On XXXX XXXX, 2017, XXXX XXXX XXXX from the Office of the President of US Bank responded in Case No. XXXX. To the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX obfuscated, misrepresented, and lied, also by omission. As his correspondence also came from the Office of the President, I believe perhaps this matter should also be turned over to authorities with jurisdiction over fraud by bank employees. This has been conscious, repeated misrepresentation by US Bank going on for several years in this matter, now including misrepresentation to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. XXXX XXXX, in an attempt to obfuscate, follows a long line of US Bank obfuscation in this matter, and states that he can find no original purchase on my bank statement of the items returned by me to XXXX and credited to my US Bank account, thus somehow, according to him and put forth repeatedly by US Bank in this matter, justifying the bizarre scenario that US Bank, that somehow I " repurchased '' items I actually returned?!? The items were NEVER purchased on a US Bank account, originally or any other time, as I have made US Bank aware of repeatedly, and thus there would NEVER be a purchase of these items showing on ANY US Bank statement, which XXXX XXXX is fully aware of. The purchase was made through other means completely irrelevant to this complaint. I simply had XXXX do what merchants do many thousands of times a day, return an item to the bank card of my choosing. Merchants do this daily because people lose cards, close accounts, and for a host of other reasons. If this matter between US Bank and I or any other authorities proceeds to discovery at some point, I am certain it will be established that this happens many, many times a day with US Bank customers. Thus, XXXX XXXX not only obfuscated, but also misrepresents by stating that I have said that the items were purchased on my US Bank account. I have said the exact opposite many times, can document this, and US Bank knows this. This leads into the issue of XXXX XXXX lying. He attempts to throw much smoke up in an attempt to hide what really went on here, something that US Bank is fully aware of and was complicit in at the time of the charges, as XXXX 's actions were coordinated at the exact same time and day, a Saturday, with several institutions. When I saw the fraud XXXX had done elsewhere the day at issue, a Saturday at that, when it could be expected that I would have difficulty responding as banks, at best, are open for only a limited time, I pulled my money out of my US Bank account immediately, thus leaving US Bank in the position in which it had to claim earlier authorizations occurred for the charges against my account to justify US Bank allowing the charges by XXXX to go through on an account with insufficient funds. The entire matter was an attempt by an XXXX employee to, essentially, get back at me for the volume of returns I had made to XXXX. US Bank and XXXX had further communications in the matter as well after the day the charges were allowed to go through against my account. XXXX XXXX has obfuscated, misrepresented, and lied in this matter to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau on behalf of the Office of the President of US Bank. The items were never purchased on a US Bank account, US Bank knows this, and US Bank knows what really was going on here. So XXXX XXXX purporting to extend me the " opportunity '' to point out where on my statements the purchases of the items occurred is just another example of US Bank 's Office of the President misleading the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. XXXX XXXX is further trying to hide the fact that US Bank 's real position in this matter, for which it, understandably, is afraid to come out and say, is that US Bank feels it can decide, essentially on a whim, and at the behest of a merchant, to charge someone 's account if the merchant comes to US Bank with a sympathetic-enough argument, which in this case would have been an individual at XXXX upset by the volume of my returns. But as you can see, this all took coordination and communication between US Bank and XXXX, and so for the Office of the President of US Bank to feign ignorance while purporting to extend me an opportunity to locate the original charges on my statement is an attempt to intentionally mislead the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. US Bank knew before it even let the charges go through that there was not an original purchase of the items on my account, and US Bank certainly was made aware of this fact on multiple occasions afterward as part of my communications with US Bank in this matter. US Bank 's deceit in this matter is an insult to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Lastly, by engaging in this behavior, US Bank became complicit in another theft, perhaps at a felony level given the combined dollar amounts of the merchandise involved. To wit, XXXX took possession of property in exchange for crediting my account, all as part of the aforementioned return transaction. XXXX then turned around with US Bank and charged my account for the merchandise it now had in its possession. But it never gave me the property, or even made an attempt to give me the property I purportedly, according to US Bank, had now " repurchased. '' This also further highlights the bizarre smoke that XXXX XXXX is putting in front of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau on behalf of the Office of the President of US Bank.