Consumer complaint received 2026-05-07 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Savings account
Issue: Managing an account — Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: MD

Complaint narrative:
This complaint concerns a custodial/minor account opened in my name while I was a minor that Wells Fargo states was controlled by a custodian. Wells Fargo confirmed in writing that I owned the funds in the account while the custodian controlled the account. The account contained substantial funds with deposits totaling approximately {$360000.00}. After reaching the age of majority on XX/XX/XXXX, I repeatedly sought assistance regarding the account and requested closure of the account, including appearing with a custodian. My requests were denied, and I was never informed of any required process, documentation, or steps necessary to complete the closure. At no time after I reached the age of majority did Wells Fargo proactively notify me of any alleged requirements necessary to obtain control of, close, or transition the account. During a XX/XX/XXXXXXXX recorded call, Executive Office representative XXXX stated that she could see college accounts opened for me after I reached the age of majority, but that she could not see any documentation showing funds from the custodial account being transferred into those accounts. Additionally, on XX/XX/XXXX, a Wells Fargo banker informed me that after XXXX XXXX, I should have received online access, a debit card, and control of the account. This directly conflicts with later statements from Wells Fargo representatives claiming I had no authority at all regarding the account. Despite Wells Fargo repeatedly referencing XXXX XXXX and the age of majority during recorded conversations, the custodial account remained active and under custodial control until it was closed in XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, during a recorded call, Executive Office representative XXXX stated that although I did not have transactional authority, I did have authority to close the account after reaching the age of majority if I appeared with a custodian. XXXX further explained for the first time that the process would have required closing the custodial account, opening a new account, and transferring the funds into the new account. That explanation raises significant questions regarding how the custodian was later able to close the account and transfer the funds without my participation if Wells Fargos stated process required my participation to open a new account and receive the transferred funds. However, Wells Fargo later reversed course in letters dated XX/XX/XXXXXXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, and during an XX/XX/XXXXXXXX recorded call with Executive Office representative XXXX, by stating that I had no authority at all and that all matters and documentation must be addressed solely with the custodian. During the XX/XX/XXXXXXXX recorded conversation, XXXX acknowledged that I had been receiving conflicting messages. Despite this acknowledgment, Wells Fargo still failed to reconcile or explain : how I could simultaneously possess closure authority and no authority at all, how the custodian later closed the account without my participation if my participation was allegedly required to close and transfer the funds, what the actual termination age applicable to the account was, what requirements applied to closure of the account, why those requirements were never explained to me when I repeatedly sought assistance after reaching the age of majority, or why Wells Fargo refuses to provide structural and procedural information regarding the account while relying on lack of transactional authority. XXXX also stated that I had no right to documentation because I had no transactional authority, even though my requests were not transactional in nature. My requests were for clarification and documentation regarding the account structure, authority, policies, procedures, handling of the account, and the basis for the denial of my requests. Additionally, based on the explanations provided by XXXX and XXXX, Wells Fargo repeatedly referenced age XXXX and the age of majority during recorded conversations by asking whether I went into the branch after turning XXXX, whether I was present with a custodian, and whether I returned after turning XXXX to make any changes. Wells Fargo also stated there were no branch records showing I was present with a custodian after the age of XXXX. However, Wells Fargo refused to explain what records were reviewed, how branch interactions are documented, what systems were searched, or how my requests were handled when I presented in person seeking closure of the account. During one branch interaction, branch manager XXXX informed me that the funds were my fathers money, which directly conflicted with Wells Fargos later written statement confirming that I owned the funds in the account. My inquiries into the handling of the account were further prompted after I received correspondence regarding a life insurance benefit check issued payable to me in the amount of {$280000.00} that had been deposited into the custodial account. The correspondence advised that if I disputed the endorsement or handling of the check, the matter would need to be investigated through the bank. After attempting to seek guidance through local law enforcement, I was also advised that the matter would need to be addressed with the bank. This led me to pursue clarification from Wells Fargo regarding the handling, authority structure, and administration of the account. Wells Fargo has provided materially inconsistent explanations regarding this account through multiple employees and representatives, even though the account was allegedly closed in XXXX and its status should not have changed. I have now received different and conflicting explanations from multiple Wells Fargo employees regarding my authority, account access, required procedures, and account handling. These inconsistencies raise significant concerns regarding Wells Fargos administration, documentation, oversight, and explanation of this custodial account and the guidance provided to me after reaching the age of majority. Additionally, Wells Fargos repeated references to age XXXX and the age of majority during recorded conversations have raised significant questions regarding when custodianship over this account was supposed to end, what authority the custodian was permitted to retain after I reached the age of majority, and whether the custodian should have continued possessing transactional authority over the account after I reached the age of majority, including the ability to continue withdrawing, depositing, handling, and ultimately closing the account without my participation. Based on Wells Fargos descriptions of the account as custodial in nature and its repeated references to the age of majority, I am requesting clarification as to whether the account was governed under a XXXX-type structure and, if so, whether Wells Fargo properly applied, explained, and administered the requirements and authority associated with that structure after I reached the age of majority. At this point, Wells Fargos responses demonstrate inconsistent explanations of authority, failure to explain applicable requirements, refusal to clarify account structure and policies, unsupported refusal of documentation, unexplained denial of my requests, unexplained closure of the account by the custodian without my participation, and failure to provide a consistent and policy-based explanation regarding the handling and closure of an account in my name containing substantial funds.

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