Consumer complaint received 2023-01-08
Company: GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA
State: PA
Product: Checking or savings account
Sub-product: Savings account
Issue: Managing an account
Sub-issue: Deposits and withdrawals

Complaint:
Summary : Goldman Sachs Bank, through its XXXX online banking division, incorrectly set up a joint account by using the primary account holder 's name and combining it with the personal information of the secondary account holder, creating an individual account with account holder information that could not be properly verified because it did not match. Had XXXX followed proper customer due diligence procedures, this error should have come to light at account opening or shortly thereafter. But this error only became apparent XXXX months after the account was established, when what should have been a relatively routine verification of a XXXX transfer from the account resulted in the blocking of the customer 's account for XXXX weeks, despite promises to investigate and resolve the matter in XXXX to XXXX business days. Considerable effort and many hours of phone time were necessary to deal with the largely callous and difficult XXXX bureaucracy to get the account block removed. Further incompetence in basic banking functions rendered XXXX helpless in resolving the basic matter of properly titling the account, an issue that remains unresolved. 

Details : XXXX. I and my wife opened a joint savings account with XXXX on XX/XX/2022. 
XXXX. The account was funded not less than XXXX times since the account was opened, and all deposits were handled without incident. 
XXXX. All seemed to be fine until my wife attempted to process a XXXX transfer out of our XXXX account to our joint checking account at XXXX Bank. We initially received confirmation that the transfer had been processed, but this was later reversed and our account was arbitrarily restricted from all activity. We could not even view our account online. 
XXXX. Our first indication of a problem were calls to my cell phone and emails sent to me asked that I contact XXXX, which my wife initially did. Representatives at XXXX essentially refused to discuss the matter with my wife, despite the fact that she was inquiring about an account that she believed to be an account in joint ownership. 
XXXX. When I called XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, I was able provide answers to all of their questions, but despite several attempts they were unable to confirm my identity. Finally, after providing identifying information numerous times to several individuals such as the last XXXX digits of my SSN, XXXX, and XXXX security XXXX, I was able to speak to someone in the Fraud area. Here, after questioning the Fraud representative, I was able to learn that the XXXX withdrawal had raised concerns, which only mounted when my wife and I tried to identify and authenticate ourselves. I also learned that the account had been set up improperly, with my name as the sole owner, BUT WITH MY WIFE 'S INFORMATION SUCH AS XXXX AND XXXX LISTED AS MY INFORMATION. This explained the inability for XXXX to verify my identity when I called them. 
XXXX. At this point, with my wife on the call with me, we addressed every question asked by the Fraud employee, explaining that we had opened the account jointly with both of us sitting at the computer and verifying the input. We were emphatic that this was an error on the part of XXXX and not us. Despite all of this, and the admission by the Fraud employee that the account had not been opened properly, we could not get XXXX to remove the block from the account nor would they take any steps to correct the account titling issue. 
XXXX. Rather, we were told that an investigation would need to be conducted and that we would be called back in XXXX to XXXX business days. 
XXXX. Despite the promised follow-up, we never received any contact from XXXX. Instead, we called them ourselves on XX/XX/XXXX, but failed to get a live human being on the phone. The phone system repeatedly forces the caller to press XXXX to remain on the call or XXXX to receive a call back. On the surface, this is a cleverly disguised way to force callers out of the telephone queue through frustration, setting them up for a return call that will likely never be received. Despite waiting far too long for our call to be answered, the option of asking for a call back seemed ludicrous given that they failed to call us back in the first place. We finally gave up, assuming that we would be unsuccessful getting any kind of resolution on the Friday before XXXX anyway. 
XXXX. Receiving no communication from XXXX, we again attempted to resolve the issue on XX/XX/XXXX. On this attempt, we were at least successful in getting the block removed from our account, essentially XXXX weeks after it was put in place. This happened only because of our persistence and our good fortune in getting an account representative who was willing to help by working between what she called the " backroom '' and the XXXX area. But when we asked her to help get the account titling issue resolved by adding my wife 's name to the account, she ran into problems because the XXXX new account system could not successfully deliver a confirming email to my wife 's XXXX email account ; a real mystery because she has been able to receive other emails from XXXX. Finally we were told that the confirming email would be received by day 's end, but regardless of receipt of the email my wife would need to speak with an account representative again to fully get her part of the joint account set up. THE PROMISED EMAIL WAS NEVER RECEIVED. The duration of the telephone call to XXXX was XXXX hours and XXXX minutes. 
XXXX. On the following day, the account XXXX that had helped us the prior day called explaining that she was unable to get my wife 's name added to the account and she would call back later. When she finally did call, along with her supervisor, my wife was told there was a technical problem on the part of XXXX and it would have to be escalated to technical support. My wife was told that she should be contacted in XXXX to XXXX business days. The time spent on the phone for this interaction was nearly another hour. 
XXXX. XXXX did call again on Tuesday, XX/XX/XXXX, suggesting that my wife file an application for a new account. Doing so would have represented the XXXX such action and she declined and said we would most likely just close the account. After thinking more about it, she called XXXX back and asked to speak with a supervisor. The supervisor did try to help and worked with her to input the new account, but left the phone on numerous times, placing her of hold ( this is something that we experience repeatedly with XXXX reps ). While on hold, the call terminated abruptly. Knowing that she would have to run the XXXX of the XXXX automated telephone system to try to get back to the supervisor - a daunting task at best, she decided to wait for a call back from the supervisor. No one ever called back and this was the last contact we had with XXXX. 
XXXX. At this time, the account remains open as an individual account in my name. It will most likely be closed and the funds moved to a bank that is competent and responsive to its customers.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation