Consumer complaint received 2026-03-10 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Deposits and withdrawals
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: WY

Complaint narrative:
CFPB Complaint Evidence, Investigation Failure, and XXXX XXXX Device Data Summary : Wells Fargo issued multiple Final Determinations without conducting a complete investigation, without obtaining or reviewing required evidence, and while providing information that contradicts law enforcement records, devicelevel XXXX XXXX data, and their own internal timelines. -- - 1. No Evidence Was Reviewed or Produced Wells Fargo has not produced : ATM footage Transaction analysis Device/IP logs Fraud pattern comparison Internal notes supporting their conclusions Any evidence showing the transactions were authorized The bank issued conclusions without a single piece of supporting evidence. -- - 2. Required Investigative Steps Were Not Performed The bank did not : Retrieve or review ATM video Contact law enforcement despite an active investigation Reconcile their timeline with my phone records Review the sheriffs report or warrant Compare the disputed transactions to my historical account behavior Review the XXXX XXXX devicelevel authorization data A Regulation E investigation requires actual investigative steps, not assumptions. -- - 3. XXXX XXXX DeviceLevel Evidence Was Ignored The disputed ATM transaction was performed using a Wells Fargo debit card stored in XXXX XXXX not a physical card. This means the transaction generated devicespecific cryptographic evidence, including : Device Account Number ( DAN ) the tokenized card number unique to my XXXX Transaction Cryptogram a onetime cryptographic signature proving which device initiated the ATM session Token Reference ID linking the card token to my specific device Wallet Authentication Record showing the exact time my device authenticated the transaction Authentication Method Face ID, Touch ID, or passcode used Device Metadata confirming the specific XXXX model and device identifier This data is created automatically by XXXX XXXX and is available to the bank during investigation. Wells Fargo did not request, review, or reference any of this evidence. This is a critical investigative failure because the cryptogram and DAN alone can confirm : Which device initiated the ATM session Whether the transaction was authorized by my device Whether the card was provisioned to another device Whether the transaction was legitimate or fraudulent Ignoring this evidence invalidates any Final Determination. -- - 4. The Bank Provided Information That Conflicts With Reality Wells Fargo issued statements that contradict : Law enforcement documentation The sheriffs report The warrant status My phone records XXXX XXXX devicelevel data Their own internal timelines Their own prior responses These contradictions indicate the bank did not verify facts before issuing determinations. -- - 5. Final Determinations Were Issued Without Evidence Wells Fargo closed claims while : Evidence was still outstanding The warrant was active No ATM footage had been reviewed No XXXX XXXX device data had been reviewed No timeline reconstruction had been performed No supporting documentation existed A Final Determination can not be issued when the investigation is incomplete. -- - 6. Pattern of NonResponsiveness and Procedural Breakdown Multiple complaints have remained open for extended periods with no action, and several were closed with : No evidence No investigative detail No reconciliation of contradictions No reference to devicelevel XXXX XXXX data This pattern suggests a systemic failure to investigate, not an isolated error.

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