Consumer complaint received 2018-01-04
Company: FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF OMAHA
State: NY
Product: Credit card or prepaid card
Sub-product: General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement
Sub-issue: Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement

Complaint:
I am writing to respond to XXXX XXXX of First National Bank of Omaha 's response to our complaint regarding XXXX XXXX XXXX credit card with the bank ( CFPB Case No. XXXX ) regarding our request that {$11000.00} in gambling charges and fees be removed from XXXX XXXX XXXX account. In her response, XXXX says that " these transactions occurred from XXXX XXXX through XXXX XXXX, when you closed the account '' and that " during the time the charges in question were being made by XXXX XXXX, neither you nor XXXX XXXX sought to terminate XXXX XXXX ability to use the account, or informed FNBO of any concerns about the charges XXXX XXXX was making. Rather, the billing statements that reflected these charges were consistently paid. '' I did not know until the fall of XXXX, when I came to XXXX, TX to review my mother 's finances and put her in XXXX XXXX, that she even had a credit card with you, let alone that her grandson was using it. As soon as I found out what was going on, I closed the account, telling your company that I strongly suspected fraud on XXXX XXXX XXXX part, and I also asked for a copy of past billing statements. After I received the billing statements from XXXX XXXX to XXXX XXXX, I reviewed them and discovered over 250 mysterious charges that we determined where from offshore illegal gambling companies. Once we were able to ascertain what the charges were and totaled them up, we talked to your company on the phone about them, but were told you would n't remove these illegal gambling charges. After that, we submitted a claim with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau on XXXX XXXX, XXXX with Case No. XXXX. 

FNBO 's position is that, according to the response they provided for this claim on XXXX XXXX, XXXX to CFPB, " FNBO relies on payment system operator policies and procedures designed to thwart unlawful Internet gambling. The UIGEA does not obligate FNBO to police proactively for potential illegal activities underlying charges made on credit card accounts. '' However, according to your own deposit agreement as seen at https : //www.firstnational.com/common/iws/pdf/deposit_agreement.pdf, you say on Page 25 of the document that " You agree not to use your account for unlawful internet gambling. We may block any Transaction that we identify as a restricted Transaction under the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 or other applicable law. '' On Page 32 of that agreement, FNBO also says that cardholders " agree not to use your card to engage in illegal activity or online gambling. '' It says nothing there about relying on " payment system operator policies and procedures designed to thwart unlawful Internet gambling '' while you stick your fingers in your ears and proclaim to be shocked, shocked gambling was going on with an FNBO  credit card. No, the agreement says that you " may block any Transaction that we identify as a restricted Transaction under the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 or other  applicable law. '' So why would you allow such transactions to go on? Why did your company not identify over 250 offshore gambling charges, with foreign transaction fees to XXXX and XXXX, when we could figure out what they were shortly after first seeing them? Most credit card companies can pick up such shenanigans quickly. Why did n't yours? 
Note that you are not denying that these are illegal online gambling charges. At any rate. you would think that after the 5th or 10th strange foreign transaction fee connected with a company with a name like " XXXX XXXX, '' that your computers ' algorithms would realize something was awry. Instead, you let over 250 such transactions go through without any issue, or with giving any alert to the primary cardholder. My mother was in her mid-XXXX by then, had XXXX XXXX, was not internet-savvy and did not grasp what her grandson was doing with the card. Instead, she paid the bills without understanding what those mysterious charges were. It was your company 's job to protect her, and you failed. 

So we are still seeking the sum of {$11000.00} to be removed from this account. If your company still refuses to take responsibility for this situation, we may be compelled to pursue other avenues to resolve this claim, including legal action. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.

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