Consumer complaint received 2025-12-09 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Fees or interest — Charged too much interest
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: MA

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this amendment to Complaint # XXXX. It concerns Wells Fargos handling of my disability-related hardship request, including the premature closure of the Executive Office investigation , inconsistent limitation of the scope of review, refusal to provide temporary delinquency protections, and the need for higher-level compliance review. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- After I notified Wells Fargo that I was unable to work due to a XXXX and requested hardship-related interest relief, I received one introductory call in which my circumstances were briefly acknowledged. The Executive Office then attempted to reach me twice solely to verify income. When we did not connect, the investigation was closed and reported as completed, even though no substantive evaluation of my hardship request took place. This premature closure prevented proper review. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - When I later raised broader hardship concerns, including delinquency protection and fee relief, I was told that because my original complaint mentioned only reduced interest, the Executive Office was not required to consider additional hardship issues. This was stated only after the investigation had already been closed. I was then referred to customer service, which refunded my XXXX interest and said future interest could also be refunded if I called back monthly. This shows that additional hardship relief was warranted but was made available only outside the formal review and only if I repeatedly initiated contact during a XXXX hardship. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- I was also told Wells Fargo is not required to grant hardship assistance to customers with no income, effectively treating lack of income as a disqualifying condition. This appears inconsistent with the intended purpose of hardship programs, where loss of income is typically the primary qualifying factor. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - When I requested escalation to Compliance or the Office of the President, the request was refused. I was also told Wells Fargo could not provide temporary protection from delinquency or negative credit reporting and I should take this up with the credit bureaus if negative reporting occurred. This is incorrect ; only creditors can prevent delinquency reporting. Declining temporary protections during a documented XXXX hardship raises concerns about avoidable consumer harm. -- -- - My account is now more than {$1000.00} over the credit limit due to essential living expenses. This was not caused by the bank but substantially increases vulnerability to delinquency. Because Wells Fargo declined to offer temporary hardship protections, I will need to liquidate part of my limited IRA, incurring a 10 % penalty, to avoid credit damage. This would not have been necessary of delinquency and credit reporting protections were offered during my period of documented hardship.

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 monetary relief