Consumer complaint received 2025-07-30 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Domestic (US) money transfer
Issue: Money was not available when promised — 
Company: Block, Inc.
State: DC

Complaint narrative:
Business Name : Square, Inc. ( Block, Inc. ) Complaint Type : Service Issues Amount : {$35000.00} Summary : Square wrongfully held a legitimate business payment, incorrectly labeled it as fraudulent, and is now exceeding their own stated refund processing timeline by holding my money for 7+ business days. 


Original Issue ( XX/XX/year> @ XXXX ) : Received legitimate {$35000.00} ACH payment from established client for video production contract. Square immediately froze funds claiming " credit card scam investigation '' despite being a bank transfer, not credit card transaction. 
Inadequate Investigation : Provided comprehensive documentation proving payment legitimacy : Valid contract from RFP process Established client relationship with XXXX XXXX  XXXX Ongoing project work Business correspondence Square ignored all evidence ( provided via client contracts, correspondence and contact information of all parties provided ) and declared payment " fraudulent '' with " decision final '' - no meaningful review conducted. Even after I had my client call their bank to confirm that the payment was legitimate and approved.

Current Problem - Excessive Refund Delay : Refund initiated : XX/XX/year> Today : XX/XX/year> ( Business Day 7 ) Status : Still no refund received Poor Customer Service : No phone support available - only chat Agents provide contradictory information Can not speak with anyone with actual authority Scripted responses with no real problem-solving Business Impact : Can not pay contractors on active project Severe cash flow disruption Client relationship damage Lost productivity dealing with Square 's mistakes Legal and Regulatory Concerns Violation of Federal Investigation Standards : Under FDIC guidance ( FIL-3-2012 ), payment processors must " act promptly to minimize possible consumer harm '' and conduct thorough investigations. Square failed to meaningfully review comprehensive documentation proving payment legitimacy, instead relying on algorithmic decisions without human oversight required by federal standards.

Improper Use of Customer Funds : Square 's practice of holding acknowledged legitimate funds for maximum allowable periods while earning interest on those deposits violates FTC Act Section 5 standards against unfair practices that cause " substantial injury to consumers which is not reasonably avoidable. '' This enables Square to generate float income at small business expense.

Non-Compliance with Due Process Requirements : Federal regulations ( FFIEC BSA/AML Manual ) require processors to " thoroughly investigate '' suspicious activities rather than automatically reject them. Square 's scripted responses and refusal to consider evidence demonstrate systematic failure to meet federally mandated investigation standards.

The extended processing delays suggest Square prioritizes float income generation over legitimate business operations, using fraud prevention as pretext to retain customer funds beyond periods justified for actual investigation.

There actions can be seen as a pattern in many online reviews of Square holding legitimate business payments while providing poor customer service and excessive processing delays.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation