Consumer complaint received 2022-02-08 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Domestic (US) money transfer
Issue: Fraud or scam — 
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX a con artist named XXXX XXXX cashed my official check # XXXX in the amount of {$1000.00} paying to the order of a senior apartment XXXX XXXX XXXX. This check was issued by and mailed directly from the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  to XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX through the Bill Pay bank service to pay the senior apartment monthly rent. Unfortunately, the check was stolen and an altered payee name of XXXX XXXX was added by hand writing above the valid payee name of XXXX XXXX XXXX but I didnt make, authorize or ratify the alteration. To my surprise, the con artist successfully cashed the altered check from a branch of Bank of America ( BoA ) located in XXXX XXXX, California, which is far away from XXXX XXXX XXXX I can not believe that the working staff of BoA ignored the forgery and did not alert the bank, but cashed the forged check for the thief! 

My actions after the forgery happened : I immediately reported the forgery case to the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  that I opened my checking account with after the alert call from XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX notifying me that the monthly rent was not received. Meanwhile, on XX/XX/XXXX I signed all the documents required by XXXX XXXX to negotiate with BoA for forgery refund. 

The {$1000.00} of the forged check # XXXX was credited back to my checking account on XX/XX/XXXX, but was withdrawn away from my checking account on XX/XX/XXXX. The XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  explained as follows. The {$1000.00} was first credited back to my checking account in advance from XXXX XXXX. Then BoA considered that I did not notify the bank about the forgery on time, and denied the liability to repay the {$1000.00} back to XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX  decided to withdraw the credit. 

Then the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  notified me that XXXX XXXX  could not help me anymore to negotiate with BoA and I had to undertake the loss myself. To prepare for the negotiation with BoA myself, I kindly but insistently requested the written communications between XXXX XXXX  and BoA from the XXXX XXXX and the Research Department of XXXX XXXX. They first told me that they did not write any communication documents to BoA, and later said that the written communications were commercially confidential and could not be released to a customer. 

Finally on XX/XX/XXXX I obtained a copy of an Immediate Payment Due notification issued from the Returns and Exceptions Department of BoA to the Research Department of XXXX XXXX  with the Banks Claim of Late Return form from the XXXX XXXX XXXX attached. In that document BoA clearly requested XXXX XXXX  to pay {$1000.00} back to BoA for the reason that XXXX XXXX  failed to meet the UCC Midnight Deadline, Reg CC the Duty of Expeditious Return and Reg CC Notice Requirement. The Banks Claim of Late Return form also showed out the name of the working staff of BoA who caused my loss with her negligence. 

I called the Research Department of XXXX XXXX  on XX/XX/XXXX regarding the denial of BoA to repay my loss due to the negligence of their working staff. To my understanding, the UCC Midnight Deadline, Reg CC the Duty of Expeditious Return and Reg CC Notice Requirement in the Immediate Payment Due notification from BoA to XXXX XXXX  are the law codes between banks, rather than between banks and customers. However, XXXX XXXX  tried to use those law codes to mislead and convince me that I notified the bank about the forgery late and had to take the full responsibility for the loss. This is unfair to me as a customer, who had to undertake the inappropriate negotiated result between XXXX XXXX  and BoA. 

While XXXX XXXX  kept complaining that it was my fault for not finding and reporting the forgery earlier to the bank, I realized that XXXX XXXX  was also responsible for my loss. As the manager of my bank account, XXXX XXXX  is in the best position to oversee my financial transactions daily and has the best opportunity to catch and stop the fraud. The working staff at the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  should have carefully inspected the checks received from BoA and easily found the very obvious altered payee name on the forged check, and taken action to alert BoA to stop processing the forged check on time before the Midnight deadline required by BoA, but they failed to perform their duties. On the other hand, BoA also had the best opportunity to stop the forgery and alerted XXXX XXXX. The working staff of BoA should also be more serious and careful to inspect the altered check before cashing the check for the thief, since the altered payee name was an obvious alteration. Unfortunately they failed to perform their duties either. 

All of the above shows that both XXXX XXXX  and BoA shirked their responsibilities to use care in scrutinizing checks paid in order to detect forgeries. However, both banks are using the excuse of finding the forgery too late for not repaying my loss. The Research department of XXXX XXXX  told me that BoA denied the liability to repay the loss to XXXX XXXX for late reporting, and therefore XXXX XXXX was not obligated to pay me back either. 

According to XXXX XXXX XXXX, page XXXX, section XXXX : A bank is under an obligation to its depositor to use care in scrutinizing checks paid in order to detect forgeries, and to render its accounts to prevent the perpetration of frauds upon its depositor. Therefore, if a bank, in the exercise of proper care, could have discovered the alteration or forgery of a customers checks, it can not throw the loss caused by paying them upon the depositor merely because he failed to examine his account. Or, stating the rule in terms of negligence, a bank which is guilty of negligence in failing to discover an alteration or forgery can not avoid liability on the ground that the depositor was negligent in failing to examine his balanced passbook, statement of account, or returned checks. ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX  XXXX XXXX, XXXX ; XXXX XXXX BoA, XXXX ; XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX, etc., XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ; XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX [ XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX ]. ) Just as mentioned above, I am very shocked that BoA did not recognize the serious mistake their working staff made to cash the altered check for the thief without carefully scrutinizing the check. Meanwhile, XXXX XXXX  tried to conceal their negligence for not scrutinizing the receipt of the check sent back from BoA to detect the forgery. If both BoA and XXXX XXXX  did carefully scrutinize the altered check, either of them could have stopped the fraud and saved my loss. 

Opposite to the claims of BoA and XXXX XXXX  that the loss is caused by my failure to notify them early once the forged check was cashed, XXXX XXXX XXXX  page XXXX, section XXXX clearly states that it is the banks responsibility to scrutinize checks to detect forgeries on its depositors account. BoA and XXXX XXXX  not only failed to perform their duties, but also tried to conceal their negligence and liability. In fact, they did not appear to have any fraud monitoring measures in place at all. Therefore, the burden of the loss should be borne completely by BoA and XXXX XXXX  due to their 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