Consumer complaint received 2025-11-28 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Deposits and withdrawals
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
My vehicle was stolen on XX/XX/year>, along with my debit card, state ID, drivers license, and multiple electronic devices that had access to my financial accounts. An unauthorized electronic fund transfer was made on XX/XX/XXXX, after the theft. I did not see or become aware of the unauthorized transfer until XX/XX/XXXX, when the transaction posted, and I reported it to Wells Fargo immediately. 

Wells Fargo issued a provisional credit of {$490.00} but reversed it on or around XX/XX/year>. The bank denied the claim without providing the documents relied upon. Under 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( d ) ( 1 ), a financial institution must provide the documents relied on before reversing provisional credit. Wells Fargo told me they would mail the documents within up to 30 days, but I never received any documents. The reversal was procedurally invalid.

Wells Fargos stated reason for denial was that the transaction was a no card present transaction that could not have involved the physical debit card. However, when I filed the claim, I informed Wells Fargo that my debit card, my identification, and all electronic devices linked to my accounts were stolen in the XX/XX/XXXX vehicle theft. This gave the fraudster full ability to impersonate me and conduct transactions as if they were me. At the time of my initial claim, I provided the police report incident number XXXX and told Wells Fargo I would submit the full police report once it was completed. Wells Fargo did not consider this information and did not wait for the full report before denying the claim.

Because I reported the unauthorized transfer within two business days of discovering it, my liability is capped at {$50.00} under 12 C.F.R. 1005.6 ( b ) ( 1 ). Wells Fargo nevertheless held me liable for the full {$490.00}. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, I submitted the completed police report documenting the XX/XX/XXXX theft of my vehicle, identification, debit card, and electronic devices. On the same day, I submitted an XXXX accommodation request due to XXXX-related communication needs and requested acknowledgment. 

No acknowledgment was provided, so on XX/XX/XXXX, I called Wells Fargo and asked them to review the secure messages I sent on XX/XX/XXXX and to provide written confirmation by the end of the business day. No response was provided. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, having still received no acknowledgment of either the police report or the XXXX request, I sent another secure follow-up message. Again, no acknowledgment was provided. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, I called again to ask why neither submission had been acknowledged. 

On XX/XX/XXXX ( the day before XXXX ), I called again and asked to speak with my assigned case manager, XXXX. I explained that XXXX Title III requires an interactive process and timely, effective communication, and that Wells Fargos failure to acknowledge my XXXX request for more than four days violated 28 C.F.R. 36.303 ( c ). I explained that the police report was clear evidence of unauthorized use and that Regulation E requires prompt correction of procedural errors under 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( e ). The representative told me that XXXX was aware of my concerns, aware that I was considering reporting these violations to regulators, and was physically present in the office, but did not have time to speak with me. Wells Fargo still did not acknowledge my police report or XXXX request. 

Wells Fargo continues routing this matter to its Executive Complaints/XXXX  XXXX, which applies internal complaint timelines ( including a XX/XX/XXXX target date ) that conflict with Regulation E. Internal complaint workflows can not extend or replace federal timelines under 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( e ), which requires prompt correction of procedural violations.

To date, Wells Fargo has : reversed provisional credit without providing required documents ; exceeded the {$50.00} liability cap under 1005.6 ( b ) ( 1 ) ; failed to acknowledge or incorporate a police report submitted XXXX XXXX ; failed to acknowledge an XXXX request submitted XXXX XXXX ; failed to provide effective communication for more than four days ; refused communication even when the case manager was aware and available ; attempted to impose new internal deadlines inconsistent with Regulation E ; and failed to conduct a reasonable investigation under 1005.11 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( ii ).

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