Consumer complaint received 2020-10-01
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: CA
Product: Checking or savings account
Sub-product: Checking account
Issue: Managing an account
Sub-issue: Banking errors

Complaint:
This is a new complaint, although it will address prior complaints and mention facts about the results of those complaints. This complaint is based on contradictory information I was given regarding whether or not an investigation was ever initiated. In the latest letter I received from Wells Fargo Bank regarding the fraud claim I reported way back in XX/XX/2019, they claim that they could find no claim to research. They touch on a couple things mentioned in my complaints, but fail to provide me with any real reassurance that they in fact tried to help me. I will address their statement of not being able to find a claim to research first, because now that they have stated this more than once, I will point out that I have informed WF in person, by telephone, in writing, and by the complaint process that there was fraud on my account. They have asked me for applicable claim numbers in past letters from them to me, and I have answered that I was never given any claim number by any of the numerous WF personnel I discussed this matter with. I called the CFPB last week and spoke with a woman who agrees with me that if I called fruad and reported an error, and WF then froze my online account access, then there certainly would be a record of such an event. 

That is the first reason that I don't believe them when they say they couldn't find a claim. WF is either deliberately lying to me, or they are simply incompetent. Either way, that excuse obscures the magnitude or pervasiveness of this unfair treatment that I have had to endure from them since the onset of this nightmare. Their discriminatory behavior sort of detracts from the transparency it has promised regarding this process of resolution in what I can only imagine is their effort to blur the facts the from the CFPB investigating their deficiencies regarding Regulation E.I 'm sorry, but I'm done with being treated like this. 

If WF thinks I'm mistaken, let me explain why this is proof of discrimination and unfair business practices ; after all, they take this very seriously and want to know what happened. 

I called into WF with questions regarding this situation after receiving notice that my account was in overdraft and instructing me to call them. So I did. When I made the call, I explained who I was and that I had questions and wanted to address issues related to it. I mentioned to the rep who answered that I had been in touch with XXXX XXXX in the executive offices. To my surprise, he acknowledged my correspondence with her. Odd though, because apparently he was only given information that my claim had been " re-opened '', and couldn't provide me any other information whatsoever. He was very rude, and since WF continuously mentions that my account was closed due to prolonged overdraft and how they sent me letters telling me about it, and told me to contact them, I will now mention that if they are going to instruct customers to call in with questions they might have, or to discuss matters regarding their overdraft issues during a pending investigation ( which I believe would be the correct status of it, given the information that the rep on the phone just informed me of ), they should provide the person who will be answering the phone the pertinent information needed when the consumer complies and calls in. 

That being stated, I am confused as to whether or not the investigation had actually been " re-opened, '' or not? Which is it? This is very deceptive and misleading. I mean, unless the rep I spoke to was lying to me, then an investigation did commence at some point, and then was closed at another point. That likely being the situation, then how is it that no claim can now be found? More confusing is why was I not informed of any such closure or " re-opening '' in writing as Regulation E states must be done? 

I'll address other statements made in the companies response to my last complaint now. as well. This latest response from WF also mentions that they contacted the XXXX branch in XXXX where I hand-delivered the proof of my allegation, yet the manager there doesn't remember me or working with me on my complaint. I'd like to know if they also asked Ms. XXXX if she remembered me? After all, I have mentioned her name simultaneously when mentioning the branch manager as the experiences I have had with both of them are connected. So, did WF ask Ms. XXXX whether or not she remembers me? If not, why? As for the branch manager, my response is that if I can remember that a pregnant   banker was wearing a XXXX top, and was leaving for maternity leave on a Saturday, it is grossly offensive that I am expected to believe that a bank manager wouldn't remember a customer who came into branch WITH A WITNESS, I might add, to discuss a fraud that also involved the XXXX of his customer, which he was shown graphic photographs to substantiate the XXXX, and which he commented on ( referring the matter as similar to a robbery, and informing me that I would have no rights in the matter )!!! If he truly can't remember me then perhaps he was given his position through means other than qualifying traits or experience. It is convenient that he would have XXXX now that I have continued to allege his discriminatory behavior and factual information regarding our meeting which certainly doesn't help WF 's attempts at trying to seem as though they've acted in good faith. Of course this manager doesn't remember me, he can't admit that he confirmed to me that he forwarded an SD card that had not only audio and video and photographic PROOF of the fraud, but also a declaration of facts contained in it ; but guess who can? My witness, that's who. I certainly hope the CFPB is paying close attention to this matter and the words I am writing now, because clearly there is something wrong here on WF 's error resolution procedures and the way they have treated me throughout this ordeal. The manager is lying. It's just more XXXX, but for the record, he is XXXX XXXX XXXX maybe, full head of XXXX hair. He was dressed in a suit and we sat at the first table to the left of the door. It took a while to get his full attention with his incessant waving of his hands to someone behind the counter mouthing for them to turn the cameras on ; like I was about to rob the bank or something. I can't express how insulting it is that he now claims he can't remember me. I'm not even going to say anymore about him. Like I said, he is lying. If anyone wants to know, Ms. XXXX is a beautiful woman with light XXXX XXXX skin and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX hair. She was wearing a dress that had brown and white and flowers on it, I think, but I might be wrong about that. She was very helpful, actually. He was not. 

Since I'm discussing that meeting, let me mention how unspeakably frustrating it is that WF now claims that the same documentation that went through two separate hands at that branch, first Ms. XXXX 's, and then the manager 's, can now not be located! 

Another surprise! 

Ms. XXXX obviously distributed it as promised to the branch manager, whom then assured me that he forwarded it to fraud. That is another level of incompetence that has now altered my opinion of the manager at the branch and the procedures in place for this type of documentation retention. If WF lost the proof of the fraud, then they should be liable regardless. I can't get that documentation back. More proof of unfair and deceptive treatment, given that in front of a witness, I was assured that it was sent off to fraud. Where does that leave me? 

