Consumer complaint received 2025-11-16 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement — Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
This complaint is based on the closed complaint ID XXXX. 

Hi, I respectfully request that this case be reopened, as I believe the prior resolution did not fully address the evidence provided. Please review the following points directly, rather than restating that the transactions were authorized, since the issues concern merchant legality and XXXX misclassification. 

1. The resolution letter dated XX/XX/year> stated : we found that no fraud occurred, or that the transactions were authorized. However, the supporting documentation only confirmed authorization, not the absence of fraud. Under the FTC Act ( 15 U.S.C. 45 ), fraud includes misrepresentation and unfair practices, not just lack of authorization. Mastercard Rules ( Section 5.9.2 ) also prohibit merchants from submitting transactions that are illegal under applicable law. Therefore, the documentation does not establish that fraud was absent. 

XXXX. The XXXX applied was XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  In reality, the merchant provided gambling services. Gambling transactions must be coded under XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ). Misclassification constitutes transactional misrepresentation under Mastercard Rules ( Section 5.8.1 Merchants must accurately describe the goods or services provided and must not misrepresent the nature of the transaction ). Incorrect XXXX coding is grounds for chargeback under XXXX XXXX XXXX, Reason Code XXXX ( Cardholder Dispute Misrepresentation ). 

XXXX. The supporting documentation acknowledged that the merchantis banned in New Jersey. Despite this, the denial concluded that authorization alone negates fraud. Under New Jersey law ( N.J.S.A. 2C:371 et seq. ), sweepstakes gambling is prohibited. Mastercard Rules ( Section 5.9.2 ) explicitly prohibit merchants from processing transactions that are illegal in the cardholders jurisdiction. Supporting an illegal merchant conflicts with both state law and Mastercard compliance obligations. 

4. Please confirm whether an investigation into merchant misrepresentation and illegal activity was conducted. Mastercard Rules ( Section 3.11 ) require issuers to investigate merchant misrepresentation and illegal activity when disputes are raised. CFPB Regulation E ( 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ) also requires financial institutions to conduct a reasonable investigation of reported errors, including unauthorized or misrepresented transactions. The documentation provided does not demonstrate such review.

5. Finally, please clarify whether Wells Fargos position is that any customer authorization renders a transaction valid, even when merchant identity and activity are misrepresented. Under CFPB Regulation E ( 12 C.F.R. 1005.2 ( m ) ), authorization must be informed and valid. A yes response obtained through misrepresentation does not constitute lawful authorization. The FTC Act ( 15 U.S.C. 45 ) prohibits deceptive practices, and Mastercard Chargeback Guide ( Reason Code 4837 No Cardholder Authorization ) recognizes that misrepresentation invalidates consumer consent.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I respectfully request a full reconsideration of the dispute in light of these points. 

Sincerely, 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 non-monetary relief