Consumer complaint received 2018-05-01
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: IL
Product: Checking or savings account
Sub-product: Checking account
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account
Sub-issue: Transaction was not authorized

Complaint:
XX/XX/XXXX To Whom It May Concern : On or about XX/XX/XXXX unauthorized charges were made to my banking account ( s ). The date and any further dates will be given based on the Wells Fargo bank statements and could be a day or two later than the actual dates as I only have a record of the dates of posted amounts. I was alerted to this incident via the Wells Fargo electronic overdraft protection alert. I immediately called the bank that evening and then called them immediately in the morning to file the fraud complaint. The amount taken from the account in question was a total of {$2300.00}. This was also the amount of the provisional credit that was authorized for and placed in my account by Wells Fargo. 

An investigation ensued, and the above amount was credited within ten businesses days. After the bank contacted the merchant, I was contacted directly by the merchant via my XXXX account informing me that I had an unspecified balance due to the merchant, that needed to be remedied. I then called Wells Fargo to inform them of this email and was told to call the merchant and to get any information I could without giving any personal information. In the course of this conversation, I was advised that the account with the merchant, in my name, was opened in XXXX of XXXX and that there were transactions that transpired at that time as well. I told the person I was speaking to that I was unaware of said transactions and that I would look into it. 

I reviewed my online bank statements to find that there were indeed charges there and called to inform Wells Fargo of my findings. I told them that I did not authorize the XXXX transactions but was aware that those charges were past the 60-day window. I then placed all fault on myself for not realizing said transactions.The representative for Wells Fargo offered to make a new claim for those charges and said all the bank could do was deny the claims since they were past the 60 days but that I should try. 

During the course of time passing, the merchant returned all money for XXXX save for {$200.00} to one account and {$700.00} to another. Wells Fargo issued a final credit for the joint account to cover the non-refunded charges for XXXX. Wells Fargo had previously issued a final credit of {$740.00} for XXXX charges to make the account completely whole. In short, all charges for XXXX for both accounts have been returned to me via a refund from the merchant or from Wells Fargo. While the XXXX transactions were being concluded, the bank then stated they would credit the missing {$200.00} to my bank account. 

Meanwhile, Wells Fargo is indicating that they are reversing the original provisional credit minus the above {$200.00} and will be removing the new amount of {$2100.00} from my account on XX/XX/XXXX. I was told via online message and over the phone by Wells Fargo that I would receive two letters advising me of the {$200.00} credit as well as the reversal of the {$2100.00}. At the time of this writing, I have received neither letter. Moreover, the reason they stated that the reversal was occurring was that there was no liability protection for me on the immediately reported fraud in XXXX. This was due to the charges reported later that occurred in XX/XX/XXXX. The XXXX charges were added by Wells Fargo to the claim as opposed to being made into a new claim. 

The response from the bank was that since the charges were from the same merchant that they were forced to place them on the same complaint. I then pointed out to them that the charges appeared to be from two different places ( XXXX originating from XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX while XXXX transactions stem from XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX ) . Though it is clear that this XXXX is the processing establishment or otherwise affiliated with both merchants in some way, there is no indication that these merchants are the same company. As time passed and the claim was filed, it was discovered that the merchant was the same, but that information was discovered at a later date. Once I pointed out this discrepancy of what was known at the time, the Wells Fargo agent then stated that it was the same card, so they had to be processed together. In short, the agent appeared to be determined to make sure the 60-day window was initiated in order to claim no liability for the immediately reported XXXX transactions. Furthermore, though the merchant has refunded the vast majority of the XXXX transactions, they have issued no refunds for any of the transactions occurring in XXXX at the time of this writing. As such, Wells Fargo is stating that they have no liability for the immediately reported XXXX transactions due to their adding the XXXX amounts to the original claim as opposed to opening a new claim as stated previously. I do not see why these can not be handled as two separate claims for a variety of reasons, as that is how they were reported. 

With that stated, I find all of these interactions with Wells Fargo to be quite curious to phrase this most charitably. I am therefore requesting documented evidence of their decision based on these regulations that were cited over the phone. These regulations were not explained and the explanations of why Wells Fargo was doing what they did have changed several times now. For example, the same vender explanation changed to the same card explanation, which later changed to it does not matter because we ( Wells Fargo ) now have the claim in this 60-day process. 

If it is found that that the way Wells Fargo is processing this claim is an attempt at an end around to bypass their liability to fraudulent charges, then I ask that the provisional credit continue to stay in place while this 90-day investigation ( ending sometime in early to XXXX ) is concluded via XXXX. Furthermore, I am requesting documentation which states that Wells Fargos action of adding the subsequent claim from a date prior to the initial and timely fraud claim voids the fraud protection for the first and immediately reported XXXX claim. 

Thank you

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