Oh, I know, out in the cold. 

This is what else I would like WF to address : why I am being treated unfairly by denying me my rights outlined under Regulation E? According to what I have read, my situation in particular indicates that this particular error resolution matter appears as unsafe and unsound banking practices that violates the law or regulations and seems to me that I am now on the other end of a company engaged in abusive and deceptive practices and I would like the CFPB to take note of this and investigate. Among the failures I believe were made in this situation, the following would apply : First : Notice of the error was given in person, by telephone and in writing. 
( b ) Billing error notice. A billing error notice is a written notice from a consumer that : ( 1 ) Is received by a creditor at the address disclosed under 1026.7 ( a ) ( 9 ) or ( b ) ( 9 ), as applicable, no later than 60 days after the creditor transmitted the first periodic statement that reflects the alleged billing error ; ( 2 ) Enables the creditor to identify the consumer 's name and account number ; and ( 3 ) To the extent possible, indicates the consumer 's belief and the reasons for the belief that a billing error exists, and the type, date, and amount of the error.

I complied totally with this. The bank manager printed out my statement and we went over the  transactions together in branch. Again, he promised this information would be given to fraud. His XXXX XXXX  is not my responsibility. 

If there was an investigation, and I was told there was, and then I was told there wasn't, but either way, this is what it says should have happened, but didn't : Reasonable investigation. A creditor must conduct a reasonable investigation before it determines that no billing error occurred or that a different billing error occurred from that asserted. 
Also ... it states : 13 ( c ) Time for Resolution ; General Procedures 1. Temporary or provisional corrections. A creditor may temporarily correct the consumer 's account in response to a billing error notice, but is not excused from complying with the remaining error resolution procedures within the time limits for resolution. 
Lets see ... it's been well over a year. I should be given interest when if my rights are ever enforced and my money returned to me. 

2. Finality of error resolution procedure. A creditor must comply with the error resolution procedures and complete its investigation to determine whether an error occurred within two complete billing cycles as set forth in 1026.13 ( c ) ( 2 ). 
??? 
( 2 ) Adverse credit reports prohibited. The creditor or its agent shall not ( directly or indirectly ) make or threaten to make an adverse report to any person about the consumer 's credit standing, or report that an amount or account is delinquent, because the consumer failed to pay the disputed amount or related finance or other charges.

( 3 ) Acceleration of debt and restriction of account prohibited. A creditor shall not accelerate any part of the consumer 's indebtedness or restrict or close a consumer 's account solely because the consumer has exercised in good faith rights provided by this section. A creditor may be subject to the forfeiture penalty under 15 U.S.C. 1666 ( e ) for failure to comply with any of the requirements of this section.

Perhaps two might apply, but 3 certainly does. My account was closed in what should have been the middle of an investigation and I was harassed about the balance and given no information when I called in as instructed. Also, I shouldn't have been in overdraft to begin with as I have mentioned several times in previous correspondence because ... 
( i ) Relation to Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E. If an extension of credit is incident to an electronic fund transfer, under an agreement between a consumer and a financial institution to extend credit when the consumer 's account is overdrawn or to maintain a specified minimum balance in the consumer 's account, the creditor shall comply with the requirements of Regulation E.

Finally, I want to point out that : Creditor 's failure to comply with billing error provisions. Failure to comply with the error resolution procedures may result in the forfeiture of disputed amounts as prescribed in section 161 ( e ) of the Act. ( Any failure to comply may also be a violation subject to the liability provisions of section 130 of the Act. 

Wells Fargo has consistently sent me the " need more information '' letter, when they should have been following the law. I demand that my money be returned to me at once, given that I have just outlined the deficiencies they have demonstrated in handling my dispute. It is completely unfair and discriminatory. I don't want another " need more information '' letter from them. I have already given them all of this. The facts are that I provided WF with documentation that proved that someone other than me stole my money. That documentation was recorded evidence using the exact amounts and terms which clearly proved that I was victimized. The statements, " we already got XXXX dollars of his Social Security money '', and " we got XXXX as soon as he got it '', and " did he bring the money? Yeah, it's in the glove box, but there's XXXX missing. There was supposed to be XXXX! We think XXXX took it. ", and " I just want my XXXX that he owes me and I'm going to Utah ''. I have went over transactions with the bank manager in XXXX. He pointed out a few of these transactions from the statement he printed out at the branch. The dates were from XX/XX/2019 through the end of XXXX. Also recorded in those documents was a statement made by one of the perpetrators of my victimization which he claims that he prevented me from checking my balances from  the time I got my account set up, until the middle of XXXX. Given I have none of the original recordings anymore, or account access to be sure, maybe WF can use that info to assist with it's determination. For the record, this victimization is ongoing as I've mentioned several times. I just was awarded XXXX XXXX dollars in a civil verdict against two of the people who originally began this insane crusade of harm against me. I wouldn't trust WF with one penny of it, and even with this judgement, I want my money back. I REFUSE to sit back and allow the people who have done unspeakable things to me to be given MY OWN MONEY FOR XXXX ME ... even if WF is willing to do so. 
If I am not given my money back, I am contacting the CFPB Ombudsman with the information provided herein. I WILL be hiring an attorney and I WILL be suing WF for this situation. This is certainly something worth fighting for. I will be waiting for my next " more information letter '', WF. If that is what I receive instead of a check, then I will cease communication until I am represented by an attorney. 

Yours Faithfully, XXXX XXXX Account Number XXXX PS I am attaching a letter from the OCC stating this is RegE and a letter I received from WF which I think proves that they knew of a claim? 
Debit Card Ending in XXXX

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation