Consumer complaint received 2026-06-09 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Banking errors
Company: Paypal Holdings, Inc
State: MN

Complaint narrative:
I was a victim of identity theft. When I initially called in XX/XX/year>, my dispute was denied more than 2 times even after providing an identity theft report from the FTC. At the time, I was unaware that someone was impersonating me which I later found out that someone was using my drivers license and posing as me. Pay Pal conducted an investigation and came to the conclusion that these purchases must have been authorized based solely on my active browser activity during the time period that the transaction occurred. There is not sufficient evidence to conclude that these fraudulent transactions were authorized or that there was any wrongdoing on my part. I keep my PayPal account open in a browser tab most of the time to track my finances and take advantage of your cash back rewards when shopping online which requires me to log-into my account any time I use PayPal for XXXX purposes. I have submitted several pieces of evidence that these were in fact, unauthorized and fraudulent transactions. I even uploaded proof photos, text messages from when I was notified that my ID was being used. After conducting a thorough investigation of my own, I discovered that someone gained access to my personal information after I lost my wallet, which contained my PayPal card and my Virginia drivers license. This physical theft initiated a series of digital impersonation tactics, including {$1000.00} unauthorized transaction through my PayPal account. Additional research reveals that this tacticusing XXXX to funnel unauthorized paymentsis increasingly common due to the platforms limited safeguards against fraud. On XX/XX/year>, my debit card was used to make XXXX unauthorized transactions. I did not authorize any transactions on or after this date. I didnt find out about the identity theft until later that month and I only found out that my identity had been compromised when an individual reached out to me over XXXX to let me know that someone was using my ID and was posing as me to conceal their fraudulent activity. Upon notification, I was able to confirm the legitimacy of the info that I received, I was also able to confirm that the fraudulent activity occurred as a direct result of the identity theft because the card was not in my possession at the time of the transaction at the time of transaction as all of my belongings were in my wallet. These critical facts were not available during my original dispute and the conclusion based solely on browser activity was made without full context. This a case involving both identity theft and fraud. Given the severity and scope of the identity theft, I urge PayPal to reconsider this transaction under the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and to review the regulations listed below applicable to this case. The fraudulent transactions were incorrectly deemed authorized based solely on browser activity. Since the fraudulent activity took place, I have placed fraud alerts and filed the following formal reports : a police report, identity theft report with the FTC, and contacted Virginia XXXX to safeguard my identity from being used in the future. CFPB regulations state that when someone reports fraudulent/incorrect transactions or submits an identity theft report, consumers are protected from liability and institutions must adhere to that report since its issued by a law enforcement agency. Identity theft report is attached. I have aggressively disputed these transactions and have provided several examples of key evidence yet my dispute has been denied several times twice. I even submitted several documents including a timeline of events, my investigation and rationale on why the evidence I provided shows strong signs of fraudulent activity. In compliance with Regulation XXXX, I immediately reported the unauthorized charges back in XXXX as soon as I realized what had occurred. As a consumer, per CFPB regulations, I am entitled to reimbursement for any unauthorized charges that are reported within 60 days, which I did. Despite filing several times including online and via phone and online chat, my dispute has been denied and closed several times. I urgently and respectfully request a full refund of the unauthorized transactions processed below. These charges were made without my consent and fall within the scope of identity theft and unauthorized use. I have submitted the supporting documentation and request that appropriate corrective action be taken in accordance with consumer protection standards. * * Disputed Transaction ( XXXX ) : * * These transactions fall into the category of an Unauthorized Electronic Fund Transfer. These transactions fall into the category of an Unauthorized Electronic Fund Transfer, which is a reportable error per the CFPB Merchant name Date & Time Status Type Amount Transfer To XXXX XXXX XX/XX/year> XXXX AM PDT Settled Transfer {$200.00} Transfer To XXXX XXXX XX/XX/year> XXXX AM PDT Settled Transfer {$800.00} Enclosures : Links to sources are below - Other relevant evidencescreenshots, correspondence, etc. - XXXX Notice to Furnishers of Information [ PDF ] -CFPB Electronic Fund Transfers FAQs XXXX 's XXXX for Resolving Errors https : XXXX # XXXX - [ Visa XXXX Liability Policy ] https : //www.visa.com/en-us/personal/security/zero-liability-policy Sources : Federal Protections Per CFPB Regulations : The transactions are EFTs covered by the error resolution provisions of the regulation to protect consumers from liability for incorrect or fraudulent transactions. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) issued additional guidance on Regulation XXXX error resolution requirements related to XXXX transactions through Frequently Asked Questions ( FAQ ). In the FAQ, the CFPB clearly established that consumers are protected from unauthorized ETFs if a fraudster steals the consumers account access or credentials or fraudulently induces a consumer into sharing account access information. Regulation XXXX : XXXX CFPB regulation, the consumer is entitled to reimbursement of unauthorized charges for the first 60 days after the first statement where the erroneous transaction initially occurred. Regulation XXXX protects consumers by establishing rights, responsibilities, and liabilities for consumers who use electronic and remittance funds transfers. It also provides consumers with a process to dispute unauthorized, incorrect, or fraudulent transactions. Local Protections ( Washington XXXX DC ) District of Columbia XXXX Under the XXXX Consumer Protection Procedures Act ( XXXX XXXX XXXX et seq. ), it is unlawful to : Misrepresent a consumers legal obligation Engage in unfair, deceptive, or abusive practices related to consumer credit Attempting to deny fraudulent transactions after notice of identity theft constitutes a separate statutory violation under XXXX law. Gives you a private right of action you can sue for : Treble damages or {$1500.00} per violation ( whichever is greater ) Punitive damages Attorneys fees Injunctions to stop unlawful practices [ XXXX XXXX Liability Policy ] : As a Visa cardholder, I am protected under Visas XXXX Liability Policy, which states that I am not responsible for unauthorized transactions made with my Visa debit card, provided I report the loss promptly and exercise reasonable care in safeguarding my card Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( XXXX ) : According to the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( XXXX ), as implemented by Regulation XXXX, an " unauthorized electronic fund transfer '' is a transfer from a consumer 's account initiated by a person other than the consumer without their actual authority, and from which the consumer receives no benefit. This includes transfers where : XXXX. A fraudster obtains your login credentials through a data breach or phishing. XXXX. Someone uses your lost or stolen card or access device. XXXX. You are fraudulently induced or tricked into providing a third party with access to your account. This is a critical point : even if you " furnish '' the access device due to fraud, the transaction is still considered unauthorized. Your negligence is not a basis for the financial institution to deny your claim.

Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief