Consumer complaint received 2026-04-15 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account — Transaction was not authorized
Company: Chime Financial Inc
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
RE : Supplemental/Related Complaint Against Chime Financial , Inc . Continued EFTA Violations, Pattern of Bad-Faith Dispute Handling, and Failure to Respond to Formal Demand Original Complaint ID : XXXX Dear Consumer Financial Protection Bureau , I am writing to supplement and renew my previously filed complaint ( ID # XXXX ) against Chime Financial, Inc. ( Chime ) in connection with unauthorized fraudulent transactions totaling approximately {$400.00} that were made on my account without my knowledge or authorization. This supplemental complaint is necessitated by a continuing pattern of conduct by Chime that I believe constitutes clear and repeated violations of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ), 15 U.S.C. 1693 et seq., and Regulation E, 12 C.F.R. Part 1005. Since my initial complaint, the situation has materially worsened. I respectfully request that the Bureau treat this correspondence as a related and supplemental complaint to my prior filing, and that it be incorporated into Chimes ongoing regulatory record. I. Background and Prior Complaint On or about the date of the XX/XX/year>, I discovered approximately {$400.00} in unauthorized charges on my Chime account. I reported the fraud to Chime within approximately one hour of discovering the transactions well within the reporting windows established under the EFTA. I also filed a police report documenting the fraud and provided Chime with a copy. Despite this, Chime denied my initial dispute. I filed a second dispute, which was also denied. Following those denials, I filed a formal complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a complaint with the Better Business Bureau, and sent formal written Notice of Demand letters to Chime Financial , Inc. via XXXX mail on XX/XX/year>, citing violations of the EFTA and demanding reimbursement. Chime never responded to those demand letters. II. New and Continuing Violations Since Initial Complaint Since the filing of my initial CFPB complaint, Chimes conduct has continued in a manner that strongly suggests bad faith, automated processing, and willful disregard of federal law. The following events have occurred and form the basis of this supplemental complaint : 1. Chime independently reopened one of my disputes on its own initiative and denied it within 24 hours, providing no written explanation of its findings. A meaningful investigation of a fraud dispute can not be completed in 24 hours. This conduct is facially inconsistent with the reasonable investigation standard required under 15 U.S.C. 1693f and 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( c ). 2. Chime also independently reopened a second, separate dispute and denied it as well, again without providing a written explanation of findings or the basis for denial. 3. Chime has failed to provide me with written findings explaining the basis of any of its denials. Under 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( d ), when a financial institution determines no error occurred, it must promptly deliver a written explanation of its findings and inform the consumer of the right to request the documents it relied upon. 4. Chime failed to respond to XXXX XXXX mail demand letters sent on XX/XX/year> to its principal address at XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. These letters cited the EFTA by statute, included my police report, and provided a deadline for response. No response was ever received. 5. In total, I have now been denied reimbursement XXXX times across XXXX separate disputes. The pattern of conduct rapid automated denials, failure to explain findings, failure to respond to formal legal demands, and failure to conduct genuine investigations suggests systemic noncompliance rather than isolated error. III. Applicable Legal Standards The EFTA and Regulation E impose specific obligations on financial institutions that handle electronic fund transfers on behalf of consumers. Under 15 U.S.C. 1693f and 12 C.F.R. 1005.11, when a consumer reports an unauthorized electronic fund transfer, the financial institution must : ( 1 ) investigate the claim within 10 business days ( or issue a provisional credit while conducting a longer investigation of up to 45 days ) ; ( 2 ) conduct a reasonable, good-faith investigation of the alleged error ; ( 3 ) provide written notice of its findings upon completion ; and ( 4 ) inform the consumer of their right to request the documents relied upon in the determination. Under 15 U.S.C. 1693g, the burden of proof rests with the financial institution to establish that the transfer was authorized. Chime has not met any of these obligations. It has not conducted reasonable investigations, has not provided written findings, has not offered provisional credit, and has not met its burden of proving authorization.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation