Consumer complaint received 2015-03-25 00:00:00
Product: Money transfers — Domestic (US) money transfer
Issue: Fraud or scam — 
Company: U.S. BANCORP
State: NM

Complaint narrative:
In XXXX XX/XX/2013, XXXX, a no-contract gym in XXXX, NM, used my XXXX year old son 's signature to forge an EFT authorization on my checking account, of which I am the sole owner/signatory. XXXX XXXX lifted the account/routing number from a paper check that I wrote to them to cover one month 's membership fees for my son. This check clearly listed only myself as the the account holder, not my son. My son was under the impression that he was signing up for a membership, nothing else, and simply signed his name, " here, here, and here '', as directed by the gym 's employee, while no parent/legal guardian was present. He left with the understanding that he was good to use the gym for XXXX month only, since that was what my check covered, and only ended up using the gym for that XXXX month so as not to owe another month 's membership fee. 
Subsequent to that membership application, XXXX XXXX made XXXX unauthorized monthly EFTs on my checking account, without ever seeking proper authorization from me, or providing me a copy of the authorization they were using with my son 's signature. In XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, I discovered the unauthorized EFTs while stopping another authorized EFT for my son 's college fund, and informed XXXX XXXX to cease and desist the unauthorized transfers and return the stolen funds forthwith. They stopped the EFTs, but refused to refund the unauthorized transfers. 
I submitted a claim with my bank for restitution of the unauthorized EFTs, but my claim was denied because the gym 's bank, US Bank, will not return the transfers without the permission of XXXX, the forger of the EFT authorization. At no point during these fraudulent EFTs, did either my bank, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, or the gym 's bank, US Bank, verify that the EFT authorization contained the name or signature matching the checking account holder, namely myself. I should also mention that my son has a different last name than I do, which should 've made the bogus EFT authorization painfully obvious. 
I am currently in the process of submitting a complaint with the NM Attorney General for XXXX, but am still confounded as to how this bogus EFT authorization flew by XXXX banks for nearly 2 years without question. 
I have since learned that shady businesses, such as no-contract gyms, PREFER or REQUIRE payment via checking account EFTs since they KNOW the banks wo n't verify authorization, probably because the EFT Act holds them blameless for EFT fraud. Although I realize the originator of the forged EFT authorization is responsible for this financial crime, it would not be possible without the blind eyes the financial institutions employ during these transactions. Shady businesses prefer ACH EFTs on checking accounts rather than credit card transactions because they know it 's very difficult for consumers to get the banks to restore funds transferred without proper authorization. There needs to be some changes to the EFT Act to levy penalties on banks that transfer money out of accounts without proper authorization, instead of only requiring the account/routing information of a viable account, and worrying about authorization after the fact, or when they get caught.

Company public response: Company chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation