Consumer complaint received 2026-07-16 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem caused by your funds being low — Bounced checks or returned payments
Company: U.S. BANCORP
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint because I dispute U.S. Bank 's determination that I am liable for an overdraft balance of approximately {$7400.00} arising from a check transaction that I now maintain was unauthorized and connected to identity theft. During the initial stages of U.S. Bank 's investigation, I initially believed the disputed check was mine because I did not yet have the benefit of information and documentation that later became available. As I continued investigating the matter, I obtained additional evidenceincluding substitute check documentation, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) Identity Theft Reports, Early Warning Services ( EWS ) identity theft block confirmations, and a XXXX Results of XXXX significantly changed my understanding of the transaction. After obtaining this information, I promptly updated U.S. Bank regarding my position and submitted the additional documentation supporting my identity theft claim. Despite this additional evidence, U.S. Bank continued to hold me responsible for the resulting overdraft, closed my account, and subsequently charged off the balance as bad debt. I respectfully request that U.S. Bank conduct a comprehensive reinvestigation and explain the factual basis for its determination. My dispute is not simply about the amount of the overdraft. Rather, I dispute U.S. Bank 's determination that I personally deposited, endorsed, negotiated, authorized, or otherwise became legally responsible for the disputed check. If that determination is incorrect, then the resulting charge-off and any adverse reporting based upon that determination should likewise be reconsidered. Prior to the disputed transaction, I legitimately used my U.S. Bank account for ordinary banking purposes, including receiving direct deposits associated wiXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. This demonstrates that the account itself was legitimately established and used by me. The disputed check transaction and the subsequent account activity were inconsistent with my normal banking activity. From the beginning, I acted diligently to report the suspected fraud and cooperate with every investigation. I filed Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) Identity Theft Reports, reported the matter to law enforcement, and continued providing documentation as it became available. In addition to filing FTC Identity Theft Reports and reporting the matter to law enforcement, I submitted my identity theft documentation to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. After reviewing my submissions, XXXX placed identity theft blocks on relevant records associated with my consumer file. I have enclosed the XXXX identity theft block confirmations with this complaint. While I understand that an identity theft block is not itself a determination that I am not liable for the disputed transaction, it demonstrates that an independent consumer reporting agency reviewed my identity theft documentation and took action consistent with my claim that my personal information had been misused. XXXX of the most significant pieces of additional evidence I obtained is the enclosed XXXX Results of XXXX. After reviewing my fraud documentation, XXXX concluded that it found no indications that its system would provide information to a merchant that would cause my check transactions to be declined. This independent finding is consistent with my position that I do not have a history of fraudulent check activity associated with my identity. I also contacted XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX because the disputed check originated from a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX informed me that it could not disclose information because I was not an owner or authorized signer on that account and instructed me to continue working directly with my financial institution regarding the disputed transaction. Although XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXould not provide account-specific information because of privacy restrictions, its response confirmed that I was not the owner of the originating account. After U.S. Bank informed me that it considered the disputed check to be my responsibility and I began receiving correspondence regarding the matter, I contacted the bank to discuss the investigation. During XXXX of those calls, U.S. Bank 's automated authentication system, which ordinarily prompted me to verify my identity using my regular device identified as my XXXX XXXX, unexpectedly presented XXXX authentication options : " XXXX XXXX '' or " XXXX XXXX. '' Prior to that call, I had never been presented with an XXXX XXXX as an authentication device for my account. Because this was inconsistent with my previous authentication experience, I immediately raised the issue with U.S. Bank and requested that it investigate whether the device was associated with the disputed activity, including any available device registration records, authentication logs, login history, IP address information, or other relevant electronic records. To date, I have not received a clear explanation regarding why the XXXX XXXX appeared or whether those records were meaningfully evaluated during U.S. Bank 's investigation. I had also previously reported my debit card as missing. Around the same period, I observed transactions that I believed were inconsistent with my normal banking activity and spending patterns. I reported these concerns to U.S. Bank because I believed they could indicate unauthorized account activity and requested that they be investigated as part of the bank 's review. Based on U.S. Bank 's communications with me, I understood that the bank considered me responsible because the disputed check had been deposited into my account. I respectfully dispute that conclusion because I maintain that I did not deposit, endorse, negotiate, or authorize the disputed check. Although I updated U.S. Bank after obtaining additional information and submitted new supporting documentation, I remain concerned that U.S. Bank did not fully reconsider its original determination in light of the new evidence. To date, I still do not understand what evidence U.S. Bank relied upon to conclude that I personally deposited or endorsed the disputed check. I respectfully request that U.S. Bank identify the specific facts, records, or evidence supporting its determination. Understanding the basis of the bank 's decision is important so that I XXXX meaningfully respond to it. I am also concerned that the investigation did not appear to meaningfully address the issues I repeatedly raised regarding the unfamiliar XXXX XXXX, the reported missing debit card, the unusual account activity, and the additional evidence I later obtained, including my FTC Identity Theft Reports, police report, XXXX identity theft block confirmations, XXXX Results of Reinvestigation, substitute check documentation, and Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX. Prior to submitting this complaint, I sought assistance from the XXXX of the Comptroller of the Currency ( XXXX ) regarding this matter. My XXXX complaint has remained in " Review in Process '' status since approximately XX/XX/year>, and I have not received a substantive determination or explanation. Since filing that complaint, I have obtained significant additional evidence, including the XXXX Results of Reinvestigation, which was not available during my original submission. I respectfully request that this additional evidence be considered as part of U.S. Bank 's response to this complaint. I recognize that U.S. Bank made its initial determination based on the information available at that time. However, my purpose in submitting this complaint is to request that the bank evaluate this matter based upon the complete evidentiary record that is now available, including documentation that was not available during the initial investigation. I respectfully request that this additional evidence be fully considered before maintaining the conclusion that I am responsible for the disputed transaction.

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 non-monetary relief