Consumer complaint received 2026-04-01 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem caused by your funds being low — Overdrafts and overdraft fees
Company: M&T BANK CORPORATION
State: DE

Complaint narrative:
This is a formal regulatory complaint and investigation mandate regarding M & T Banks systemic deceptive practices, unauthorized financial disclosures, and deliberate facilitation of a cyber-financial intrusion. Currently, there are open escalations ( CFPB Complaint IDs : XXXX and XXXX ) where M & T Bank has falsely responded tXXXX the complaints " do not belong to them. '' I now submit official M & T Bank statements as forensic evidence of their direct liability, active financial harm, and data breach. The undeniable facts, supported by M & T Banks own ledgers, are as follows : XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX Violation & Manufactured Overdrafts ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ' Trap ) On XX/XX/year>, I visited the M & T Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX to deposit a XXXX XXXX Total Loss Settlement check amounting to {$10000.00}. Given that XXXX XXXX is a major national insurance carrier, there was XXXX risk of insufficient funds. During this transaction, I strictly adhered to all security protocols by providing my official Drivers License ( Photo ID ) and my M & T XXXX XXXX to the teller for identity verification. The teller verified my identity and accepted the check, yet committed an incomprehensible act of negligence by failing to ensure the endorsement was correctly processeda direct breach of the 'Duty of Ordinary Care ' under UCC Article XXXX. Furthermore, despite this latent processing error, M & T Banks system officially reflected the full amount as " Available Balance '' the following day. Relying on this official confirmation from a major financial institution, I proceeded with a vehicle purchase. It was only on XX/XX/XXXX that the bank reversed the funds due to their own initial administrative failure ( item returned ). This bank-induced trap decimated my balance and triggered a massive {$5200.00} Overdraft Transfer from my credit card on XX/XX/XXXX. M & T Bank weaponized its own employee 's gross negligence and deceptive balance reporting to manufacture high-interest debt against a consumer who had performed every due diligence at the teller window. XXXX. XXXX Violations : Transaction Reordering, Phantom Overdraft Exploitation, and Deceptive Verbal Assurances On XX/XX/year>, observing a {$0.00} checking balance with no pending transactions, I deposited {$1000.00} in CASH to secure my account. Despite this immediate cash liquidity, M & T Bank executed a deceptive transaction reordering practice. Instead of utilizing the cash deposit to cover pending clearances, the bank triggered an unnecessary {$300.00} Overdraft Transfer from my credit card, assessing multiple {$8.00} Overdraft Fees. When I subsequently visited the branch after depositing funds to resolve the bank-initiated issue, the staff reneged on their initial promise to completely roll back the overdraft. They begrudgingly reversed only a single {$8.00} fee, leaving another intact, and explicitly assured me that no further overdraft-related fees or interest would accrue. This was a blatant lie. M & T Bank designed a " XXXX XXXX '' system where cash deposits into the checking account do NOT automatically cure the credit card overdraft principal. Consequently, directly contradicting the teller 's explicit assurance, M & T has been systematically extracting punitive 25.99 % ( and 25.74 % ) APR interest consecutively across XXXX ( {$23.00} ), XXXX ( {$7.00} ), and XXXX ( {$4.00} ). This compounding financial extraction, built on false verbal guarantees and transaction manipulation, is an ongoing, textbook Abusive and Deceptive Act under XXXX. XXXX. Regulation XXXX Violation & Defined Hacking : Facilitating Business Logic Abuse I formally define the intrusion by XXXX as a Cyber-Financial Hacking event via XXXX XXXX XXXX. Hacking is the exploitation of functional vulnerabilities to gain unauthorized access to data and funds. In XXXX, I explicitly disputed fraudulent charges from a merchant ( XXXX ), physically destroyed my credit card ( ending in XXXX ), and had a new card issued ( ending in XXXX ) to establish a strict financial firewall. Under fundamental XXXX XXXX security protocols, the new account must be entirely isolated. However, M & T Bank actively uploaded and broadcasted my secure, undisclosed new card number ( XXXX ) to the Visa Account Updater ( VAU/ABU ) database without my consent. While legitimate entities like Delaware E-ZPass correctly identified the security event, received a " Decline, '' and removed my old card from their system, M & T Bank intentionally provided my new XXXX credentials to the disputed merchant, XXXX. As proven in my XXXX statement, XXXX successfully exploited this data leak to bypass my physical firewall and charged my new card on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. This active disclosure of private financial data directly facilitated this hacking event, violating Regulation 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 monetary relief