Product: Credit card

I attended a conference at XXXX XXXX conference center in XXXX FL. from XXXX. I stayed in the resort hotel and did not leave the property during the entire stay. on XX/XX/XXXX after departing I discovered four separate transactions were billed to three of the cards in my wallet. only one of the cards was used by me during the stay and my wallet was never away from my person. I did not have housekeeping service the room or leave any valuables in the room while I was out. The transactions were to an XXXX XXXX based charity, XXXX ( XXXX XXXX in managing professional skills ). one credit card was charged for two separate transactions of XXXX and XXXX. Two debit cards were charged for XXXX each for a total of XXXX. I received a Square up receipt by email for the credit card transactions with an address listed for XXXX  of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXX FL. XXXX The address maps to vacant land within less than a mile of the XXXX XXXX resort. Onsite conferences during my stay included a Fire service accreditation group XXXX, and Threat locker, a computer security conference. I asked hotel security if any other guest complained of this type of fraud during that time frame and was told they would only cooperate with law enforcement in any inquiry. Checks of XXXX, XXXX, and XXXXXXXX XXXX for XXXX showed basic information with no posts or followers since inception in XXXX of XXXX. Phone number associated avmps is a Texas number ( XXXX XXXX ). square up receipt showed an email for the account of XXXX. 

I reported the fraudulent charges to Bank of America for the two separate transactions to my B of A visa totaling XXXX. I also reported to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX two transactions to separate XXXX debit cards that were in my wallet totaling XXXX. XXXX promptly investigated and refunded the fraudulent charges. Bank of America initially credited the money to my account but then sent a letter retracting the credit and imposing liability for the fraud to me as the consumer. I contacted B of A a second time and explained the circumstances again. The person I spoke with said they would reopen the investigation. I called a third time several weeks later and was told that the investigation was never reopened and that the customer service agent had just made a note saying that I disagreed with their initial finding. I asked to speak with a supervisor and in that conversation was told that the investigation would be reopened. I gave the person the information regarding the police report that I filed with XXXX XXXX Florida after the initial denial. I was told that the denial was the result of an AI decision because I indicated that the card was not lost or stolen and the charges showed that the physical chip was read. The specific language states '' We confirmed your card was used for the charges. The chip was read, your PIN was entered, and/or you signed for the merchandise or service, which indicates you or someone you allowed to use your card was present. '' This statement is inaccurate and B of A has not produced any supporting documentation of this denial. I was directed to a link that was supposed to show details of the investigation but in fact never did. B of A also included a statement in their response stating that a comment has been placed in my credit report with multiple agencies indicating that I disagree with their decision. I do not believe that this is relevant to the claim and is actually an overt intimidation of myself as a consumer and is in violation to the TILA and/or the EFTA. I have fulfilled my obligation as the consumer and protected the access to the B of A card to the extent possible. I am being wrongly held liable for fraudulent charges that have been allowed to persist in my account by B of A without any apparent investigative action whatsoever. Bank of America XXXX number : XXXX