Consumer complaint received 2026-04-24 00:00:00
Product: Prepaid card — Payroll card
Issue: Unexpected or other fees — 
Company: REGIONS FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: IN

Complaint narrative:
Company Name : Comdata / XXXX Product : Payroll Card / Prepaid Card Issue : Deceptive practices, undisclosed fees, and barriers to accessing earned wages Description of Complaint : I am filing a formal complaint against ComdataXXXX for engaging in Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ( UDAAP ) and violating provisions of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( Regulation E ) regarding fee disclosures and access to wages. The company utilizes system mechanics and undisclosed fees that systematically trap earned wages and force excessive charges on the consumer. The specific violations and deceptive practices are detailed below : XXXX. Predatory ATM Error Generation and Excessive PIN Fees When attempting to access my wages via an in-network XXXX ATM , the machine rejected my initial, correctly entered PIN. This system error induced a secondary attempt where, second-guessing the initial rejection, an incorrect PIN was entered. The system immediately levied an excessive {$3.00} " Incorrect PIN '' fee. While customer service refunded this initial fee upon request, the sequence indicates a predatory system design : generating a false initial rejection to trigger a user error on the subsequent attempt, thereby generating fee revenue. Furthermore, immediately penalizing a single PIN error is inherently abusive given the practical realities of using public ATMs. Consumers are forced to use machines that frequently suffer from poor maintenance, such as sticky or unresponsive keypads. Additionally, these ATMs are located in high-traffic public areas where consumers must maintain situational awareness for their own personal safety. Environmental distractions, or even being physically bumped by other retail patrons, can easily result in a single mis-keyed entry. Punishing a minor, environmentally induced keystroke error with an excessive {$3.00} chargeespecially when the ATM is the primary, forced method to access earned wagesexploits the consumer 's circumstances for profit. I no longer trust the integrity of the ATM network provided by this financial institution. XXXX. Artificial Transaction Limits to Prevent Full Withdrawal The approved XXXX ATMs restrict transaction options by failing to provide an interface for custom withdrawal amounts, forcing users to withdraw in preset increments ( e.g., {$20.00} multiples ). Because earned wages are mathematically never paid in perfectly even {$20.00} increments, this design inherently prevents consumers from withdrawing their exact balance. By artificially limiting withdrawals, the system deliberately forces consumers to leave residual balances on the card or execute multiple transactions. This effectively bars the consumer from accessing the entirety of their earned wages for a singular, transparent fee, intentionally trapping residual funds within the XXXX ecosystem. XXXX. Undisclosed Third-Party Transfer Fees Upon contacting customer service to seek alternative withdrawal methods due to the unreliable ATM network, the representative explicitly instructed me to use Cash App to transfer my funds. The representative failed to disclose that this method incurs a {$2.00} fee. Directing consumers to third-party platforms to bypass internal system failures without disclosing the associated financial penalties is a clear violation of fee disclosure requirements under Regulation E. XXXX. Transfer Delays and Circumvention of Compulsory Use Prohibitions Under 12 CFR 1005.10 ( e ) ( XXXX ) ( Regulation E ), employers and financial institutions are prohibited from requiring employees to receive wages via a specific payroll card. However, this company facilitates a system where the card is issued by default during agency onboarding if personal bank information is not immediately available. Once trapped in this system, the user is penalized for attempting to leave. The initial setup screen advertises a {$1.00} fee for a XXXX day transfer, but this option is inexplicably unavailable when attempting to set up a standard direct deposit to a personal bank. Instead, the direct deposit setup enforces a mandatory XXXX hold. This arbitrary delay traps the consumer 's funds in the ComdataXXXX ecosystem for two full pay periods, forcing reliance on the fee-laden ATM or third-party transfer options outlined above. XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX Use Violations Under 12 CFR 1005.10 ( e ) ( 2 ), consumers can not be required to establish an account with a particular financial institution as a condition of receipt of wages. While the onboarding agency failed to provide a viable, immediate alternative to the payroll card ( such as a paper check ), ComdataXXXX system architecture actively facilitates and enforces this " de facto '' compulsory use environment. By imposing an arbitrary and mandatory XXXX hold on the initiation of external direct deposits to an institution designated by the employee, Comdata ensures that newly hired employees are trapped utilizing their proprietary, fee-laden card for a minimum of two pay periods. This systemic friction intentionally eliminates the viability of the consumer 's legal right to an alternative payment method, effectively forcing reliance on the Comdata product and subverting federal consumer protections.

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