Consumer complaint received 2026-03-15 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Banking errors
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint regarding Wells Fargo Bank , N.A . for multiple violations of Regulation E, unreasonable investigation practices, and improper handling of several disputes totaling {$12000.00}. These disputes include a highvalue XXXX reservation ( {$11000.00} ), XXXX ( {$25.00} ), XXXX ( {$240.00} ), and a separate XXXX leak refund ( {$480.00} ) that Wells Fargo seized. The underlying merchant, XXXX, engaged in conduct that directly caused these disputes, including : - XXXX told me to leave the property despite full payment. - XXXX took my payment but did not provide the stay or the nights I paid for. - XXXX attempted an unauthorized {$1000.00} charge even though I had already paid. Wells Fargo refused to begin the investigation until I provided what they considered adequate evidence, which violates 12 CFR 1005.11 ( c ). I sent them numerous pieces of evidence they rejected. Wells Fargo also violated Regulation E by predetermining the amount they were willing to credit me before beginning the investigation. Regulation E requires a reasonable investigation before any determination is made, and provisional credit must reflect the full amount of the alleged error. By crediting only {$5000.00} and treating that amount as final before the investigation even began, Wells Fargo violated 12 CFR 1005.11 ( c ), which prohibits predetermining outcomes, delaying investigations, or conditioning investigations on the consumer providing additional evidence. This conduct is consistent with the patterns identified in Wells Fargos prior consent decrees, which found systemic failures in dispute handling, unauthorized holds, and improper accountmanagement practices. Wells Fargo also seized the {$480.00} refund XXXX issued for a ceiling leak, even though it was unrelated to the dispute. They issued inconsistent rulings on charges from the same merchant in the same dispute and provided no documentation supporting their determination. Wells Fargo also improperly denied my dispute with XXXX, even though the charge was the result of an unsafe, unroadworthy vehicle that XXXX provided to me. I took XXXX to court and won, proving that Wells Fargos investigation and denial were incorrect. Regulation E requires a reasonable investigation before a determination is made, and Wells Fargos refusal to reverse the charge ( despite clear evidence and a court judgment confirming the merchant was at fault ) demonstrating a failure to conduct a lawful investigation. This conduct is consistent with the patterns identified in Wells Fargos prior consent decrees, which found systemic failures in dispute handling and improper reliance on unreliable merchant claims. During this same period, Wells Fargo also improperly held a {$2500.00} XXXX check and put an extended hold on it without cause, further demonstrating systemic failures in deposit handling and violations consistent with prior consent decrees. Wells Fargos conduct in my case is consistent with the patterns identified in the CFPBs 2022 Consent Order, which found widespread mismanagement of deposit accounts, improper handling of disputes, unauthorized holds, and failures to provide required credits and refunds.

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