Consumer complaint received 2015-06-23 00:00:00
Product: Bank account or service — Checking account
Issue: Deposits and withdrawals — 
Company: BBVA FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
BBVA Compass bank was advised of a Teller-caused error on XXXX XXXX, 2015. BBVA Compass stated that they did not make an error when contacted about it on XXXX XXXX, 2015 via the customer service line. Their phone representative told me that the withdrawal was done by someone who had full access to the account and funds. Account holder told the representative on the Customer service line that this was not true because there was no signature card on the account for this person. When the bank was visited on XXXX/XXXX/2015 at the XXXX location, the account representative told the account holder that there would be no issue disputing this transaction and getting the money reimbursed. Account representative was told that arrangements would be made to regain payment for this error from the person who withdrew the account ( account holder 's father ). Due to personal reasons and familial relationship to this person, the account holder waited until XXXX 2015 to open a formal dispute. The account representative at the branch in XXXX was visited and informed of the situation. This person contacted the branch that committed this error and instructed them of the error they caused and that there has not been a repayment of this transaction by this person withdrawing the money as he has recently been having health related issues and could not repay. They stated that they would make efforts to contact the withdrawer of the account and inform him of the need to repay this money. The person told the account holder that it would take 7-10 business days before there could be a resolution to this problem. During this call, the account representative asked about XXXX XXXX being possibly entered as a beneficiary and account holder agreed to accept this option. However, it seemed that this was done to make it appear that the bank teller did not make such a gross error and misjudgment in giving these funds to the wrong person. On XXXX XXXX, 2015, without telling the account holder, the account was deemed to be fraudulent and instructed via voicemail to call back as the account may need to be closed. The account holder called the fraud account specialist that the account was not compromised as the error was caused by the bank teller and not by the person as he had asked for the balance on his account, not remembering his account number due to recent XXXX treatments received. The account holder then tried to prevent some overdraft fees when the debit card associated with the account was canceled on XXXX XXXX, 2015. There was no documentation to support the need to close the debit card. Then the customer service line was contacted that same day and told the account was deemed fraudulent and had automatically closed the debit card. The local branch was visited again and informed of all the issues with this account and that there was no resolution to the prior issue and had waited over 20 days to get a resolution to the problem. The account representative then qualified the account holder for a credit card to help avoid such large overdraft fees occurring by accident. The account holder had XXXX or XXXX overdraft fees reimbursed as caused by the debit card being canceled without notification. However, the issue of the XXXX dollars was not addressed. The account holder has waited for nearly 2 months to try to receive a result to the internal investigation being conducted, but each time the fraud specialist can not provide a deadline for this transaction to be resolved. The last conversation that the account holder has had with the fraud specialist is that they would email the investigator of this dispute and try to receive some information to relay to the account holder about the status of the investigation. Meanwhile, the fraud specialist only states to look at the account to see if the funds appear, but it has taken too long to get a response.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation