Consumer complaint received 2026-04-29 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Domestic (US) money transfer
Issue: Other transaction problem — 
Company: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/year> at XXXX XXXX XXXX, Capital One sent me an automated email confirming that " XXXX XXXX has just sent you money with XXXX in the amount of {$5000.00} '' and stating that " The money has already been deposited in your account, so you don't need to do anythingjust sit back and enjoy that money-in-the-bank feeling. '' That message was sent from XXXX and contained no warning, hold, or pending-status flag. Acting in reasonable reliance on Capital One 's official representation that the funds were available and final, at XXXX XXXX XXXX seven minutes after the bank 's notification I completed an unrelated peer-to-peer marketplace transaction on XXXX ( order # XXXX ) by releasing XXXX XXXX to a buyer identified on XXXX as " XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ID XXXX ). The buyer had selected XXXX as the payment method on the XXXX platform. I subsequently refunded XXXX XXXX to the same buyer to correct a {$96.00} overpayment. On XX/XX/year> at XXXX XXXX XXXX, Capital One emailed me that the {$5000.00} credit had been debited from my account ending XXXX and that all of my Capital One accounts had been restricted pending review ( reference # XXXX ). The reversal was based on a claim filed by the XXXX sender of record, XXXX XXXX / XXXX XXXX, who alleged his XXXX credentials had been compromised. I had no knowledge of, no involvement in, and no prior relationship with XXXX XXXX. I am an innocent third-party recipient who acted in good faith on Capital One 's own notification. The XXXX counterparty ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and the XXXX sender of record ( XXXX XXXX / XXXX XXXX ) are different people. That mismatch is documented in the XXXX order record, the chat transcript, and the XXXX sender field, and is prima facie evidence of third-party payment triangulation. Within approximately 45 minutes of releasing the XXXX, I began receiving threatening SMS messages from XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX saying " Police are on the way to you. If you not home don't even go back. They will get that {$5000.00} back '' and " They have all of your information. '' That same number is stored on my XXXX under the contact name " XXXX XXXX XXXX '' directly linking the XXXX sender of record ( XXXX / XXXX XXXX ) to the post-transaction coercion. I also received SMS messages from XXXX XXXX claiming his account had been " hacked. '' The same phone number was used to send both the threats and the supposed " I was hacked '' messages, which is inconsistent with the conduct of a genuine victim of unauthorized account access. The XX/XX/year> debit of {$5000.00} from my account is itself an unauthorized electronic fund transfer under 12 C.F.R. 1005.2 ( m ) I did not authorize Capital One to debit that amount from my account. This is the core of my complaint : Capital One performed an unauthorized debit that improperly cancelled a settled credit and effectively used my deposit account as a recovery fund for losses that under Regulation E and ordinary commercial-law principles must be borne by the sender, the sending institution, or XXXX / XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX On XX/XX/year> I emailed Capital One at XXXX providing the full chronology and supporting evidence. On XX/XX/year> I sent a second formal written dispute attaching the consolidated dispute package. I have received only an automated acknowledgment quoting internal SLAs of 6090 business days for " Hold Harmless '' and 90 business days for " Without Entry, '' which is incompatible with Regulation E. As of today, XX/XX/year>, I am at day 55 of the 60-day Reg E window. Capital One has not provided written findings under 1005.11 ( d ), has not produced any documents relied upon, and has not issued the provisional credit required by 1005.11 ( c ) ( 2 ) when an investigation will exceed 10 business days. Capital One made a positive, unqualified representation that the funds were " already deposited '' and that I did not need to do anything. I relied on that representation to release consideration in a separate transaction. Capital One then reversed the credit and shifted the loss to me, an innocent recipient. That allocation of risk is improper. Regulation E protects the consumer whose account is debited without authorization that is me. The bank 's improper reversal can not be allowed to stand. DESIRED RESOLUTION : 1. Recredit of {$5000.00} to my Capital One account ending 3694. 2. Immediate provisional credit pursuant to 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( c ) ( 2 ). 3. Immediate removal of all restrictions on my Capital One accounts. 4. Written findings under 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( d ), with copies of the documents Capital One relied upon. 5. Written confirmation that no negative information has been or will be furnished to XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, or any other consumer reporting agency, and withdrawal of any such information already furnished. 6. Litigation hold on all transaction logs, authorization records, IP / device identifiers, internal communications, and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX network records related to reference # XXXX.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation