Consumer complaint received 2026-05-27 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: SANTANDER HOLDINGS USA, INC.
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint regarding Santander Banks handling of an unauthorized electronic banking transaction dispute totaling {$1000.00}. The disputed transaction occurred on or around XX/XX/XXXX. After discovering the unauthorized withdrawal, I promptly notified Santander and disputed the transaction, clearly stating that I did not authorize, initiate, consent to, or benefit from it. My physical card also remained in my possession throughout the relevant period. On XX/XX/XXXX, Santander issued a denial letter stating : Claim 001 is denied for inconsistencies. Customer states the card is still in their possession. This is card present CHIP/PIN transaction. Customer is not explaining how card would have been obtained. I am concerned Santander failed to conduct a reasonable investigation as required under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E ( 12 CFR Part 1005 ) and instead improperly shifted the burden onto me to explain the mechanics of the fraud itself. Under Regulation E, the burden is on the financial institution to demonstrate that an electronic fund transfer was authorized, not on the consumer to determine or explain exactly how unauthorized access may have occurred. Santander appears to have relied primarily on the fact that the transaction was processed as a chip/PIN transaction and that my physical card remained in my possession. However, despite requests for supporting documentation, Santander failed to provide meaningful evidence establishing authorization, including : -Transaction location information -Merchant or ATM identification details -ATM surveillance or terminal records -Terminal IDs or authentication logs -PIN verification evidence -Documentation demonstrating that I personally authorized or benefited from the transaction The documentation Santander did provide was notably sparse , listing only XXXX as the transaction description. The amount itself, {$1000.00}, is also atypical for an ordinary consumer debit purchase or ATM transaction, particularly where no associated fees or transactional context were provided. Additionally, to address likely assumptions regarding potential credential compromise, there were no further unauthorized transactions within the hours immediately following discovery of the disputed charge and notification to Santander. The card was not borrowed, shared, or removed from the cardholders possession, and the account history reflects extremely limited online purchasing activity and no history of digital wallet usage or tokenization activity. Santanders own transaction records should readily reflect these longstanding account usage patterns. Instead of substantiating authorization, Santanders denial appears to rely on inference and burden-shifting rather than evidence. Most importantly, I am requesting reimbursement of the disputed {$1000.00} transaction unless Santander can produce actual evidence demonstrating authorization. I am also requesting : -Reopening and reinvestigation of the claim -Production of the records and evidence relied upon in denying the dispute -A determination consistent with Regulation Es consumer protection and investigation requirements I have retained copies of Santanders correspondence and denial documentation.

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