Consumer complaint received 2026-06-11 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account — Transaction was not authorized
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: MD

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/year>, a fraudulent XXXX purchase totaling {$620.00} was made using my husband 's Bank of America XXXX card. The transaction consisted of XXXX copies of the XXXX XXXX purchased through XXXX as a guest checkout transaction. Neither my husband nor I made this purchase, and my husband did not have an XXXX account at the time of the transaction. Bank of America 's fraud monitoring system immediately flagged the transaction as suspicious and generated a fraud alert through the Bank of America XXXX app. Upon receiving the alert, my husband promptly contacted Bank of America and reported that the transaction was unauthorized. During that interaction, Bank of America acknowledged the suspected fraud, opened a fraud claim, issued a replacement debit card, and later provided a provisional credit while the claim was under investigation. Subsequent events further confirmed that my husband 's personal information was being used fraudulently. On XX/XX/year>, he received notice from XXXX that an account had been created using his email address without his authorization. He immediately contacted XXXX and reported the account as unauthorized. On XX/XX/year>, XXXX notified him that the account had been permanently suspended because of activity that XXXX believed was putting the marketplace at risk. Despite the immediate fraud report and the bank 's own fraud alert, Bank of America denied the claim on XX/XX/year> and reversed the provisional credit effective XX/XX/year>, concluding that the transaction was authorized by the cardholder or someone with permission to use the account. On XX/XX/year>, after the provisional credit was reversed, my husband contacted Bank of America to better understand the basis for the denial. During that conversation, a Bank of America representative advised him that the XXXX proof of delivery was a primary reason for the bank 's decision. However, the proof of delivery does not establish that my husband authorized the transaction or received the merchandise. The delivery photograph provided by XXXX does not depict our residence, porch, or property. Although the shipment was delivered somewhere in XXXXXXXX XXXX it was not delivered to our home. We specifically brought this discrepancy to the attention of both Bank of America and XXXX. We also contacted XXXX directly after the denial. XXXX informed us that the purchase had been made as a guest transaction and that no XXXX account existed for my husband at the time of purchase. This directly contradicted Bank of America 's position that prior XXXX activity supported the legitimacy of the transaction. Additionally, throughout our more than XXXX banking relationship with Bank of America XXXX XXXX purchases have been made only using my debit card and not my husband 's debit card. My husband had never used his debit card for XXXX transactions prior to this disputed purchase. We specifically advised Bank of America of this fact during the appeal process. A reasonable review of the account and card usage history should have revealed that this transaction was inconsistent with my husband 's established spending patterns and prior card activity. The transaction was placed using my husband 's name, address, email address, and debit card information. The fact that a fraudster possessed this information does not establish that the transaction was authorized by the cardholder. Rather, it is consistent with identity theft and the fraudulent use of stolen personal and financial information. We appealed Bank of America 's decision and provided additional information, including : ( XXXX ) the bank 's own fraud alert and issuance of a replacement debit card ; ( XXXX ) the fact that my husband had no XXXX account at the time of the purchase ; ( XXXX ) the fact that his debit card had never previously been used for XXXX transactions ; ( XXXX ) the fact that the XXXX delivery photograph does not depict our residence; and ( XXXX ) the fact that an unauthorized XXXX account was later created using his email address and personal information and subsequently suspended by XXXX. Despite this information, Bank of America denied the appeal and again concluded that the transaction was authorized. I am requesting that Bank of America reimburse the {$620.00} fraudulent transaction, conduct a thorough and independent review of the claim, and provide a written explanation of the evidence relied upon to conclude that the transaction was authorized. I also request that Bank of America explain why its investigation did not give appropriate weight to : ( XXXX ) the bank 's own fraud alert and issuance of a replacement debit card, ( XXXX ) the fact that my husband had no XXXX account at the time of the transaction, ( XXXX ) the fact that the XXXX delivery photograph does not depict our residence, ( XXXX ) the subsequent unauthorized creation and suspension of an XXXX account using my husband 's information, and ( XXXX ) the fact that my husband 's debit card had no prior history of XXXX transactions despite more than XXXX years of banking history with Bank of America. If Bank of America truly believed this transaction was authorized, it is unclear why the transaction was initially flagged as suspected fraud by its own monitoring systems, why a replacement debit card was issued immediately following the report, and why subsequent evidence of unauthorized use of my husband 's personal information was not meaningfully considered during the investigation.

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