BANK OF AMERICA COMMERCIAL BANKING Phone call on XX/XX/XXXX to XXXX Customer Service at XXXX XXXX to XXXXXXXX XXXX 
Re : OVERDRAFT FEES MADE WHEN DENYING ACCESS TO ACCOUNT FOR THREE DAYS PRIOR CARD REISSUE : I contend that BOA has breached their contract and violated Federal and State Law by denying me 24/7 access during critical times and then hammering me with an unwarranted and illegal OVERDRAFT FEE of {$35.00}. This charge is especially unfair when considering that I had attempted for 72 hours to gain access to my business account and had to wait 90 minutes to get a representative on the phone. 
I reasonably requested reversal of the OVERDRAFT FEE and was denied. 
Recently, had a BOA Business Debit card cancelled due to loss and upon noting potential unauthorized activity. A substitute card was obtained and the account was monitored. Another card was received in the mail and activated the week of XX/XX/XXXX-XX/XX/XXXX, or thereabouts. 
From Friday, XX/XX/XXXX, at XXXX XXXX, up through and including Monday, XX/XX/XXXX,  access via the internet and cell phone app was problematic and at each time I attempted to log in to my account via cell phone or laptop while traveling, I was continually bounced stating I had not entered the correct pass code and had been prompted to create a new pass code at every try ; subsequently resulting in many different changes to the pass code, all without affect. 
Having been denied access and unable to monitor the account, I was charged an OVERDRAFT FEE of {$35.00} for an internet charge that came through, and which is still be investigated, of approximately {$19.00}. On Monday, XX/XX/XXXX, after receiving an email from BOA a deposit was made to cover all charges and creating a positive balance. 
If BOA can do this unfairly to me, they can do or have done it to thousands of people. It is questionable whether they can profit by defaulting individuals through denying them access to their accounts so that they would never know what their account balance is or what has transpired, all contrary to their banking contract with me. 
On Monday, XX/XX/XXXX, after telephoning continually and waiting on hold due to high volume of calling for more than a period exceeding 90 minutes, I spoke with a representative who said that there was nothing to do and that the charges were held valid. I then spoke with a XXXX XXXX XXXX, Small Business Department in XXXX, XXXX   XXXX, who stated he was the Small Business Officer and Team Manager and who had no address, no phone number or extension or no email and no Employee Identification, and who identified himself as the ultimate individual in charge as his boss, an individual only stated as XXXX, XXXX Direct Manager, had already gone home and that there was no further call escalation. 
XXXX XXXX continued with a theme of plausible denial and stated that online and phone communications and website were merely an accommodation and had no real effect on ones banking account. I informed him that a contract was created and that there were lengthy and continuing TERMS OF USE of such modalities and that it was not a trivial avenue of banking access, contrary to his statements. 

XXXX XXXX stated he only could give out the following : Executive Complaint BANK OF AMERICA XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX BANK OF AMERICA LEGAL ORDER/PROCESSING DIVISION XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Fax NUMBER given as : XXXX ) With no physical address, no name of a responsible party, no phone number of a responsible party. And a plausible denial that any further information could be given, such as an email or fax number ( except Legal Dept ) in which to contact the above. 

I was denied the name of the Chief Executive Officer, his/her contact information, and the same with the Custodian of Records in which to personally service legal process. XXXX XXXX stated that this information is not given to the general public. When I informed him I was a business customer and not the general public, he stated that I fell into the category. 

An investigation into BOAs policies, practices and illegal acts should be reviewed in light of all federal laws and regulations under which they bound. This practice of illegally denying account access and then levying overdraft fees are illegal and have probably been experienced by thousands of account holders.