither my wife the only other authorized user -- nor I made this transaction. 

I could go on, but it suffices to say that after they denied my claim I can not trust Bank of America to prevent fraud or deal with it responsibly. I paid off the balance of valid transactions and closed my accounts on XX/XX/XXXX. 

When I first reported the fraud on XX/XX/XXXX, the phone agent indicated that this was probably because a data breach, and that he had been seeing a lot of similar activity. In fact, Bank of America had already indicated to me over email on XX/XX/XXXX that they were sending me a new card because of a data breach. This brings into question why any transaction after XX/XX/XXXX was approved. 

After I read the claim denial letter on XX/XX/XXXX, I called and spoke with XXXX in Tennessee. He indicated that Bank of America attempted to contact me by phone on XX/XX/XXXX. I show no missed calls in my phones log, or in my phone company records. To be frank, that is XXXX word against two pieces of evidence that I have no reason to doubt. I do not believe Bank of America attempted to call me, and I do not believe Bank of America has acted in good faith to deny my fraud claim. 

While on the phone with XXXX, I noticed and reported two more transactions with XXXX  XXXX. I dont know how or why these were approved, since I was told they were blacklisted in my initial XX/XX/XXXX call. I also dont know why one of these transactions is for a negative amount. 

I sent Bank of America a similar letter to this on XX/XX/XXXX.