Consumer complaint received 2026-01-02 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: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I had suffered a severe mental stress and risked my personal info due to Wells Fargo XXXX XXXX  XXXX branches, they had worked with scammers and reassigned Wells Fargo phone numbers to scammers and failed to mitigate customer risks. The incident took place on XXXX XXXX at XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, I had met XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX WI with no resolution or help, so I met another branch XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX very next day, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, WI XXXX who had acknowledged that they knew that their phone numbers are sold and multiple customers were affected by this scam and Wells Fargo failed to mitigate customer risks.

I have already raised with Wells Fargo regarding a fraud incident XXXX saying that their sold telephone numbers that were still publicly listed as a Wells Fargo contact in XXXX Wisconsin areas. 

As mentioned during my visit to the branch, branch management acknowledged that this telephone number issue was a known problem, had been identified approximately XXXX XXXX  prior to my incident, and that multiple customers had already been affected by similar fraudulent activity. 

Despite this prior knowledge, the compromised telephone number continued to appear online as a Wells Fargo contact number, without removal, warning, or customer alert. As a customer acting in good faith, I relied on this publicly available information and reasonably believed I was communicating directly with Wells Fargo.

Once a financial institution becomes aware of a known and ongoing risk that may expose customers to fraud, it is expected to take timely and reasonable steps to mitigate further harm. This includes prompt removal of misleading contact listings, customer warnings, and coordination with online platforms to prevent continued exposure.

The failure to promptly address this known issue resulted in foreseeable customer risk and directly contributed to my exposure to fraud, significant stress, time loss, and disruption to my financial security.

This email is intended to formally document the facts as acknowledged by branch management and to ensure this information is included in the review by Wells Fargos risk, compliance, and customer remediation teams. The issue had been escalated to local law enforcement XXXX. 

A formal notice of complaint and demand for remedial action arising from a serious fraud incident involving the selling of Wells Fargo phone number 's which are legitimate Wells Fargo contact associated with Madison, Wisconsin.

While attempting to contact Wells Fargo in good faith, the customer service seemed to be Wells Fargo with proper NMLS ID and I was routed to individuals falsely representing themselves as Wells Fargo personnel after transfer. These individuals exploited Wells Fargos brand identity, consumer trust, and the apparent legitimacy of the phone number to induce disclosure of sensitive account credentials under the pretext of fraud prevention.

Although I did not ultimately authorize a fraudulent transfer, this incident exposed me to immediate and substantial risk of financial loss, identity compromise, and reputation harm. The absence of an actual completed transfer does not negate the harm suffered nor Wells Fargos responsibility to maintain reasonable consumer protections against foreseeable impersonation and spoofing attacks.

The circumstances demonstrate multiple systemic failures, including but not limited to : - Inadequate consumer-facing safeguards against phone-number impersonation - Failure to sufficiently warn customers regarding spoofed or redirected Wells Fargo contact numbers - Failure to prevent or promptly neutralize the misuse of Wells Fargos brand in publicly accessible channels - Reliance on post-incident remediation rather than effective preventative controls As a federally regulated financial institution, Wells Fargo has an XXXX XXXX of care to protect customers from foreseeable fraud schemes that leverage its name, reputation, and perceived communication channels. The prevalence of Wells Fargo impersonation scams is well-documented, making this risk neither novel nor unforeseeable. 

As a direct result of this incident, I incurred : - Exposure of confidential credentials obtained under false representation - Significant emotional distress and disruption - Time, effort, and expense securing accounts, changing credentials, and filing law enforcement and fraud reports - Ongoing concern regarding identity misuse and future financial exposure

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