Consumer complaint received 2026-05-26 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: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: WA

Complaint narrative:
CFPB COMPLAINT REGULATION E NON-COMPLIANCE AND VIOLATION OF DISPUTE DUTIES Company : Wells Fargo Bank , N.A . Total Disputed Amount : {$4100.00} Federal Regulations Cited : 12 CFR Part 1005 ( Regulation E ) & Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ) 15 U.S.C. 1693f. Narrative Description : I am filing this formal consumer protection complaint against Wells Fargo Bank , N.A . for explicit and systemic violations of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ) and its implementing Regulation E ( 12 CFR Part 1005 ), specifically regarding the bank 's statutory duty to initiate error resolution procedures and conduct good-faith investigations. The consumer timely notified Wells Fargo immediately upon discovering multiple unauthorized electronic fund transfers executed via the XXXX network and unauthorized debit card transactions. Despite receiving explicit, timely notice of fraud from the consumer at the moment the transactions occurred, Wells Fargo completely failed its federal regulatory mandates by refusing to open formal dispute investigations, failing to issue required provisional credits, and failing to provide any statutory determination letters. The specific unauthorized fraudulent transfers that Wells Fargo refused to investigate are detailed below : XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX to XXXX ( Ref # XXXX ) {$1000.00} XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX to XXXX XXXX {$290.00} XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX to XXXX XXXX {$400.00} XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX # XXXX XXXX, XXXX {$970.00} XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX {$1000.00} XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX {$380.00} Regulatory Infractions : 1 Violation of the Duty to Investigate ( 12 CFR 1005.11 ( c ) ) : Under federal law, once a consumer provides notice of an error, a financial institution is strictly required to investigate the oral or written allegation, determine whether an error occurred within 10 business days, and correct the error. Wells Fargos total inaction and failure to even log or open an investigation constitutes a direct breach of this section. 2 Failure to Issue Provisional Credit ( 12 CFR 1005.11 ( c ) ( 2 ) ( i ) ) : Because Wells Fargo chose to ignore the fraud reports and did not complete its investigations within the initial 10-business-day window, the bank was legally required to provisionally credit the consumer 's account for the total amount in dispute ( {$4100.00} ) while completing its review. By blocking the dispute process entirely, the bank unlawfully deprived the consumer of her funds. 3 Unlawful Shifting of the Burden of Proof & UDAAP : Under the EFTA, the statutory burden of proving that an electronic transfer was " authorized '' rests solely and exclusively on the financial institution. Refusing to open a file when a consumer reports identity fraud or unauthorized access is an Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Act or Practice ( UDAAP ) designed to artificially deflate the bank 's fraud metrics and evade liability.

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