Consumer complaint received 2016-11-21 00:00:00
Product: Bank account or service — Checking account
Issue: Deposits and withdrawals — 
Company: UMPQUA HOLDINGS CORPORATION
State: OR

Complaint narrative:
( Sorry to be so late in reporting -- I 've been hoping to resolve the issue with the bank directly. An Umpqua Bank representative told me last week that there 's nothing more that I can do with them, so I 'm writing to you guys. ) Summary : My checkbook was stolen from my car. Fraudsters cashed {$800.00} in bad checks at my home branch bank. Bank says I 'm responsible for that money because it was " negligent '' to leave my checkbook in the car. I say it was negligent for them to cash those checks without calling me, or even bothering to check the ( wildly different ) signature on the check against my real signature. 

Detail : Late in the evening of XX/XX/XXXX I was looking at my online banking and noticed two large checks I did n't write ( {$500.00} and {$310.00} ) had been cashed against my account that day. ( I never write checks. My checks still have my address from two houses ago. ) I called Umpqua, but they do n't have a line to report check fraud late at night. So, I stayed up all night to be able to report the lost check first thing in the morning. 

Good thing I did, too because the thieves tried to pass another {$400.00} check that morning. ( Having heard from me, the bank denied that one. ) I immediately filed a police report, closed my account, did all the things you 're supposed to do. 

After this all went down, everyone at the bank assured me I 'd be reimbursed. They just needed to let the process ploy out with the fraud investigation unit. 

Several weeks later, an justifiably embarrassed teller from my home branch called to tell me that the fraud unit had denied my claim because I 'd been " negligent '' in leaving my checkbook in the car. They expected me to eat the {$810.00} loss. 

I would like to point out at this juncture that, had I walked into my home branch with a personal check made out to me for {$800.00}, the bank would not have cashed it that day. They would have put a hold of -- at minimum -- 3 days on that check. It 's understandable that they should do this -- if the check turns out to be hinky and I jet off to XXXX never to be seen again, they 're on the hook for {$800.00}. 

HOWEVER, if XXXX XXXX walks in with {$800.00} worth of handwritten checks against my account, apparently Umpqua Bank is only too happy to release those funds, no questions asked -- no signature check, no phone call, nothing. 

The only difference between the two situations is that, in the first, it 's the bank that assumes the risk. In the second, I do. In short, Umpqua seems to be taking better care of their money than their depositors ' money, which is not a good look for a bank, in my opinion. 

I have no doubt that the low-level grunts at my home branch who cashed the checks followed all of Umpqua 's rules. And I 'm sure that not calling the accountholder, or even taking a minute to go look up the correct signature on an accountholder 's check, saves them labor costs. But if you 're going to cut those corners, you need to take responsibility when things go wrong. 

Umpqua should refund the {$810.00}.

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