Consumer complaint received 2025-06-25 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Domestic (US) money transfer
Issue: Other transaction problem — 
Company: BANCFIRST CORPORATION
State: OK

Complaint narrative:
b'Official Complaint with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\nXXXX XXXX\n\nBank Information\nXXXX\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Ok XXXX\nType of Account: Savings acct- XXXX\nPerson Contacted: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\n\nDetails of complaint below\nINVESTMENT SCAM\nXXXX XXXX account), in XXXX XXXX, he came across an advertisement on XXXX  promoting an investment opportunity (refer to evidence #XXXX). Following this, he registered for a XXXX  meeting where the company representatives outlined the investment process and assured him that a dedicated team would manage his account.\nAfter receiving assurances during two XXXX  meetings, XXXX XXXX  decided to proceed with the investment and purchased two electric vehicle chargers for a total of US$ XXXX The company representative, XXXX, initially requested that the funds be transferred in Bitcoin. However, XXXX XXXX insisted on making a wire transfer, to which XXXX  reluctantly agreed and provided the necessary banking details for the transaction (refer to evidence #XXXX).\n\nXXXX XXXX requested wire transfer, the wire transfer request wasnt fully investigated and\nOn JXXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX initiated a domestic wire transfer of US$ XXXX  from his XXXX XXXX  account to XXXX XXXX (refer to evidence #XXXX).\nTo further establish trust with XXXX XXXX XXXX provided the contact information of three purported investors. However, despite multiple attempts, XXXX XXXX was unable to reach any of them (refer to evidence #XXXX).\nXXXX XXXX followed up with XXXX XXXX  numerous occasions trying to get his funds back, which included calling, emailing and coming inside his primary bank. And was not issued any investigation report of incident or fully credited\nIn XXXX  The Company\'s representatives ceased all communication with XXXX XXXX  and subsequently blocked him on XXXX. (refer to evidence #XXXX) Realizing the fraudulent nature of the operation, XXXX XXXX  decided to sever ties and reached out to his bank again in an attempt to recover his funds. However, he was informed that only US$ XXXX  could be refunded.\XXXX  breached their Duty of Care towards the Client and the public by failing to prevent and stop the fraud at hand.\n\nADR Structure\n1. The jurisdiction applicable to this ADR is the U.S.\n2. XXXX  acted as the Sending Entity\n3. The payment method was a Wire Transfer.\n4. The Applicable Regulations breached by XXXX  (listed)\na. Electronic Fund Transfers Act, 15 U.S.C.  1693 et seq.) - To address concerns raised by the increasing prevalence of electronic banking transactions, Congress enacted the Electronic Fund Transfer Act of 1978 (EFTA), 15 U.S.C.  1693 et seq. Lawmakers viewed such transactionsprocessed through computer networks without human interactionas "much more vulnerable to fraud, embezzlement, and unauthorized use than the traditional payment methods." Wachter v. Denver Nat\'l Bank, 751 F.Supp. 906, 908 (D.Colo. 1990); Bank of Am. v. City Cty of San Francisco, 309 F.3d 551, 564 (9th Cir. 2002).\nb. Regulation E - According to Regulation E - an unauthorized Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) includes any transfer initiated by a person who obtained an access device through fraud, robbery, or force. Regulation E affirms and clarifies that if a consumer is fraudulently induced into sharing account access with a third party, the subsequent transfer is an unauthorized EFT.\nRefund Requirement (12 CFR  1005.11): (c) The financial institution must investigate any reported unauthorized transaction and must provide provisional credit for the amount of the alleged error within 10 business days after receiving the notice.\nLimitations on ability of Financial Institutions to Avoid Liability: No Reliance on Separate Agreements: the EFTA includes an anti-waiver provision that provides that an agreement with a consumer may not contain any waiver of any right conferred or cause of action created by the EFTA.