Consumer complaint received 2026-03-13 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement — Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am the Primary Account Holder for Wells Fargo account ending in XXXX. I am filing this complaint because Wells Fargo has willfully violated the Fair Credit Billing Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1666 ) dispute resolution timelines, engaged in retaliatory claim denials, and explicitly stated to me on a recorded line that they " do not follow federal law. '' On XX/XX/year>, I initiated disputes # XXXX and # XXXX ( {$6000.00} total ) regarding a fraudulent auto repair. The merchant ( Mod Automotive ) failed to complete the agreed-upon services, abruptly abandoned their physical business location to avoid liability, and maliciously double-billed me for warranty labor explicitly covered by the manufacturer. Upon being notified of the dispute, the merchant utilized their ARI software to retroactively fabricate false invoices to deceive the bank. ( Digital audit logs proving this spoliation of evidence are attached ). Despite Wells Fargo instructing me to withhold payment, the claim sat abandoned for nearly a month. No agent contacted me for the supporting documents they promised to request. My Authorized User proactively uploaded the forensic proof of the merchant 's digital document fabrication and sent an email demanding the mandatory provisional credit, as the prolonged delay was negatively impacting my credit utilization. On a subsequent three-way call, a Wells Fargo Claims Representative told us the high-ticket department was " backed up '' and hadn't even looked at the case. When reminded of the federal statutory timeline for disputes, the representative explicitly stated that Wells Fargo " does not follow federal law '' and only adheres to " Visa guidelines. '' The very next day, Wells Fargo retaliated by abruptly denying both claims for entirely incorrect reasons. The Mod Auto claim was denied because " too much time had passed, '' completely ignoring the uploaded evidence justifying the timeline. The Patriot Engines claim was denied simply because my Authorized User submitted the documents, despite a signed authorization form being attached from day one. Furious, I escalated this in person to my local Wells Fargo branch banker. The banker laughed at the " backed up '' excuse and disclosed that the claims department actually denied the cases because our written demand for provisional credit under federal law made them think we were " trying to sue them. '' Following my branch complaint, Wells Fargo apologized, falsely claimed Patriot was never denied ( despite my email proof showing it was ), and reopened the claims. We immediately resubmitted all evidence with a formal written notice that reopening the claims due to their internal retaliatory error does not restart the federal statutory clock. Wells Fargo responded with another month of total silence. We sent a final email giving them XXXX hours to rectify their negligence before escalating to regulators. I formally requested the final results of the investigation, the specific documentation the bank relied upon to evaluate the claim, and the immediate issuance of the mandatory provisional credit required by federal law, as the bank had already exceeded the statutory timeframe for dispute resolution. In response to this warning and my request for information, the bank did not call or send a formal letter in the mail. Instead ( which is why I selected " Other '' as their method of response on this form ), on XX/XX/year>, Wells Fargos XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( ECMO ) sent a direct email demanding an extension until XX/XX/year>, to " research '' the matter. This places the dispute timeline at 102 days, willfully exceeding the XXXX absolute statutory maximum under the Fair Credit Billing Act, with no provisional credit ever issued. Because Wells Fargo ignored forensic proof of merchant document fabrication, retaliated against a consumer for demanding compliance, and has now documented their intent to violate the XXXX federal resolution cap, they have forfeited the right to collect this debt under 15 U.S.C. 1666 ( e ). I demand an immediate, permanent credit of {$6000.00} and the correction of my credit reporting.

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