Consumer complaint received 2016-07-05
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: CA
Product: Bank account or service
Sub-product: Checking account
Issue: Making/receiving payments, sending money

Complaint:
I currently have an open claim with Bank of America due to an incident of fraud on my checking account with them. I had noticed a charge in the nominal amount of {$77.00} from a company name I did not recognize. After querying the payment, I was informed that the same amount had been taken since XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. It was agreed that this was fraud and the money was refunded to the account on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX a day after the claim was initiated. On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX Bank of America decided that the charges did in fact stand and that we had made them so proceeded to take the entire sum of the charges totaling {$850.00} from my checking account. They did however credit XXXX amount of {$77.00} back to us on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX of those taken. This implies that XXXX is fraud but the other charges are not and presents yet another inconsistency in Bank of America 's claims procedure. Since then, the claim has become a full time job to fight. My wife and I have spent endless hours on the phone to the claims department, as well as having to go in branch. After demanding the paperwork and evidence Bank of America were basing their actions on, we received copies of agreements made with XXXX XXXX for items of furniture using our details. The details given were incredibly basic, with just my name, routing and account numbers being listed. Bank of America refuse to budge based on our routing number being present but these are readily available for hackers, fraudsters or mail thieves and as such, consumers rely on their banks to provide the safety they promise. However, Bank of America failed to provide this at even the most basic level in this instance. We were told by the claims department that the charges stood in part due to my signature being on the documents but it was not my signature. It was a printed version of my name, perhaps even done via an online form and nothing remotely close to my handwriting or signature. The agreements also did not contain my phone number or any other details customary to a finance application. There were so many red flags with this transaction that the principal ruling allowed for a refund of the money taken but the decision was bizarrely reversed by even more questionable evidence. So far, in addition to the aforementioned actions taken by Bank of America, there has been a consistent lack of adequate customer service and the claims department has been evasive at best. My wife has gone to the branch several times in the past week to demand help, usually to be told that nothing could be done and she should call the claims department. As both of us have spent countless hours doing just that, she has persisted in demanding help from the in branch staff. A cashier at the Bank of America in XXXX, off XXXX XXXX, told her that she could make an appointment for someone to call the claims department in branch and advocate for her. My wife was told that her " appointment '' would be the following Tuesday at XXXX and that she would have to bring all of the paperwork and documents we have. She arrived in branch at the given time but was informed that there was no appointment. The cashier who had made it with her was present but no accountability was taken beyond it being a 'misunderstanding '. After demanding to speak to a manager, one came out & eventually asked that she bring a letter refuting the charges with my signature as supporting evidence. She did so the following day and it was allegedly faxed to the claims department. After a follow up call with the claims department this morning, she was told that they had not received the fax and to check back on Monday. This essentially means more hours either my wife or myself have to spend fighting to have the money Bank of America allowed to fraudulently be charged from my checking account returned.

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