Consumer complaint received 2025-11-04 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem caused by your funds being low — Non-sufficient funds and associated fees
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
Explanation of Attached Screenshots XXXX XXXX  The screenshots I attached show two different and contradictory versions of my balance and transaction order. 

In the second screenshot, the bank sent me an alert stating that my balance was {$7.00}. At that point, all previous charges had already been deducted, and my balance was still positive. Nothing new had posted. 

However, in the first screenshot, the bank subsequently rearranged the order of transactions and placed my {$100.00} XXXX payment in a position that caused my balance to suddenly appear as {$91.00}. This negative balance only appeared after they changed the sequencing of the transactions. 

This means the bank modified or re-ordered the transaction history after the fact, which resulted in a negative balance that did not exist at the time I received the {$7.00} low balance alert. The transaction history they are showing now contradicts the banks own alert and does not reflect the original order or balance. 

This manipulation of transaction order caused an artificial negative balance and allowed the bank to remove available funds without showing a reversal transaction. This supports my claim that my account balance was altered without proper documentation, which violates Regulation E.

XXXX XXXX The bank issued a provisional credit for my dispute, but the credit was immediately offset by the same disputed transactions, which defeated the purpose of the credit and caused my account to show a false negative balance. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, the bank posted a temporary/provisional credit of {$300.00} for the disputed charges ( as shown in the Status Details notice ). However, immediately after the credit posted, my available balance dropped because the disputed charges were re-applied, reversed, or manipulated without showing any clear history or ledger entry. The provisional credit was essentially removed by the same transactions it was supposed to cover. 

For example, on XX/XX/XXXX, a {$100.00} XXXX payment suddenly posted into an account that was showing {$91.00}. My account should not have been negative at all during an active dispute while a provisional credit was already issued. Nothing new posted to justify a negative balance of {$91.00}, so the negative balance is a direct result of improper handling of the disputed transactions. 

This shows : The bank acknowledged the dispute and issued the temporary credit. 
The credit should have protected the account from going negative. 
Instead, the bank re-processed or rearranged the same disputed charges against that credit, creating a false negative balance. 
There is no transaction history explaining where the credit went. 

I am requesting that the CFPB review this because the bank is manipulating posted transactions, removing the benefit of the provisional credit, and causing financial harm during an active investigation. The bank should restore the provisional credit and correct the account balance immediately. 

In summary, the banks actions have effectively nullified the provisional credit by reapplying the disputed charges, resulting in an inaccurate negative balance. Furthermore, I would like to emphasize that my type of account does not permit overdraft protection at all. Therefore, my account should never have been allowed to go negative under any circumstances. 

I am requesting that the CFPB ensure the bank correct this error, restore the provisional credit properly, and confirm that my account can not be placed into a negative balance when overdraft protection is not even a feature of my account.

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