Consumer complaint received 2016-10-29 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — 
Issue: Application processing delay — 
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I held the Wachovia Platinum Visa card for several years before mismanagement drove it to insolvency and the FDIC arranged its acquisition by Wells Fargo. A short while after I opened the card, Wachovia introduced a rewards program. Adding it to my account involved a simple change of account setting through my online profile. I did not have to apply for a new card. When Wells Fargo acquired Wachovia, it discontinued the rewards program without notice or explanation. A few months later, when I attempted to redeem the rewards which I thought had continued to accrue, I learned of the ending of the rewards program. Being aware that Wells Fargo had its own rewards Visa card, I visited my local branch to inquire. I was shocked to learn that Wells Fargo demanded that I apply for a new card event though they themselves had removed the rewards program which I had previously. 

When the acquisition originally was announced, Wells Fargo assured its customers that we would continue to receive the excellent service which we enjoyed under Wachovia. Shocked that Wells Fargo expected me to apply for a new card in order to restore the ability to earn rewards, I opted instead to desist in using the card, demoting it to use only in case of emergency. 

The card languished in this state for approximately 5 years. Then, earlier in 2016, I visited the same branch on other business and was informed by the teller that I was eligible for rewards on the same card. He encouraged me to accept the new program as the enrollment process was simple. Astonished, I immediately visited a customer service representative who explained that, yes, I could have THE SAME REWARDS PROGRAM which I originally had with Wachovia without applying for a new card. I merely had to consent to a change of setting on my card, which the representative conducted with my consent. 

A few weeks later, when my card expired and I received my automatic renewal, the new card clearly indicated its status as a rewards card. I felt a great sense of irony that the senior leadership of Wells Fargo needed 5 years to realize that the Wachovia program never should have been cancelled but accepted this new reality. 

My relief was short-lived when I learned that Wells Fargo had encouraged me to accept the new rewards program so that I would be confused and erroneously conclude that the newer, more, Cash Wise program was the same program as I had just accepted. Once I realized the deception, I examined the product 's terms and conditions on wf.com which made it clear that it was a separate product requiring an application. I applied and was denied. 

Concluding that an error had been made, I rang the reconsideration line and explained that I did not desire an additional credit line but rather a change in product. The operator suggested that I ask the Credit Card Services department for a product swap, which I would have done originally had I believed it to be an option. The Credit Card Services department denied my request because, under the bizarre manner in which the bank 's systems are programmed, it was a duplicate application, even though, supposedly, a product swap is not an application and would have retained the same credit line. 

As a final effort, I decided to visit the same branch which had encouraged me to accept the lesser rewards program. Before doing so, however, I applied for a credit line increase on my XXXX XXXX card, which was approved, clearly signaling that my creditworthiness was not at issue. 

I have been a Wells Fargo customer for so long that, when I opened my original account, it was with XXXX XXXX. The loyalty which I have demonstrated has been reciprocated with deliberate deception and profiteering because Wells Fargo seeks to minimize enrollments in its best rewards program in order to pad its profit margin.

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