Consumer complaint received 2026-04-11 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Other banking product or service
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: U.S. BANCORP
State: CO

Complaint narrative:
Subject : Request for Executive Review Dispute of Fraud Claim Determination This is a follow-up complaint regarding CaseXX/XX/XXXX. I dispute U.S. Banks conclusion and believe the response does not adequately address the circumstances of fraud involving remote access and coercion. Dear Executive Office, I am writing to formally request an executive review of the denial of my fraud claim involving a {$10000.00} wire transfer from my account at U.S. Bank. On XX/XX/scrub> 2026, my computer was compromised by scammers impersonating XXXX antivirus technical support. After calling a number displayed on my computer, the scammers gained remote access and full control of my device. While controlling my computer, they manipulated my screen to falsely show that {$11000.00} had been deposited into my account instead of {$110.00} and pressured me to return the funds immediately. During this time, they maintained remote access and directed my actions in real time. While under this deception and with my device compromised, {$5000.00} was transferred from my savings account and {$5000.00} from my line of credit into my checking account, and those funds were then wired to an account at XXXX XXXX controlled by the scammers. I understand that the denial letter states that U.S. Bank is not responsible for transactions resulting from the sharing of credentials and emphasizes the customers responsibility to maintain account security. However, I respectfully disagree that this situation constitutes typical sharing of credentials. At no point did I willingly or knowingly provide access in a normal or informed manner. This incident involved a sophisticated social engineering attack in which criminals had remote control of my computer, were actively manipulating my screen, and directing my actions while I was under significant psychological pressure. This type of fraud is widely recognized as social engineering fraud or authorized push payment fraud, where victims are manipulated in real time while their devices and sessions are compromised. Under these circumstances, the transaction should not be treated as a standard authorized action or voluntary sharing of credentials. Additionally, I am concerned that this situation may indicate a gap in fraud detection, particularly involving rapid internal transfers followed by a large wire transfer to a new external recipient. I respectfully request that U.S. Bank reconsider this determination and conduct a further review of this case under the context of fraud involving remote access and coercion. I also request the following : XXXX. A detailed explanation of how the bank concluded that this transaction qualifies as authorized under these circumstances XXXX. Confirmation of whether a wire recall request was sent to XXXX XXXX and the outcome XXXX. Reconsideration of reimbursement or goodwill compensation I have reported this incident to local law enforcement and the FBI XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ). I value my relationship with U.S. Bank and hope this matter can be reviewed again fairly, considering that I was a victim of a sophisticated scam involving manipulation and unauthorized remote access. Thank you for your time and attention. U.S. Bank acknowledged that I made the transaction due to a third partys actions. However, they continue to classify this as credential sharing, which does not accurately reflect the situation.

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