Consumer complaint received 2025-01-20 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: SOFI TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
Resubmission due to additional information provided below : I disputed a transaction of {$1500.00} made in XXXX to XXXX. I have submitted multiple appeals to Sofi Bank regarding the denial ( s ), providing additional information with each attempt to recover the lost funds. Despite these efforts, they have not offered further clarification, and their rationale for denying the claim remains inadequate. Below, I provide context and explanations to support my claim that this transaction was unauthorized. 

1. At the time of the disputed transaction, I was in possession of my debit card. I suspect my PIN may have been compromised, potentially at an ATM I attempted to withdraw money from a cruise port in XXXX. 

XXXX. I received a text alert for a smaller, unauthorized charge of {$160.00}, which I promptly flagged as unauthorized ( a photo of the text message from Sofi Bank is attached ). My card was then frozen as a result. For the {$1600.00} transactiona significantly larger amountno such notification was sent to me. This inconsistency in the banks fraud detection and notification process raises concerns, as it prevented me from identifying and disputing this unauthorized charge immediately. If the {$1600.00} withdrawal occurred after my card was frozen due to the {$160.00} dispute, it should not have been approved, as frozen cards are intended to block all transactions. If the {$1600.00} withdrawal occurred before my card was frozen, I should have received a text alert similar to the one I received for the {$160.00} transaction. The absence of such an alert for this much larger transaction raises questions about the effectiveness and consistency of the banks fraud prevention measures. 

XXXX. I provided an itinerary that confirms I was in XXXX, XXXX, on the date of the charge in question. The charge was processed at a terminal in XXXX XXXX ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ), which is more than 19 hours away from my location in XXXX. This was a closed-loop cruise itinerary, traveling from Florida to Florida. Given the timeline, it would have been impossible for me to stop in XXXX, travel to XXXX XXXX, and return to XXXX before the ship departed in the late afternoon on the same day. 

XXXX. The bank ( Sofi ) gave me conflicting information regarding the charge. They initially told me the charge was on XX/XX/XXXX. Later, they told me the charge was on XX/XX/XXXX. I was in XXXX, XXXX on the XXXX and at sea on the XXXX. It is impossible for me to have used my card in XXXX XXXX on either day. 

The bank 's rationale for denying the claim remains inadequate. The information they provided me for denying the claim is listed below verbatim : Case Summary : The disputed transaction ( s ) are Card Present transactions and the member claims to be in possession of their debit card. 1. The member was asked if they were in possession of their debit card when the transaction took place. We received a Yes response on XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX. The member was asked if they recently traveled out of the country. If so, where? We received a XXXX, XXXX response on XX/XX/XXXX. No denials for the wrong PIN indicating whoever was using the debit card knew the PIN. No denials for Non Sufficient Funds ( NSF ) indicating whoever was using the debit card had knowledge of how much was available in the checking account. A review of the login history shows no sign of unauthorized access or abnormal activity. Payment type : Credit for Misc General Merchandise Thank you for your time, XXXX XXXX, XXXX.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation