Consumer complaint received 2021-11-14 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
Wells Fargo Claim # XXXX Account Ending : XXXX Wells Fargo has violated the Electronic Funds Transfer Act ( EFTA ) and the XXXX by failing to conduct an adequate Error Resolution Investigation on unauthorized transactions reported in claim XXXX. The EFTA and its implementing Regulation E require that financial institutions holding consumers accounts allow consumers to contest unauthorized past EFTs through an error resolution procedure as described in 12 C.F.R. 1005.11. 

Facts : XX/XX/XXXX : Reported unauthorized transactions on account ending XXXX ( claim XXXX ) XX/XX/XXXX : Claim denied and Wells Fargo determined transactions were authorized or that a processing error did not occur. 
XX/XX/XXXX : Filed complaint with Wells Fargo Enterprise Complaints Management Office requesting the documentation used in the investigation. Also file complaint with CFPB prematurely. 
XX/XX/XXXX : Wells Fargo Enterprise Complaints Management Office responded regarding my complaint on XX/XX/XXXX. The attached document ( doc 1  ) from Wells Fargo acknowledges my request for documentation. 
XX/XX/XXXX : Phone call with Wells Fargo to inquire if the documentation has been mailed. Agent informs me no such requests for documentation were made! 
XX/XX/XXXX : File 2nd complaint to the Enterprise Complaint Management Office in the attached email ( doc 2 ) indicating Wells Fargo is violating my rights to request documentation. 
XX/XX/XXXX : Enterprise Complaint Management office responds in the attached letter ( doc 3 ). Wells Fargo acknowledges no right to documentation was processed by the claims center! 
XX/XX/XXXX : File a 3rd complaint to the Enterprise Complaint Management Office ( doc 4 ) accusing Wells Fargo of not conducting a proper investigation, unable to provide documentation, and plans to pursue their violation of regulation E. 
XX/XX/XXXX : Wells Fargo retaliates with the decision to close my checking account. In addition, Wells Fargo closes my credit card, which was in good standing, with no late payments, and no outstanding balance! This affects my credit score. 
XX/XX/XXXX : 30 days have passed since my initial request for documentation on XX/XX/XXXX. 
XX/XX/XXXX, Received Right to Documentation used in investigation received. Documentation states the claim was denied because 1. Account history shows previous authorized transaction with the merchant in XX/XX/XXXX prior to the disputed transactions. 
2. Account Login history shows the online banking was monitored through the disputed timeframe. 

Complaint & Violations : In response to the first claim Account history shows previous authorized transaction with the merchant in XX/XX/XXXX prior to the disputed transactions. This is not true -- the transaction in XX/XX/XXXX WAS REPORTED AS UNAUTHORIZED to the representative. Representative refused to include the transaction as it was past 60 days, despite extenuating circumstances regarding my hospitalization. If a proper investigation was completed and Wells Fargo had reviewed internal records, as well as my assertion of the transactions are unauthorized, then this claim would not have been denied. 
In response to the claim Account Login history shows the online banking was monitored through the disputed timeframe. The documentation Wells Fargo provided shows the majority of logins occurring in Virginia. I do not reside in Virginia nor have I been to Virginia. Furthermore, NY hospitalization records indicate it would be impossible for me to login from Virginia at the same time while in NY. Lastly, the documentation provided also indicates instances of failed password attempts. If a proper investigation was completed and Wells Fargo had reviewed internal records, including my assertion the transactions are unauthorized and NY hospitalization records, then this claim would not have been denied. 
In summary, Wells Fargo failed to address adequately the unauthorized transactions, as required by law. When conducting an Error Resolution Investigation, a financial institution must determine whether an error has occurred, 15 U.S.C. 1693f, and in so doing, must conduct, at a minimum, a review of its own records regarding [ the ] alleged error ( 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( c ) ( 4 ) ). This review must include any relevant information within the institutions own records, 12 C.F.R. Pt. 1005, Supp. I, Comment 11 ( c ) ( 4 ) -5, and the investigation must be reasonable, 71 Fed. Reg. 1638, 1654 ( Jan. 10, 2006 ). Wells Fargo failure to conduct a reasonable review of all relevant records and information in its own records when investigating an error notification as described above violates section 908 of EFTA and section 1005.11 ( c ) ( 4 ) of Regulation E.

Recently, the CFPB fined XXXX for multiple violations, including failing to properly conduct an investigation when notified of an error by a consumer. Specifically, when consumers had transactions with the merchant at issue that predated the disputed transaction, XXXX made the summary determination that no error had occurred, without reasonably considering other evidence in its own records, including the consumers assertion that the EFT was unauthorized, or the bases for the consumers assertion ; even when the consumer did not have a transaction history with the merchant, XXXX failed to reasonably consider relevant details in its own records, including the consumers account history, the consumers assertions that the EFT was unauthorized, or the bases for the consumers assertion. XXXX found no error, when a reasonable review of all relevant information within the Banks records would have resulted in a determination in favor of the consumer. Similarly, Wells Fargo has failed to conduct a reasonable review of all relevant records and information in its own records when investigating an error notification, thereby in violation of section 908 of EFTA and section 1005.11 ( c ) ( 4 ) of Regulation E. Wells Fargo found no error, when a reasonable review of all relevant information within the Banks records would have resulted in a determination in my favor. 

Resolution : Reimbursement for claim XXXX Penalties for violating EFTA Reopen the retaliatory closing of my credit card account as a fraud victim

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