Consumer complaint received 2025-11-12 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement — Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement
Company: Block, Inc.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a formal dispute under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ) regarding an unauthorized ATM withdrawal made using my Cash App card issued by XXXX XXXX. I reported the transaction to Cash App promptly, but my claim was denied without a proper investigation or written explanation, in violation of Regulation E ( 12 CFR 1005 ). 

Because XXXX XXXX  is the issuing financial institution, I am requesting a formal investigation and written report of your findings as required under Regulation E. In addition, the transaction occurred at a XXXX XXXX  ATM , and I am requesting an investigation into whether XXXX XXXX  failed to properly maintain or secure the ATM, which may have allowed skimming or other unauthorized access to occur. 

I believe Cash App ( Block, Inc. ), XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX  have failed to uphold their respective obligations to protect consumers from unauthorized electronic fund transfers and to conduct good-faith investigations under federal law. 


Summary of the Issue On XX/XX/year>, an unauthorized withdrawal of {$980.00} occurred from my Cash App debit card at a XXXX XXXX  ATM located at XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, FL XXXX. 

I did not authorize this withdrawal, and my physical card remained in my possession at all times. Based on the sequence of events, I believe my card information was skimmed or electronically compromised at that same ATM during a prior legitimate visit on XX/XX/year>. 

I immediately filed a fraud dispute through Cash App ( Block, Inc. ), but the claim was denied without proper explanation or resolution. Cash App has refused to provide any details of a proper investigation or any provisional credit all of which are required under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ) and Regulation E ( 12 CFR 1005 ). 



Regulation and Compliance Concerns Failure to properly investigate the unauthorized transaction as required under Regulation E 1005.11.

Failure to issue provisional credit within 10 business days while the investigation was pending.

Failure to provide a written explanation of investigation results or legitimate supporting documentation. 
XXXX XXXX  lack of oversight of its third-party partner ( Cash App ) in ensuring compliance with federal consumer protection obligations. 
XXXX XXXX  potential failure to maintain ATM security, which may have allowed a skimming device or other compromise to occur posing a risk to consumers. 



XXXX. Violation of Regulation E 1005.11 Failure to Conduct a Proper Investigation Under 12 CFR 1005.11 ( c ), when a consumer notifies a financial institution of an unauthorized electronic fund transfer, the institution must investigate promptly and complete the investigation within 10 business days ( or 45 days if more time is needed ). 
Cash app denying my dispute within XXXX hours without contacting the ATM operator, reviewing footage, or examining the transaction data can not reasonably constitute a good-faith investigation. 
A financial institution is required to review all relevant evidence before making a determination not just look at whether the card number was used. 


XXXX. Failure to Issue Provisional Credit ( 1005.11 ( c ) ( 2 ) ( i ) ) If the investigation could not be completed within 10 business days, the institution must provide a provisional credit to your account for the disputed amount while it continues the investigation.

Cash Apps denial in under two days suggests no provisional credit was provided, which is a violation if the claim was not fully and properly investigated within that time frame.

3. Failure to Provide Required Written Explanation ( 1005.11 ( d ) ) If the financial institution determines that no error occurred, it must provide a written explanation of the results, including : A summary of the investigation, The evidence relied upon, and A notice of the right to request supporting documentation. 
Simply stating You authorized the transaction because your card was used does not meet this requirement. 


XXXX. XXXX XXXX  Oversight Obligations Although Cash App ( Block , Inc. ) operates the platform, XXXX XXXX  is the regulated financial institution under the EFTA and is ultimately responsible for ensuring that its third-party service provider ( Cash App ) complies with all consumer protection laws. 
If XXXX XXXX  allowed Cash App to deny your dispute without a proper Regulation E investigation, XXXX XXXX  may also be liable for noncompliance. 



XXXX. XXXX XXXX  ATM Security Duty Because the fraudulent transaction occurred at a XXXX XXXX ATM, the bank may have a duty of care to maintain and secure its machines against skimming devices and other fraud risks. 
If the ATM was compromised, XXXX XXXX  could share liability for damages resulting from negligent maintenance or security. 




Supporting Facts On XX/XX/year>, I spoke with the branch manager at the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ATM, who confirmed that the machine has an active security camera and that footage should be available. 

I have filed a police report regarding this fraudulent withdrawal. 

Cash App has numerous ongoing complaints and class-action lawsuits related to denied fraud claims. 

I have documentation of all transactions, dispute communications, and proof of possession of my card at the time of the fraudulent withdrawal.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation