Consumer complaint received 2025-11-26 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK, THE
State: OH

Complaint narrative:
Corrected Complaint and Supplemental Evidence Summary Filed Due to System Limitation Preventing Upload of Required Documentation Between XXXX XXXX XXXX I was recruited online for what I believed was a legitimate remote job involving completing review tasks. I was instructed to deposit money into XXXX, convert it to cryptocurrency, and transfer it to what I was told was my personal work credit account. I completed these steps multiple times, ultimately transferring approximately {$20000.00}. The platform repeatedly claimed my funds were locked until more deposits were made, which is when I realized it was a scam. On XX/XX/XXXX, I reported the incident to my bank and attempted to block further transfers. Despite providing screenshots, transaction histories, and communication logs, I was later told to continue working with the supposed merchant, who is the same party running the scam. Following this direction, on XX/XX/XXXX, an additional {$500.00} was taken. I have reported the incident to law enforcement and federal authorities, but the original CFPB filing did not allow me to upload all required screenshots and documentation, so this corrected complaint summarizes the missing evidence. 

Clean Transcript of Phone Call With Bank After Dispute Denial ( Cleaned for clarity content preserved exactly as spoken. ) Bank Representative : On the XXXX, our researchers determined that your reimbursement request will not be researched further. They stated that you must contact the merchant directly. The case is not considered fraud. They say the cardholder authorized the transactions and admitted this multiple times. Provisional credit is never guaranteed. Based on the research, the transactions were authorized. The concern is considered a quality-of-service issue or a binding contract with the merchant. Therefore, the transaction will not be researched further. They also note that the cardholder willingly sent funds to the scammer and did not expect to receive any goods or services. 

You : Thats not true. I expected to get my money back. I thought this was my own internal bank for the company. It was confusing. I expected to be able to withdraw my funds. Once I realized the job was illegalbecause paid positive reviews are illegal in the U.S.I stopped. I need to confirm that my bank is telling me I must commit a crime in order to recover my money.

Representative : What do you mean the bank is telling you to commit a crime? 

You : Youre telling me I have to work with the scammers. The job theyre making me do is illegal. Ive explained this. I expected to withdraw my money. XXXX and XXXX confirmed the funds are gone. I need verbal confirmationif I continue doing what they ask, I am doing so under direction from the bank. 

Representative : Theyre not telling you to commit a crime. They are going off the fact that you sent the money You : Correctno, let me finish. I sent the funds because I believed it was a job. I expected to get the money back. The funds are only accessible if I finish the job, which requires sending more money and performing illegal review work. I need to document that your investigator is telling me to work with scammers to recover my funds, which I must report to the FBI.

Representative : Theyre not saying to commit a crimetheyre saying you need to contact whoever the funds were sent to.

You : But the merchant is the scammer. They told me the funds were stolen. XXXX and XXXX said theyre gone. Under EFTA, sending funds under false pretenses is fraud. 

Representative : Thats why theyre saying you need to go back to the merchant, because they say you willingly sent the funds, so it is not considered fraud. 

You : I have sent you proof that the scammer is requiring me to continue illegal work to get the money back. I am not trying to be aggressive. I need to protect XXXX XXXX XXXX. My bank is telling me to continue this work. 

Representative : Im just reading what the researchers wrote. Theyre not saying you must commit a crime You : Yes, they are. They are telling me to work with the scammers. I sent you proof that the scammers require me to keep depositing money. I need you to read the investigators note verbatim.

Representative : It says : Case is not fraud as the cardholder authorized the transactions. Cardholder admitted this multiple times. Provisional credit is never guaranteed. Reimbursement denied. Facts and circumstances lead us to believe the transactions are valid. Research confirms the transactions were authorized. The concern is related to quality of service or a binding contract. Therefore, the transaction will not be researched further. Contact the merchant directly. Cardholder willingly sent the funds to the scammer and did not expect goods or services. The case is closed.

You : OK. I want the case reopened. I have the legal right to request that. I also need it documented that my rights under EFTA are being violated. I never intended these funds for a scammer. I expected to withdraw my earnings and never signed a contract. You are telling me to work with scammers and send more money, which would require breaking the law.

Representative : Theyre requiring you to work with XXXX XXXX : No, XXXX already confirmed the funds were stolen. XXXX is not the scammer. The final destination was the scammer. 

Representative : I can request the case be reopened. 

You : Is there someone above you I can speak with? 

Representative : No, there wouldnt be anyone above me available. 

You : Can I file a complaint? 

Representative : Yes. I will document that you reported a violation of your EFTA rights and your experience with the dispute team.

