Consumer complaint received 2026-03-05 00:00:00
Product: Prepaid card — Government benefit card
Issue: Problem with a purchase or transfer — Charged for a purchase or transfer you did not make with the card
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
am filing this complaint against Bank of America for repeated violations of Regulation XXXX ( XXXX CFR XXXX ) by failing to issue provisional credit on unauthorized electronic fund transfers totaling approximately {$28000.00} on my XXXX prepaid debit card, despite XXXX years of delays and clear federal obligations. On XX/XX/XXXX, I visited a Bank of America branch in person, provided XXXX forms of ID, and filed a Regulation XXXX dispute for fraudulent transactions from XXXX ( XXXX XXXX benefits ). I received claim/reference numbers that day. The branch representative confirmed : under Reg XXXX, BofA had XXXX business days to either fully resolve the fraud or issue provisional creditlikely as a check, given the amount and my prior self-red-flag of the account for identity theft ( XXXX affidavit on file ). No such credit has been issued as of XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX past the deadline. This is not a new issue. The fraud occurred in XXXX ; I have waited XXXX years for a corrected XXXX from XXXX ( my appeals focused solely on that, not BofA XXXX obligations ). BofA never instructed me on freezing my credit reports with XXXX, XXXX, or XXXX me exposed to ongoing harm from the identity theft. Instead, they ping-pong me between departments, with XXXX minute holds, fake " supervisors '' refusing names/IDs, and endless transfers. When I intentionally misstated my in-branch date as XX/XX/XXXX, they fabricated an " XXXX XXXX '' notice supposedly received on XXXX XXXX exact day I filed in person. This is impossible : no XXXX notice could arrive same-day on a Friday, and my XXXX XXXX records show no such hold tied to BofA. The restriction is a lie, invented to stall. Regulation XXXX requires provisional credit within XXXX business days for unauthorized EFTstimeliness is core to the law, not optional. BofA XXXX XXXX CFPB/OCC consent XXXX ( {$220.00} XXXX fine ) already punished them for delaying credits, improper freezes, and misusing fraud flags on XXXX cards. Yet they continue dragging this outyears on a matter that should've resolved in dayswhile hiding behind baseless " XXXX '' excuses. This violates federal law and inflicts real harm : financial hardship, credit damage, and emotional distress from prolonged uncertainty. I demand : Immediate provisional credit of the disputed amount ( expedited check with tracking ). Full reimbursement plus interest from XXXX. Compensation for delay, credit exposure, and hardship. No further runarounddirect contact with an executive or escalations team who can act without weeks of waiting. This pattern of evasion must endconsumers shouldn't wait XXXX years for what law requires in XXXX days. I will pursue federal court if unresolved, seeking treble damages under XXXX for willful negligence.

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