Consumer complaint received 2026-03-04 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Savings account
Issue: Opening an account — Didn't receive terms that were advertised
Company: MORGAN STANLEY & CO. LLC
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I previously submitted CFPB Complaint No. XXXX regarding Morgan Stanley Private Banks denial of a promotional cash bonus associated with a Premium Savings Account opened through the E * TRADE platform. Morgan Stanley responded to that complaint, but the response did not address the central disclosure issue and included explanations that appear inconsistent with newly discovered evidence. In light of newly discovered evidence, I am submitting this additional complaint so that the CFPB can review information that appears inconsistent with the companys response. On XX/XX/XXXX, while logged into my authenticated E * TRADE account opened through Morgan Stanley at Work, I was presented within my account dashboard with a promotional offer for a Premium Savings Account that included a promotional code. I followed the instructions displayed in that authenticated interface, entered the promotional code during the account-opening process, and opened the XXXX XXXX Account. The system accepted the promotional code and allowed the account to be opened. The promotional terms displayed during enrollment required that the customer apply the promotional code at account opening, deposit qualifying new funds within 30 days, and maintain the required balance during a XXXX maintenance period. Based on those terms I opened the account and deposited {$100000.00} in net new funds. After account opening, Morgan Stanley confirmed in writing that my account had been enrolled in the promotional offer and later confirmed that I had met the qualifying new money deposit requirement for the cash bonus. After maintaining the required balance for more than XXXX months, Morgan Stanley later notified me that the account did not qualify for the promotional bonus because I was not the original recipient of the promotional email. This eligibility restriction was not disclosed anywhere in the authenticated enrollment interface when the promotional code was accepted and the account was opened. The first time this condition appeared was in communications sent after the account had already been opened and funded. After the original complaint was closed, I located archived versions of Morgan Stanleys own promotional page from XX/XX/XXXX using the Internet Archive ( XXXX XXXX ). These archived pages show that the XXXX XXXX promotion was publicly advertised on the E * TRADE website with a promotional code and an enrollment window extending through XX/XX/XXXX. Importantly, the archived promotional page itself does not state that eligibility is limited to the original recipient of a promotional email. The promotion is presented as a public promotional campaign using a promo code. My account was opened on XX/XX/XXXX, which falls within the enrollment period shown on the archived promotional page. However, in its response to the original complaint Morgan Stanley stated that the promotion had concluded prior to my account opening and that my account was instead opened through a targeted, eligibility-based promotion. These explanations appear inconsistent with the documented facts. The system accepted the promotional code during enrollment and confirmed that the account was enrolled in the promotion. If the promotion had concluded prior to account opening, the code should not have been accepted and the account should not have been enrolled in a promotion. The bank also characterizes the promotion as a public promotional offer while denying the bonus based on a requirement that the account holder be the original recipient of a promotional email. That requirement does not appear anywhere in the promotional page itself. Post-enrollment alerts containing additional disclosure language can not retroactively introduce a material eligibility restriction after a consumer has already accepted the promotional offer and committed funds. I relied on the promotional terms presented during enrollment when deciding to open and fund the account. I deposited {$100000.00} and maintained the required balance during the promotional maintenance period. The funds used to satisfy the promotional deposit requirement remain in the account. Because the archived promotional page from Morgan Stanleys own website does not include the email-recipient eligibility requirement referenced in the banks response, the newly discovered evidence raises questions regarding whether the promotional eligibility conditions were clearly disclosed at the time the account was opened. I am submitting this complaint so that the CFPB can review this additional evidence and determine whether Morgan Stanley Private Banks denial of the promotional bonus is consistent with the promotional offer that was presented during enrollment.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation