Product: Prepaid card

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 I was reviewing my account sheet for my Chime, an operational partner of XXXX XXXX XXXX, account and I immediately noticed a series of transactions that I did not recognize and that were suspicious. This series of transactions were nine ( 9 ) in total and completed between XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  The merchant was identical on all nine transactions. It appears that the merchant is a user on the XXXX platform. The amount of said transactions varied between XXXX XXXX XXXX$100.00}. Upon further review of said transactions I determined that I did not initiate, complete, authorize, benefit in anyway from said transactions. Furthermore, I did not authorize anyone else to act on my behalf or on their own accord to initiate or complete said transactions. Lastly, I have no knowledge of the person or party who did initiate and complete said transactions. 

It should be noted that as soon as I discovered the fraudulent transactions, I immediately called Chime, an operational partner of XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, to report such occurrences. I also reported to Chime, an operational partner of XXXX XXXX XXXX, that my card had NOT been lost or stolen. I did report to Chime, an operational partner of XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, that on XXXX XXXX XXXX  that my cell phone had been stolen. In response to my alert, Chime, an operational partner of XXXX XXXX XXXX  opened the following three disputes/ cases : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX They thoroughly explained the dispute process and assured me that every effort would be made in any investigation they undertook. The said phone conversation took place on XXXX XXXX XXXX and the aforementioned disputes were opened, filed, and pending investigation. IN LESS THAN 24 HOURS ALL NINE ( 9 ) DISPUTES WERE DETERMINED AND THEREFORE CLOSED OUT. Eight ( 8 ) were determined that no error had occurred and one ( 1 ) was determined as a fraudulent transaction. 

The Bank Act and Reg E affords certain protections for consumers. Chime, an operational partner of XXXX XXXX XXXX  has not availed me to such protections. First and foremost under said federal law my liability for such an occurrence should have been nothing. I should have not incurred any expenses for said transactions. If an unauthorized withdrawal appears on your bank statement, but you did not lose your card, security code, or PIN or had any of them stolen, you should notify your bank or credit union right away. At the latest, you must notify your bank within 60 days after your bank or credit union sends your statement showing the unauthorized transaction. If you wait longer, you could have to pay the full amount of any transactions that occurred after the 60-day period and before you notify your bank. To hold you responsible for those transactions, your bank would have to show that if you notified them before the end of the 60-day period, the transactions would not have occurred. In unusual circumstances, like lengthy travel or hospitalization that keeps you from notifying the bank within the time allowed, the notification periods above must be extended. ( How do I get my money back after I discover an unauthorized transaction or money missing from my bank account? | Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( consumerfinance.gov ) ) My continued inquiry into this matter with Chime, an operational partner of XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, has been further in questioning the good faith effort made by Chime, an operational partner of XXXX XXXX XXXX, in investigating said claim. I am questioning the good faith effort actually made due to the following observations : 1. Length of Investigation : The total length of time that said investigation was actually open was less than 48 hours. Even in the automated world with varying parties involved no investigation could reasonably be open such a short amount of time, 2. Investigation Efforts/ Materials : The only materials that Chime, an operational partner of XXXX XXXX XXXX  collected in the investigation was the intake form that I completed/ answered. Furthermore, this was the only materials that were used in the determination of the claim. Therefore, the determination was based upon was my 5 question " intake form ''.

3. Determination Inconsistencies : 9 fraudulent charges were reported to your organization. All with the same facts and surrounding circumstances. 1 was approved 8 were denied. There seems to be no logic or reasoning behind this.