Consumer complaint received 2025-11-18 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Deposits and withdrawals
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: MN

Complaint narrative:
In XX/XX/year> I submitted a valid court-issued Writ of Execution to the XXXX XXXX XXXX to levy the business checking account of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). This levy was based on a final judgment entered in case XXXX and docketed in district court under file number XXXX. I paid all required levy fees. The Sheriff served the Writ on Wells Fargo according to Minnesota Statute 550.135. 

Under state and federal garnishment rules, Wells Fargo is required to identify the debtors accounts using its internal KYC records, FEIN information already on file for the entity, and the Minnesota Secretary of State business registry. The creditor is not required to provide an EIN for a levy. 

Instead of performing the required search, Wells Fargo placed the burden on me and refused to confirm or deny whether the debtors bank account existed. Over several weeks I received multiple voicemails from Wells Fargo employees that clearly show the bank did not know how to process a levy. They repeatedly asked me to provide the debtors FEIN, to clarify whether XXXX XXXX was part of the corporate name, and to explain the difference between the DBA and the legal entity. They stated they were confused about the corporate name and could not locate the debtor. These requests are improper. Banks can not shift statutory duties onto a judgment creditor. 

The bank had all identifiers. The Writ listed both the legal entity ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and the XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). The FEIN and Minnesota XXXX File Number match the business. A XXXX can not open a bank account. All accounts are held under the underlying legal entity. Wells Fargo had full ability to identify the debtor but did not perform the required garnishee search or issue the required garnishee disclosure. 

Because of this, the levy stalled for more than a month. The Sheriffs Office attempted to move it forward, but Wells Fargo never completed its duties. To this day I have not received a garnishee disclosure, a confirmation of funds, nor a denial that any account exists. This failure has blocked the enforcement of a valid court judgment and caused financial harm. 

The attachments I am including show the timeline and the evidence of Wells Fargos mishandling : 1. Three Wells Fargo and Sheriffs Office voicemails where bank representatives ask me to identify the debtor, request the EIN, and question whether New Hope is part of the business name.

2. My original Sheriff levy instruction form showing all required identifiers and fees paid.

3. The USPS money order receipts showing payment of the levy deposits. 
XXXX. The District Court Writ of Execution in case XXXX. 
XXXX. The judgment documents in case XXXX establishing the debtor and judgment amount. 
XXXX. My written email clarification sent to Wells Fargo explaining the Secretary of State system, the single-entity rule, and why the banks requests were improper. 

All of these documents confirm Wells Fargo had every piece of information required to comply with the levy but failed to perform the mandatory search. 

This complaint is about Wells Fargos failure to process a legal levy, failure to follow Minnesota Statute 550.135, failure to issue the garnishee disclosure, failure to perform required entity identification using its own internal KYC data, and failure to follow federal garnishment compliance rules. 

I consent to publication of this narrative.

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