Consumer complaint received 2025-05-23 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Mobile or digital wallet
Issue: Unauthorized transactions or other transaction problem — 
Company: Block, Inc.
State: CT

Complaint narrative:
I am following up to dispute your XX/XX/year>, decision regarding the {$710.00} transaction to XXXX XXXX. Based on your response and the documentation provided, I am not convinced that a full or fair investigation occurred. 

Your reply fails to identify : Who at XXXX XXXX was contacted, if anyone ; What specific documentation was obtained from the merchant beyond your internal records ; What criteria or external validation was used to confirm that the flight was fulfilled properly ; Whether my claims about the discrepancy in the flight details were directly investigated with the airline. 

It appears that your investigation relied solely on internal logs and whatever limited info I sent, without any third-party verification. This raises concerns about the integrity of your dispute process and whether it aligns with Regulation E under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act. 

I am requesting a more detailed disclosure of how the investigation was conducted and any evidence obtained from XXXX XXXX to support your decision. If no such contact occurred, this constitutes a failure to perform a reasonable investigation as required under applicable law. 

I am prepared to escalate this further if necessary, including providing additional supporting documentation and filing with appropriate regulatory bodies, if you are unwilling to reconsider or transparently clarify your process. 

I expect a response that directly addresses the investigative steps you took, with supporting documentation. 


I am submitting this new complaint due to how Cash App handled my previous dispute regarding a {$710.00} charge from XXXX XXXX. While my initial concern was about a flight discrepancy, my new concern is about how Cash App responded to my dispute and whether they conducted a fair and lawful investigation. 

In their XX/XX/year> response ( attached ), Cash App claims to have reviewed the dispute and denied it, stating that no error occurred. However, their reply does not provide any proof that they contacted XXXX XXXX or obtained documentation from the merchant to verify whether the service was actually provided. Instead, it appears they only reviewed internal records and what I submitted. There is no indication of any third-party verification or independent effort to confirm my claim. 

This raises serious concerns under Regulation E, which requires a reasonable investigation of consumer disputes. I requested details on who they spoke to, what documentation they reviewed, and how they evaluated my claim, but none of this was addressed. 

I am requesting that the CFPB investigate whether Cash App met its legal obligations to conduct a proper dispute investigation and to ensure they are not improperly dismissing valid consumer claims without due process. 


XXXX. No Evidence of Merchant Contact Cash App did not indicate that they contacted XXXX XXXX at any point during the investigation. 
A proper investigation should involve direct communication with the merchant ( in this case, XXXX XXXX ) to determine whether the service was rendered or if any refund/cancellation applied. 
Without contacting the airline, there is no independent verification of whether the flight was used, refunded, or properly booked. 



2. Investigation Appears Limited to Internal Records Cash Apps response repeatedly refers to the information available in our system and the documentation we relied upon, without specifying the nature of those documents. 
This strongly suggests that the investigation relied only on internal transaction logs, which only confirm that the charge was processednot whether the service was fulfilled. 
An internal review does not satisfy the requirement of a reasonable, impartial investigation. 



XXXX. No Consideration of the Discrepancy in Services Rendered The original dispute raised concerns about a discrepancy with the flight, suggesting that the service received did not match what was paid for. 
Cash Apps reply does not mention : Whether the details of the flight were reviewed, Whether boarding or refund records were requested from the airline, Or whether the nature of the disputed service was understood or evaluated.

4. Lack of Transparency in the Investigation Process Cash App failed to : Identify who handled the investigation, Provide a timeline of investigative steps, Outline any communication with XXXX XXXX, Disclose the documents reviewed from either party. 
This absence of transparency makes it difficult to believe that any meaningful effort was made to validate or reject the dispute. 



XXXX. Failure to Meet Regulatory Standards ( Regulation E ) Under Regulation E, financial institutions are required to : Conduct a reasonable investigation, Determine whether an error occurred, Report the results and correct any errors. 
Without merchant contact, external document review, or analysis of service fulfillment, this investigation does not meet the threshold of reasonable. 



Conclusion Cash Apps handling of this dispute demonstrates a lack of due diligence, inadequate investigation practices, and poor transparency. I am submitting this follow-up to request that the CFPB review whether Cash App is in compliance with Regulation E, and to advocate for a more thorough, fair investigation into my claim. 

Thank you for continuing to advocate for fair financial practices. Please let me know if additional documentation is needed.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation