Consumer complaint received 2025-12-03 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am refiling this complaint because Wells Fargo mishandled my XXXX XXXX dispute, mischaracterized the claim, failed to comply with Regulation E, denied my appeal on the wrong basis, closed my account in retaliation, and caused XXXX  harm. Their conduct violates multiple federal consumer-protection laws. I request CFPB escalation and supervisory review. 



1. Wells Fargo Mischaracterized My Dispute ( Reg E Violation ) Wells Fargo repeatedly classified my claim as fraud, even though I never alleged fraud or unauthorized use. 
My dispute was a merchant/services-not-received claim for services I paid for but never received from XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ). 

Mischaracterizing the dispute category allowed Wells Fargo to avoid a proper investigation. 
This violates 12 CFR 1005.11, which requires banks to investigate based on the error alleged. 

Wells Fargo ignored the actual issue I reported. 



2. Investigation Was Not Reasonable or Compliant A lawful Regulation E investigation must : Address the specific error reported Review consumer-provided evidence Contact or attempt to contact the merchant when appropriate Document findings tied to the actual dispute category Wells Fargo did none of these. 

They : Never investigated the merchants non-delivery of services Never addressed the merchants refusal to provide an ACH trace Ignored all documents I submitted Investigated a different issue than the one I raised This is not a reasonable or good-faith investigation under 12 CFR 1005.11.

3. Appeal Was Denied on the Wrong Legal Basis I submitted new evidence during my appeal showing the merchant acted in bad faith. 

Wells Fargo did not review this evidence. 
They simply repeated their original denial based on the wrong dispute type. 

Denying an appeal on an incorrect legal basis is : Arbitrary Capricious In violation of the banks duty of fair dealing Legally insufficient under Regulation Es error-resolution requirements 4. Account Closure Appears Retaliatory ( UDAAP Concern ) Shortly after filing and appealing my dispute, Wells Fargo closed my account. 
Their explanation a vague risk review is not a substantive or documented justification. 

Closing a customers account immediately after exercising dispute rights raises concerns under : Regulation E commentary on retaliation, and UDAAP ( Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ) 12 USC 5531 The timing strongly indicates retaliation for asserting my legal rights. 



5. Resulting ChexSystems Harm Ignored Even though Wells Fargo claimed they do not use ChexSystems, my ChexSystems file now shows negative activity directly tied to their account closure. 

Wells Fargo failed to explain : Why negative DDA data appeared How their retaliatory closure caused additional downstream harm Why this harm has not been corrected This remains unresolved and continues to impact my ability to open accounts. 



Requested CFPB Action Because Wells Fargos response is incomplete and non-compliant with federal law, I request : 1. CFPB supervisory escalation 2. A directive requiring Wells Fargo to : Correctly categorize the dispute as merchant/services-not-received Conduct a legally compliant Regulation E investigation Review all evidence and contact the merchant as required Provide a documented, non-retaliatory explanation for the account closure Remove or correct any negative XXXX  reporting caused by their actions Provide a complete, evidence-supported written response Conclusion Wells Fargo : Mischaracterized my dispute Failed to conduct a lawful investigation Denied my appeal improperly Retaliated by closing my account Caused XXXX  harm Violated Regulation E and UDAAP Provided an incomplete response I request immediate CFPB escalation and supervisory review.

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