Consumer complaint received 2025-07-19 00:00:00
Product: Prepaid card — General-purpose prepaid card
Issue: Trouble using the card — Trouble using the card to spend money in a store or online
Company: Blackhawk Network Holdings Inc.
State: MA

Complaint narrative:
I received this virtual prepaid Mastercard as payment for a class action settlement from XXXX, which I received in my email and activated. It was not clear on the card itself what company actually managed the prepaid card, however there was a phone number. 

I now believe the company is BLACKHAWK NETWORK, as this is in the footing of the account web interface, however this ownership is not at all visible on the surface of the virtual " Disbursements Prepaid Mastercard '' I received and have registered with at myprepaidcenter.com, the website for the card. 

After one successful purchase earlier in the year for {$7.00} ( a movie from the XXXX XXXX XXXX ), every subsequent attempt to use the card has been unsuccessful. I have registered an online account at the website identified in the email, myprepaidcenter.com and have verified that the billing zip is correct and there is a sufficient balance to pay for the attempted purchase. The subsequent XXXX purchase did not work, despite repeated attempts, and I gave up. 

Later, on XX/XX/XXXX, I attempted to purchase a file-organizing software from independent XXXX XXXX XXXX ', which sells an AI file organizing software advertised at XXXXXXXX for {$12.00} on the same website. 

I attempted to make this purchase with my " Disbursements Prepaid Mastercard '', first using the card number, expiration date, cvv and billing zip in the traditional fashion, which failed. I then logged onto the account I had configured at myprepaidcenter.com and verified that my available balance was {$23.00}, which was correct, as the balance had been {$31.00} originally, and I had made the one successful {$7.00} purchase on XX/XX/XXXX. 

Having verified the balance of the card was sufficient, I subsequently re-attempted the software purchase for {$12.00} at XXXX ', this time making use of the available checkout option of XXXX XXXX as I had previously synchronized my " Disbursements Prepaid Mastercard '' with my XXXX XXXX account, and after verifying my identity on my phone, the purchase was again attempted, and again it failed. 


At this time I contacted the telephone number, listed as " Customer Service : XXXX '' on the face of the " Disbursements Prepaid Mastercard '', card, which I have saved in my online account and also a screenshot of locally on my devices. 

When this number prompted me to input my card information, I did so, and did so correctly, but repeatedly the automated system did not acknowledge the existence of my card account, and repeatedly I verified that the numbers I had input into their phone tree matched the ones on the card. They did. 

I eventually reached a representative named XXXX, who, unlike the automated system, was able to locate my account with the information I provided. XXXX verified that the balance I had was sufficient, however, he told me that the purchases had not been allowed by his company because all failed purchase attempts had involved so-called " restricted merchants ''. 

I informed XXXX that this was patently false, as the first failed purchase was from the same merchant ( XXXX ) and for the same type of goods ( virtual ) as the earlier, successful purchase from XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX said that the reason these were " restricted '' XXXX is because he alleged that both Apple and XXXX were so-called " recurring billers '', elaborating that he believed that meant they retained the card information for later use, and that such purchases were not allowed by his company, which I now believe to be BLACKHAWK, of Nevada, if I recall correctly. 

I informed XXXXBLACKHAWK that their underlying assumption was demonstrably false. First, neither purchase involved recurring billing in any shape or form, and I make no purchases of that nature whatsoever if it can be avoided. 

Second, the earlier purchase made from XXXX and allowed by their systems WAS OF THE SAME TYPE AND MERCHANT as was later declined, ostensibly for the reason that it would have been a recurring purchase, however that reason is false. 

Third, NEITHER purchases attempted involved a recurring billing function in any way whatsoever, and when informed of this rather than attempting to verify if they had made an error, which would have been as complicated as simply accessing the merchant 's website at fileorganizer.gumroad.com and verifying that this merchant offers only one-time sales of a software they have developed in the form of a ( presumably ) lifetime use license. 

Nowhere to be found on the 'Gumroad ' sales site is there even one mention of even an option to subscribe to any sort of recurring billing or subscription service of any kind whatsoever advertised on their site, which appears to offer only the one specific product of their making. 

I asked XXXX that, if I could not use this VIRTUAL card to make VIRTUAL, ONE-TIME payments/purchases on-line, even from an on-line merchant I had made a successful purchase from one time before using that same card, that in that case, where, at all, could I actually use this card containing my own funds and lawful property? 

XXXXBLACKHAWK informed me that I could use the card at " XXXX '' XXXX I asked him if this virtual MasterCard was in fact an XXXX gift card. XXXXBLACKHAWK told me that it was not. I asked why, then, could I not make use of it for a purchase from an independent software merchant. XXXXBLACKHAWK said it could be used at non-recurring billers. I reminded XXXXBLACKHAWK that all attempted purchases had, in fact been from/for not recurring billers/items. 

I then asked XXXXBLACKHAWK whether I could transfer my own funds, now held by BLACKHAWK, to a different account of my ownership, so that the funds could actually be used. XXXXBLACKHAWK informed me that I could not transfer the funds under any circumstances, despite these funds being my lawful property which BLACKHAWK has only temporary, custodial and fiduciary possession thereof. 

XXXX suggested I order a physical copy of my " Disbursements Prepaid Mastercard '' so that it could be used in-store. I asked him whether the physical version of the card would suffer the same erroneous restrictions based upon false merchant information. XXXXBLACKHAWK would not assure me that these restrictions prohibiting my use of funds would be any different with the physical card, and in fact, said that it was likely that the restrictions would be the same, despite their basis in error. 

I nonetheless acquiesced to XXXX 's offer to mail me a copy of the card, which I was told would take XXXX business days, as is the dismaying usual timeframe to receive financial mailings. XXXX kindly waived a fee I could not possibly have known about related to the so-called " conversion '' of a " virtual '' payment instrument to a " physical '' one. 

The issue remains unresolved, and plausibly effects numerous other beneficiaries of the XXXX data-related class action lawsuit settlement, all who I believe had no choice but to receive their payment on a virtual BLACKHAWK card which apparently restricts usage so greatly that BLACKHAWK will quite likely be pocketing a considerable sum of the action class 's funds when these cards begin expiring in XXXX, many likely giving up on accessing the relatively small quantity of funds per person represented by the settlement after repeated failures, but adding up to potentially a great deal of free money for BLACKHAWK when scaled across the entire action class receiving settlements this way, which is certainly in the hundreds of thousands if not millions of claimants.

Thank you for your review of this matter. I expect there will be other, perhaps less detailed complaints of a similar nature as is usually the case with low-quality consumer financial products dealing with amounts of money that seem very small to the wealthy stewards of those funds such as BLACKHAWK.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation