Consumer complaint received 2023-08-20 00:00:00
Product: Credit card or prepaid 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: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
In XX/XX/XXXX I locked my keys in my XXXX XXXX XXXX outside a grocery store in XXXX, Texas. My daughter texted me the phone number for XXXX XXXX XXXX which I called for assistance. I asked the dispatcher what is the price range for lock-out service and was told {$19.00} to {$200.00}. I asked if he could provide me a smaller price range and he said no. The dispatcher said somebody would arrive within XXXX minutes. I waited for almost an hour and called the dispatcher who said he would have the vendor call me. The locksmith texted me that he was about XXXX minutes away. He finally arrived about XXXX minutes later ; I had waited more than XXXX hours. When he arrived, I asked how much he charged and he told me {$150.00}. I asked why so much and he said because my car was electric. I explained that my car is not electric ; it is a regular vehicle. He then said {$140.00}. I told him that was too much for a simple lockout. He handed me a receipt and told me to sign it. I said I would sign it after he unlocked my car. He then said he would leave if I didn't sign the receipt first. I had already waited for more than XXXX hours in the heat and sun and was not feeling well. I am XXXX  years of age and the heat has a negative effect on me. I didn't feel well enough to start the entire process of locating, calling and waiting for another locksmith. I thought that I could dispute the exorbitant price with my bank. I believe that forcing me to sign the receipt before providing the service was possibly illegal. In hindsight, I wish that I had written on the receipt that I was signing the receipt under duress and was being forced to sign it before my door was unlocked. After I signed his receipt, the locksmith then took a plastic strip and put it between my car door and frame and pulled up on the door lock, unlocking the door. The process took less than XXXX minutes. I asked for a copy of his receipt and he said he would text it to me. I did get a text of a receipt which I submitted to my bank, Wells Fargo. 

I filed a dispute with Wells Fargo asking to pay {$50.00} instead of the {$140.00} charged. I submitted a copy of a XXXX website showing that the average charge for a lock-out service in the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX I provided an explanation of the incident also and explained that my XXXX is a regular vehicle and not electric. Wells Fargo denied my dispute on the basis that they had a signed receipt from the vendor. I appealed the denial on XX/XX/XXXX, but it was again denied on the same basis, vendor provided a signed receipt. 

I provided a copy of a XXXX XXXX XXXX Internet ad stating that their cost for roadside assistance to unlock a regular vehicle is {$35.00} and they are on scene within XXXX minutes. 
" Costs to XXXX XXXX XXXX Average costs to pop a lock on a car door is $ XXXX for regular cars and the price can go up to $ XXXX for commercial vehicles and new XXXX XXXX. '' The XXXX XXXX XXXX Internet ad states also that roadside assistance is {$35.00}. 

Thank you for your assistance. I believe that this vendor 's charge of {$140.00} is exorbitant for a simple lock-out on a regular, not commercial, vehicle. 

I believe that Wells Fargo is perpetuating this vendor 's abusive, unethical and deceitful actions by allowing and advocating for them. I am concerned that the locksmith 's practice of forcing customers to sign his receipt prior to providing any service by stating he will leave ( gaining leverage by leaving his customer waiting for an unreasonable period of time, XXXX hours, in the XXXX sun and heat ) is illegal. This vendor did not comply with their own advertised prices or service. With Wells Fargo Bank 's acceptance, defense and vindication of their abusive actions, this vendor is free to continue with his fraudulent and deceptive practices.

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 explanation