Consumer complaint received 2025-05-20 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account — Transaction was not authorized
Company: U.S. BANCORP
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
To : Customer Assurance Department XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, MN XXXX Re : Rebuttal to Fraud Claim Denial Case Number XXXX Account ending in : XXXX Date : XXXX/25 Dear Customer Assurance Department, I am writing in response to your letter dated XXXX XXXX, 2025, regarding the denial of my fraud claim. I strongly dispute your findings and must reiterate that I did not authorize or participate in the transactions under review, including charges to XXXX * XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX, among others. Your determination that these were authorized transactions is not supported by any valid evidence. 

1. Lack of Evidence of Authorization Per Regulation E ( 12 CFR 1005 ), which implements the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ), financial institutions are required to investigate claims of unauthorized electronic fund transfers and must resolve them in favor of the consumer unless they can establish that the consumer authorized the transaction. You have failed to provide any direct proofsuch as a signed receipt, PIN verification, or video surveillance footagethat I approved or initiated the transactions in question.

Simply relying on transaction history or assumed usage patterns does not meet the burden of proof required under the law. The burden of proof lies with the financial institution to demonstrate that a transaction was authorized. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) has repeatedly emphasized this in enforcement actions.

2. Failure to Consider Medical Evidence I have provided a doctors note confirming that I was under medical care and not capable of being present at or conducting any activity at the locations associated with these transactions. Under the Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA ) and EFTA, consumers are protected from liability for unauthorized use of their accounts, especially when there is compelling evidence, such as verified incapacity, that contradicts the financial institutions claims.

3. Timely Reporting I reported the unauthorized transactions within the time limits required under EFTA ( generally 60 days from the statement date ). According to 12 CFR 1005.6, once a consumer reports an unauthorized transfer in a timely manner, their liability is limited to a maximum of {$50.00} unless it can be shown they acted with gross negligence or delaywhich I clearly did not.

4. Provisional Credit Obligations Your reversal of provisional credits without presenting definitive evidence of authorization contradicts your obligations under 12 CFR 1005.11 ( c ). If the bank can not resolve a dispute in the consumers favor, it must provide a written explanation and retain supporting documentation. Vague claims of conflicting information do not meet that legal standard.

Request for Action I am formally requesting that : 1. You reinstate the reversed provisional credits totaling {$4000.00}.

2. You provide copies of any and all documentation used to support your conclusion that the transactions were authorized.

3. You reopen and properly investigate the dispute in accordance with federal consumer protection laws.

If this matter is not resolved promptly and fairly, I will consider seeking legal counsel and filing a formal complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and other regulatory bodies. 

Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX

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