Consumer complaint received 2026-06-16 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Other banking product or service
Issue: Managing an account — Problem accessing account
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
Background and Timeline of Events On XX/XX/XXXX, I received email notification from the bank advising that my email address associated with my profile had been changed, something that I did not request. I noticed and reported the incident on XXXX by telephone ; however, I was unable to complete identity authentication remotely, and the bank required that I appear in person at a branch office in the United States to resolve the issue. Through my wifes online banking userwhich covered 2 of the 5 affected accountswe identified unauthorized withdrawal of funds on XXXX. We immediately notified the bank through her credentials, explained in detail the compromise of my online banking credentials and associated accounts, disputed the referred unauthorized transaction, and expressly requested the blocking of my online user, all affected bank accounts, and associated debit and credit cards as a protective measure until resolving the security breach ( replacement debit / credit cards were never received by us ) On XX/XX/XXXX, I submitted a written synopsys of the hacking via secure chat through my wife 's online banking user for further sending to Fraud Department. On XX/XX/XXXX, claim initiated past XXXX was reimbursed by he bank. On XX/XX/XXXX, I submitted a formal written notice to the banks fraud department detailing the compromise stressing again that unauthorized actors still retained control over my bank accounts while also offering options for my identity authentication ( other than visiting the bank in the US ) in an attempt to regain control of accounts. I attached copy of security breach synopsys previously sent on past XXXX On XXXX XXXX & XXXX fraudulent transactions reocurred. We again notified the bank, disputed the activity, and repeatedly requested the freezing of all accounts, cards, and online access until the matter could be fully resolved. Although the bank reportedly imposed temporary restrictions and reimbursed losses, fraudulent activity resumed later. Importantly, three accounts and the credit card remained outside our monitoring capability, as we only retained visibility through my wifes limited online banking access. As it can be seen, credit card was never blocked by the bank and accounts restriction was relaxed. Inability to Resolve Matter in Person Because we are non-U.S. residents, the banks repeated insistence on an in-person appearance significantly impaired our ability to resolve the matter. We attempted to obtain U.S. visas in order to travel and appear at the bank ; however, visa restrictions affecting nationals of our country prevented travel, leaving us unable to comply with the banks requirement. This was stressed repeated times to the bank in our phone calls. Escalation and Complete Loss of Account Control On XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, we noticed fraudulent activity had resumed once again. We contacted the bank immediately, attempted to initiate additional claims, and insisted again on all bank accounts restriction as protective measure. On XX/XX/XXXX my wifes online banking profile was compromised in a similar manner to my account, resulting in the complete loss of access to online banking for both of us. Continued insisting contact by telephone with the bank in order to recover online access for my wife account and to complete claim process for an extra week unsuccessfully. As an alternative, a bank branch assistant in XXXX recommended to action a duly authorized representative under a Power of Attorney ( POA ) for accounts closure. Funds were under restriction until XXXX A POA was prepared authorizing our representative to investigate damages, pursue reimbursement claims, transfer funds, and ultimately close the affected accounts, leaning on a notary recommended and previously used by the bank. On XX/XX/XXXX, our authorized representative appeared at the bank branch with the POA, which was reviewed and approved by the banks legal department. During this intervention, numerous unauthorized charges were identified. Despite this, the bank recommended keeping the compromised accounts active while claims were processed. Partial fund transfers were completed per mandate on POA. Important to note that unauthorized withdrawals continued immediately thereafter, suggesting that the accounts had not been effectively blocked or secured as of yet. Adulterated contact information present at the time on the profile was also captured for investigation. On XX/XX/XXXX, the bank recommended opening entirely new accounts with new account numbers and migrating remaining funds in an effort to mitigate the ongoing compromise, preserve account history, and facilitate claim accounting. During this process, access to my online banking profile was temporarily restored, personal and contact information was updated, replacement debit and credit cards were issued, and additional accounts were opened. There were also indications, however, of ongoing unauthorized access remaining visible, including the re-appearance of same unknown email address associated with my banking profile and unresolved verification issues affecting my legitimate email account which I had previously verified and confirmed, ( re done again at this time ). All this immediately notified by my agent to the bank. By XX/XX/XXXX, I had once again lost access to online banking following the verbal notification by the bank to my agent of POA being objected. Power of Attorney Disputes and Continued Obstruction Following consultations with lawyers, a revised Power of Attorney was prepared to address deficiencies allegedly raised by the bank. On XX/XX/XXXX, our representative returned to the bank, regained temporary access to the accounts, and resumed the process of fraud claims, accounting, and reconciliation. During this intervention, the bank was able to preliminarily corroborate the estimated amount of stolen funds, being over XXXX XXXX XXXX mostly effected during the months of XXXX and XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, the bank issued a letter objecting to the Power of Attorney, effectively halting the process, and once again leaving us without online access while retaining funds out of dispute. On XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted the bank seeking restoration of online banking access per prompt message provided by the system upon trial access. Despite completing identity authentication, access was denied and instructed to appear in person at a branch once again. At that time, I learned that another online user ID, business-type profile not requested or authorized by me, was associated with the accounts and that could not be explained by them, being another indication that system might stiil be under perpetrator 's influence. There was also mention of funds restriction, something that can not be trusted for a fact. On XX/XX/XXXX & XXXX, XXXX, I received written communications from the bank ( dated XX/XX/XXXX ) stating that its fraud investigation had concluded and that reimbursement would be denied because the disputed transactions were deemed consistent with account activity, effectively closing the claim despite the prolonged history of reported account compromise and prior reimbursement determinations as well as inconsistency with prior consumer activity history. On XX/XX/XXXX, I mailed formal claim appeal letters to the bank while requesting all supporting documentation for my evaluation as well as funds restriction to all of the accounts to prevent further draining of remaining legitimate funds under threat. There is still a balance of funds pending in my favour not reflected yet in claims and appeals ( have no access to records ). Continued further contact attempts with bank via telephone for all accounts funds restriction confirmation unsuccessfully till present. Retention of Legitimate Funds In addition to disputed fraudulent transactions, the bank continues to restrict and retain access to legitimate funds that were never subject to fraud claims, disputes, or investigation, effectively depriving us of access to our own property. More concerning to that is the fact of forcing us to keep our assets under its custody despite its proven inability to secure them, directly contradicting what is in dispute and its ongoing assurances. As a result, we currently remain without practical control over both disputed and non-disputed funds despite repeated good-faith efforts to authenticate identity, cooperate with the bank, provide documentation, appoint authorized representation, and resolve the matter through appropriate channels. Escalation of Security Risks and Threats During the last week of XX/XX/XXXX, circumstances escalated significantly when members of my immediate family began receiving threats through social media platforms and telephone communications from individuals believed to be associated with criminal activity, pressuring us to withdraw or discontinue claims related to the fraudulent activity affecting the bank accounts. Although the precise source remains subject to investigation, the timing and nature of these threats raise serious concerns regarding misuse or exposure of sensitive personal information, particularly given the prolonged unauthorized access to our banking profiles and personal data further supported by the bank with its inaction providing preference to criminals over us as legitimate owners. Due to concerns for personal and family safety, the matter required escalation to local police authorities for reporting and protective attention, representing an additional and serious consequence of the prolonged compromise. Principal Concerns Identity theft and account takeover, including unauthorized modification of account credentials, personal information, and account access ; Repeated fraudulent withdrawals and unauthorized transactions despite repeated notice to the bank and explicit requests for protective measures ; Failure by the bank to adequately secure compromised accounts, freeze access, or prevent recurrence after multiple fraud reports and still unresolved after almost a year ; Failure to investigate or remediate the root cause of the compromise, resulting in repeated unauthorized activity over an extended period ; Deprivation of banking benefits to legitimate owners in favour of criminals ; Denial of reimbursement despite prior acknowledgments of fraud and reimbursement history ; Continued restriction and retention of legitimate, non-disputed funds, preventing access to assets not subject to investigation or claim ; Procedural barriers and repeated invalidation of Powers of Attorney, effectively preventing meaningful resolution for non-resident account holders ; Escalation into personal security concerns, including threats directed at immediate family members requiring police involvement. Communication cut off. Really concerning sending letters, notices, emails, phone calls without a single formal response from the bank addressing the main issue. A written notice restricting total accounts funds and online access until resolving should be the golden standard for cases like this, upfront and at the very least. Financial and Consequential Impact Consequences : Current estimated direct losses exceed USD {$40000.00}, subject to reconciliation and updated accounting. In addition to disputed losses, the bank continues to retain access to other legitimate funds not subject to fraud or claim, resulting in prolonged deprivation of financial resources. This matter has caused significant hardship, including prolonged inability to access personal funds, disruption of financial obligations, extensive time, effort and expenses associated with fraud reporting and legal arrangements, and substantial emotional and physical distress affecting my family seeing the savings of our life at fraudsters mercy with bank 's support. Unbelievable! On top of that, the prolonged exposure of sensitive personal information to criminals and the subsequent threats directed toward family members have elevated the matter from a financial dispute to one involving personal safety and security concerns for our living in a very high risk country.

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 monetary relief