Representative : Are there other cases tied to XXXX or XXXX as well? 

You : Yes, all are connected. 

Representative : OK, Ive requested those to be reopened. But the first case has already been reviewed, and they say no new information was received that would change the decision. The denial stands, and the case will remain closed.

You : Do you have the name of the investigator?

Representative : I cant provide names, but I can request any documentation they used. 

You : Thats fine. Ill be filing a lawsuit and can obtain the records through subpoena.

Representative : Ive submitted the reopening requests and the complaint. Is there anything else you need read back? 

You : You did perfect. Thank you. 

Representative : No problem. Thank you for banking with Huntington. Happy holidays.

You : Thank you. Bye. 

Clean Transcript of Phone Call With Bank After Dispute Denial ( Cleaned for clarity content preserved exactly as spoken. ) Bank Representative : On the XXXX, our researchers determined that your reimbursement request will not be researched further. They stated that you must contact the merchant directly. The case is not considered fraud. They say the cardholder authorized the transactions and admitted this multiple times. Provisional credit is never guaranteed. Based on the research, the transactions were authorized. The concern is considered a quality-of-service issue or a binding contract with the merchant. Therefore, the transaction will not be researched further. They also note that the cardholder willingly sent funds to the scammer and did not expect to receive any goods or services. 

You : Thats not true. I expected to get my money back. I thought this was my own internal bank for the company. It was confusing. I expected to be able to withdraw my funds. Once I realized the job was illegalbecause paid positive reviews are illegal in the U.S.I stopped. I need to confirm that my bank is telling me I must commit a crime in order to recover my money.

Representative : What do you mean the bank is telling you to commit a crime? 

You : Youre telling me I have to work with the scammers. The job theyre making me do is illegal. Ive explained this. I expected to withdraw my money. XXXX and XXXX confirmed the funds are gone. I need verbal confirmationif I continue doing what they ask, I am doing so under direction from the bank. 

Representative : Theyre not telling you to commit a crime. They are going off the fact that you sent the money You : Correctno, let me finish. I sent the funds because I believed it was a job. I expected to get the money back. The funds are only accessible if I finish the job, which requires sending more money and performing illegal review work. I need to document that your investigator is telling me to work with scammers to recover my funds, which I must report to the FBI.

Representative : Theyre not saying to commit a crimetheyre saying you need to contact whoever the funds were sent to.

You : But the merchant is the scammer. They told me the funds were stolen. XXXX and XXXX said theyre gone. Under EFTA, sending funds under false pretenses is fraud. 

Representative : Thats why theyre saying you need to go back to the merchant, because they say you willingly sent the funds, so it is not considered fraud. 

You : I have sent you proof that the scammer is requiring me to continue illegal work to get the money back. I am not trying to be aggressive. I need to protect XXXX XXXX XXXX My bank is telling me to continue this work. 

Representative : Im just reading what the researchers wrote. Theyre not saying you must commit a crime You : Yes, they are. They are telling me to work with the scammers. I sent you proof that the scammers require me to keep depositing money. I need you to read the investigators note verbatim. 

Representative : It says : Case is not fraud as the cardholder authorized the transactions. Cardholder admitted this multiple times. Provisional credit is never guaranteed. Reimbursement denied. Facts and circumstances lead us to believe the transactions are valid. Research confirms the transactions were authorized. The concern is related to quality of service or a binding contract. Therefore, the transaction will not be researched further. Contact the merchant directly. Cardholder willingly sent the funds to the scammer and did not expect goods or services. The case is closed. 

You : OK. I want the case reopened. I have the legal right to request that. I also need it documented that my rights under EFTA are being violated. I never intended these funds for a scammer. I expected to withdraw my earnings and never signed a contract. You are telling me to work with scammers and send more money, which would require breaking the law. 

Representative : Theyre requiring you to work with XXXX XXXX : No, XXXX already confirmed the funds were stolen. XXXX is not the scammer. The final destination was the scammer. 

Representative : I can request the case be reopened. 

You : Is there someone above you I can speak with? 

Representative : No, there wouldnt be anyone above me available. 

You : Can I file a complaint? 

Representative : Yes. I will document that you reported a violation of your EFTA rights and your experience with the dispute team.

Representative : Are there other cases tied to XXXX or XXXX as well? 

You : Yes, all are connected. 

Representative : OK, Ive requested those to be reopened. But the first case has already been reviewed, and they say no new information was received that would change the decision. The denial stands, and the case will remain closed.

You : Do you have the name of the investigator? 

Representative : I cant provide names, but I can request any documentation they used. 

You : Thats fine. Ill be filing a lawsuit and can obtain the records through subpoena. 

Representative : Ive submitted the reopening requests and the complaint. Is there anything else you need read back? 

You : You did perfect. Thank you. 

Representative : No problem. Thank you for banking with Huntington. Happy holidays.

You : Thank you. Bye. 
Clean Transcript of Phone Call With Bank After Dispute Denial ( Cleaned for clarity content preserved exactly as spoken. ) Bank Representative : On the XXXX, our researchers determined that your reimbursement request will not be researched further. They stated that you must contact the merchant directly. The case is not considered fraud. They say the cardholder authorized the transactions and admitted this multiple times. Provisional credit is never guaranteed. Based on the research, the transactions were authorized. The concern is considered a quality-of-service issue or a binding contract with the merchant. Therefore, the transaction will not be researched further. They also note that the cardholder willingly sent funds to the scammer and did not expect to receive any goods or services. 

You : Thats not true. I expected to get my money back. I thought this was my own internal bank for the company. It was confusing. I expected to be able to withdraw my funds. Once I realized the job was illegalbecause paid positive reviews are illegal in the U.S.I stopped. I need to confirm that my bank is telling me I must commit a crime in order to recover my money.

Representative : What do you mean the bank is telling you to commit a crime? 

You : Youre telling me I have to work with the scammers. The job theyre making me do is illegal. Ive explained this. I expected to withdraw my money. XXXX and XXXX confirmed the funds are gone. I need verbal confirmationif I continue doing what they ask, I am doing so under direction from the bank. 

Representative : Theyre not telling you to commit a crime. They are going off the fact that you sent the money You : Correctno, let me finish. I sent the funds because I believed it was a job. I expected to get the money back. The funds are only accessible if I finish the job, which requires sending more money and performing illegal review work. I need to document that your investigator is telling me to work with scammers to recover my funds, which I must report to the FBI.

Representative : Theyre not saying to commit a crimetheyre saying you need to contact whoever the funds were sent to.

You : But the merchant is the scammer. They told me the funds were stolen. XXXX and XXXX said theyre gone. Under EFTA, sending funds under false pretenses is fraud. 

Representative : Thats why theyre saying you need to go back to the merchant, because they say you willingly sent the funds, so it is not considered fraud. 

You : I have sent you proof that the scammer is requiring me to continue illegal work to get the money back. I am not trying to be aggressive. I need to protect XXXX XXXX XXXX My bank is telling me to continue this work. 

Representative : Im just reading what the researchers wrote. Theyre not saying you must commit a crime You : Yes, they are. They are telling me to work with the scammers. I sent you proof that the scammers require me to keep depositing money. I need you to read the investigators note verbatim. 

Representative : It says : Case is not fraud as the cardholder authorized the transactions. Cardholder admitted this multiple times. Provisional credit is never guaranteed. Reimbursement denied. Facts and circumstances lead us to believe the transactions are valid. Research confirms the transactions were authorized. The concern is related to quality of service or a binding contract. Therefore, the transaction will not be researched further. Contact the merchant directly. Cardholder willingly sent the funds to the scammer and did not expect goods or services. The case is closed.

You : OK. I want the case reopened. I have the legal right to request that. I also need it documented that my rights under EFTA are being violated. I never intended these funds for a scammer. I expected to withdraw my earnings and never signed a contract. You are telling me to work with scammers and send more money, which would require breaking the law.

Representative : Theyre requiring you to work with XXXX XXXX : No, XXXX already confirmed the funds were stolen. XXXX is not the scammer. The final destination was the scammer. 

Representative : I can request the case be reopened. 

You : Is there someone above you I can speak with? 

Representative : No, there wouldnt be anyone above me available. 

You : Can I file a complaint? 

Representative : Yes. I will document that you reported a violation of your EFTA rights and your experience with the dispute team.

Representative : Are there other cases tied to XXXX or XXXX as well? 

You : Yes, all are connected. 

Representative : OK, Ive requested those to be reopened. But the first case has already been reviewed, and they say no new information was received that would change the decision. The denial stands, and the case will remain closed.

You : Do you have the name of the investigator? 

Representative : I cant provide names, but I can request any documentation they used. 

You : Thats fine. Ill be filing a lawsuit and can obtain the records through subpoena.

Representative : Ive submitted the reopening requests and the complaint. Is there anything else you need read back? 

You : You did perfect. Thank you. 

Representative : No problem. Thank you for banking with Huntington. Happy holidays. 

You : Thank you. Bye.

Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief