Consumer complaint received 2025-12-02 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: KEYCORP
State: OH

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/year> I called Key Bank immediately. The Regulation E investigation was to start on XX/XX/year> as I reported a crime of extortion, impersonation, duress, manipulation, and coercion. I explained I have proof. I made a claim for fraud. A fake headhunter and job manager approached me for a part time job. The website and job platform appeared legitimate. The manager promised a refund of funds used for task/commission. The fake manager froze the funds and used extortion tactics to get more funds. The person I spoke with at Key Bank her name was XXXX advised that they needed to wait for funds to be processed as the crypto charges were still pending except for one charge for {$150.00}. She said that I would need to call back once the rest of the charges posted that they can include the rest of the charges for the dispute. XXXX gave me an email and complaint number XXXX email XXXX I provide text messages of extortion, proof of fake website, proof headhunter and manager were fake, requested investigation under regulations e and z, proof no pin used for transactions, audio recording of the manager holding refund hostage for more money. XXXX never called back to make sure this criminal transactions were all dealt with at the same time. I followed up once the other transactions posted and requested to be included with the investigation spoke with another person that apparently gave the transactions that posted later a new investigation number and treated different. Now passed the 10 day investigation I called to find out the decision. I was told that the rest of the funds were given a different investigation number XXXX and were treated different as the initial {$150.00}. The rest of the transactions were to be denied stating a discrepancy in initial phone call not clear as to manager obtaining funds the manager was fake the identity was not real and was clear all transactions were one investigation. The audio recording of the fake manager holding the funds hostage clear extortion was not reviewed for this denial decision in the second investigation number XXXX even though the bank received phone calls and an email explaining all the crypto charges pertained to the same criminal extortion/fraud complaint by me. The initial {$150.00} investigation is still pending past the 10 day requirement under Regulation E. The transactions can not be authorized 1. Irrefutable proof of criminal extortion audio recording of the job manager 2. Text messages by XXXX of criminal extortion by the job manager 3. Proof of impersonation the headhunter and job manager and company are not real proof the website and job platform are fake the XXXX  is investigating the accreditation status which is not real ( the phone numbers and addresses for all contacts and company are not real ) 4. There is no merchant/payee for these transactions because the manager and company are fake ( there is no contact information for either the merchant/payee ) 5. There was no pin used for the transactions the debit card was processed as credit 6. There is proof of criminal fraud provided 7. I did not intend to pay criminals 8. I acted under duress and manipulation 8. There was no informed consent as the manager and company are fake could not know where the funds were going impossible to make an informed decision 9. There was no valid benefit for these transactions for the consumer. I have reported the crime to the FBI, Attorney General for the State of Ohio, XXXX XXXX XXXX  with confirmation investigating fake accreditation, FTC. OIG, and a police report. The initial investigation is still pending past the 10 days per Regulation E investigation no. XXXX the provisional refund is still pending for {$150.00} no provisional funds were given for investigation no. XXXX which is a violation under Regulation E if treated as a separate investigation. The rest of the transactions investigation no. XXXX are to be denied because Key Bank inappropriately separated the transactions into two investigations and did not apply all of the provided documentation when reviewing the second investigation number XXXX. The bank has mishandled this investigation under Regulation E. The transactions labeled as crypto {$150.00} XX/XX/year> {$1400.00} XX/XX/year> {$5400.00} XX/XX/year> {$5000.00} XX/XX/year> {$4200.00} XX/XX/year> were not addressed as the same single criminal event as they posted at different times even though I repeatedly explained one criminal event. The bank failed to adhere to requests to investigate under Regulation E and Z as this is a criminal event extortion and fraud. The bank neglected numerous phone calls and email communications clarifying this was one criminal act concrete proof has been submitted and neglected. The bank first transaction for {$150.00} is still being investigated and the rest of the transactions not treated the same because the bank did not listen that this was all the same criminal event. The {$150.00} provisional funds are past the 10 days with no decision per Regulation E. I can give at least 6 reasons these transactions can not be authorized first is this was a criminal event fraud/extortion second did not knowingly pay criminals third no merchant/payee no phone number no address for manager or company XXXX  is not real fourth no pin used for the transaction treated as credit fifth impersonation of the manager and headhunter no informed consent six past the 10 days provided under Regulation E and inappropriately mishandled the investigation as one criminal event. I still have provisional refund yet denying a portion of the transaction because the investigation was not handled properly.

Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief