Consumer complaint received 2025-07-17 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a formal complaint against Bank of America regarding their mishandling of a fraud case, failure to provide timely and appropriate communication, and refusal to issue the full provisional credit promised under their own policy and applicable consumer protection laws. 

Background : On XX/XX/year>, my husband and I discovered multiple unauthorized charges from a merchant called XXXX totaling {$8800.00}. At that time, we were home together and confirmed neither of us authorized these transactions. We immediately contacted

Bank of Americas fraud department to report the activity. The representative confirmed a fraud case was opened and informed us that we would receive a temporary ( provisional ) credit while the matter was investigated. We were told the credit would appear within 10 days. 


XX/XX/year> Business day 9 after the case was opened, I received a denial letter stating : The charge was authorized by you or made by someone who has permission to use the card or account.

I contacted Bank of America to challenge this decision and was told the only proof supporting the denial was a screenshot of a XXXX XXXX Overview describing XXXX. This overview merely stated that XXXX may require identity verification to send moneynot that it actually does. In reality, XXXX does not require such verification when using someone elses debit card.

The representative agreed that the case appeared improperly closed and initiated a reconsideration of the claim. However, I was informed that no provisional credit was required during a reconsideration, and I would have to wait up to 45 days for resolution. I insisted that this not be called a reconsideration as Bank of America improperly closed the initial fraud case without adequate investigation, relying on irrelevant and insufficient evidence.

Pattern of False Information and Obstructive Behavior Between XX/XX/year> and XX/XX/year>, I made numerous calls to Bank of America, speaking with representatives and supervisors including XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX. Throughout these calls, I encountered a consistent pattern of contradictory statements, misinformation, and delays, which has raised serious concerns about Bank of Americas handling of this matter. 
XX/XX/year> ( XXXX XXXX  ) : I was told to expect a call back within 72 hours. However, this later became 72 business hours, and by XX/XX/XXXX, I had still received no follow-up. I was also informed during this call that I did not need to visit a physical Bank of America branch to reopen the claim, as it had been handled over the phone. 
XX/XX/year>XXXX XXXX : A representative told me the claim had been escalated on XX/XX/XXXX and I needed to wait 72 business hours from that time for a call, but this was untrue as I had made no call on that date. By my calculation, 72 business hours from the XX/XX/XXXX call would have expired at XXXXXXXX XXXX  on XXXX XXXXyet no update or callback occurred. 
XX/XX/year> ( later call ) : Representative XXXX claimed my case was no longer fraud but a billing dispute because I had done business with XXXX before. This assertion is completely false ; I had never heard of XXXX before discovering these unauthorized charges. 
XX/XX/year> : I was issued a partial provisional credit of {$2100.00}, leaving {$6700.00} still outstanding. Representative XXXX explained the remaining amount could not be credited due to a technical difficulty, even though a letter from Bank of America indicated they were still awaiting a response from the merchant. 
XX/XX/year> ( supervisor XXXX ) : I was assured the technical difficulty would soon be resolved and the remainder of the provisional credit applied, but no progress was made. 
XX/XX/year> : Representative XXXX advised there was nothing to be done except wait. His supervisor, XXXX, echoed this sentiment and claimed they were still trying to figure out the glitch. No updates were provided regarding any investigation or corrective actions. 
XX/XX/year> ( XXXX supervisor XXXX ) : XXXX acknowledged my concerns and said no one could assist after XXXX XXXX. 

This repeated dissemination of false information, the failure to provide timely updates, and the refusal to apply the full provisional credit suggest a systemic breakdown in Bank of Americas fraud response processor worse, a deliberate effort to avoid compliance with Regulation E obligations.

These events have caused significant financial and emotional distress. The behavior demonstratedlack of follow up, shifting explanations, and contradictory statementsreflects a lack of transparency and accountability that undermines consumer protections.

Why This Is a Formal Complaint : Bank of America has : 1. Failed to provide the full provisional credit as required under Regulation E ( Electronic Fund Transfer Act ) for fraudulent transactions.

2. Improperly closed the initial fraud case without adequate investigation, relying on irrelevant and insufficient evidence.

3. Provided false and conflicting information across multiple communications.

4. Repeatedly failed to honor requests for call backs, impeding my ability to resolve the matter.

5. Allowed this issue to drag on for over a month without meaningful action or resolution.

Regulatory Concerns : Bank of Americas actions appear to violate several provisions of FDIC Regulation E ( 12 CFR Part 1005 ), including : 1005.11 ( c ) ( 2 ) ( i ) Failing to issue a full provisional credit within 10 business days after notice of error.

1005.11 ( c ) ( 2 ) ( ii ) Improperly denying provisional credit during the reconsideration phase.

1005.11 ( c ) ( 4 ) Failure to conduct a reasonable investigation before denying the claim, relying instead on irrelevant and insufficient evidence ( a XXXX XXXX  Overview ).

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 monetary relief