\nDenials based on a consumer\'s alleged negligence are expressly prohibited under the EFTA\'s implementing regulations. See Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Comment for 1005.6\nLiability of Consumer for Unauthorized Transfers, 6(b)(2) ("Negligence by the consumer cannot be used as the basis for imposing greater liability than is permissible under Regulation E. Thus, consumer behavior that may constitute negligence under state law, such as writing the PIN on a debit card or on a piece of paper kept with the card, does not affect the consumer\'s liability for unauthorized transfers.").\nThe EFTA places the burden of proof on the financial institution to demonstrate that challenged transfers were authorized or, if they were unauthorized, that the consumer can be held liable for them. See 15 U.S.C.  1693g(b).\nc. Breach of the Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing: It is well established that a financial entity has a duty to act with reasonable care in its transactions with its depositors ..." (quoting Chazen v. Centennial Bank, 61 Cal. App. 4th 532, 543 (1996)). "[D]epositors as used in Chazen refers a bank\'s duty to act with reasonable care in its transactions with accountholders as an implied term in the contract between the financial entity and its depositor. Chazen, 61\nCal. App. 4th at 543 (citing Barclay Kitchen, Inc. v. Cal. Bank, 208 Cal. App. 2d 347, 353 (1962)); Venture Gen. Agency, LLC v. Wells Fargo Bank, Case No. 19-cv-02778-TSH, 8 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 1, 2019).\nd. Lack of Ordinary Care (Including Uniform Commercial Code Article 4-A) Under both common law and the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), when a financial entity is sued for the negligent release of a depositor\'s money, it must show by a preponderance of the evidence that, under the circumstances, it exercised due care and diligence..... See also Am.Jur.2d Banks and Financial Institutions.\nIn Banco Multiple Santa Cruz, S.A. v. Moreno, 888 F. Supp. 2d 356, 374 (E.D.N.Y. 2012), the court found the public policy interest in safeguarding the interests of ... depositors against the negligent release of their funds, Novak,30 N.Y.2d at 142, 331 N.Y.S.2d 377, 282 N.E.2d 285, carries similar force in the present context, and supports the imposition on [] of a dutyindependent of its contractual obligationsto process withdrawal requests from its customers\' accounts in a non-negligent fashion. See N.Y. Univ.,87 N.Y.2d at 316, 639 N.Y.S.2d 283, 662 N.E.2d 763 (The very nature of a contractual obligation, and the public interest in seeing it performed with reasonable care, may give rise to a duty of reasonable care in performance of the contract obligations, and the breach of that independent duty will give rise to a tort claim[.]).\nSuch a duty is independent of and extraneous to its contractual obligations, although it springs from the parties\' contract. See Bayerische Landesbank,692 F.3d at 5859. Rather than arising out of the will or intention of the parties, the duty is predicated largely on considerations of\nsound social policy. Victorson,37 N.Y.2d at 401, 373 N.Y.S.2d 39, 335 N.E.2d 275 (internal quotation marks omitted).\n6 . The Regulatory authority to report to is the Office of the Comptroller of Currency (OCC).\n7. The Governing Body and Mediator is the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).\n\XXXX  violations\n1. Breach of Duty of Care: Failure of the Financial Entity (XXXX) to exercise reasonable care in processing transactions.\n2. Violation of Consumer Protection Regulations: regulatory safeguards were ignored.\n3. Failure to Adhere to Best Industry Practices: Examples include:\n Financial Entity (XXXX) failed to alert XXXX XXXX about suspicious activity before releasing payments.\n Neglect by branch staff to escalate large or unusual transactions to management.\nXXXX XXXX  is requesting a investigation and full compensation, He is requesting assistance with The Regulatory authority Office of the Comptroller of Currency to assist with this matter.\n\n\nIf you have any questions, please contact XXXX XXXX  at XXXX or email at XXXX\n\nCPT XXXX XXXX (representative)\nPhone number: XXXX\nAddress: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  OK XXXX\nEmail: XXXX\n\nXXXX XXXX Attorney at Law. Legal Department,\XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\nAddress: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX IL XXXX\nEmail: XXXX'

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation