Consumer complaint received 2026-07-15 00:00:00
Product: Prepaid card — General-purpose prepaid card
Issue: Problem with a purchase or transfer — Card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase or transfer
Company: Netspend Corporation
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
Description of Incident Subject : Failure to Resolve Unauthorized Electronic Fund Transfers and Permanently Restore Funds ( {$870.00} ) Respondent Institution : XXXX, XXXX XXXX ( Issuing Bank ) XXXX Netspend ( Program Manager ) I am updating my complaint to document active non-compliance, systemic negligence, and a complete disregard for consumer hardship by XXXX, XXXX. ( Netspend ) regarding unauthorized electronic fund transfers totaling {$870.00} taken from my account. I initiated this formal dispute last Friday, XX/XX/year>, before the close of the business day. Despite my immediate, timely filing and clear evidence of account compromise, the institution has failed to finalize its investigation and permanently restore my funds. Instead of resolving this fraud via standard, documented regulatory channels, they have resorted to stalling tactics. XXXX. Attempted Out-of-Band Avoidance & Documented Consumer Hardship On Monday, XX/XX/year>, an executive agent representing the institution initiated a direct phone call to my personal number from XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX. This call was an attempt to handle a formal federal dispute off-the-record. Direct outreach by executive staff to " manage '' an active disputerather than immediately finalizing their investigation and permanently returning my stolen fundsconstitutes bad-faith handling of a consumer fraud dispute. During this call, I explicitly detailed to the representative the severe financial hardship and immediate, damaging impact this withholding of funds is having on my daily life and livelihood. Despite being directly informed of the critical distress their delay is causing, the institution has continued to freeze my money without resolution. XXXX. Systemic Recognition of Account Compromise The institutions own security systems have flagged my profile as highly compromised following the unauthorized access. Every attempt to access my account now triggers mandatory multi-factor authentication ( One-Time Passcode ) via email to establish a secure connection. The institution can not claim they lack proof of fraud or unauthorized access when their own system algorithms have flagged my profile as active-risk and restricted. XXXX. Failure of Basic Fraud Transaction Velocity Controls The unauthorized transactions totaling {$870.00} were processed in a rapid, back-to-back sequence that completely deviated from my historical account behavior. Under standard banking security guidelines, this extreme transaction velocity ( rapid frequency of high-dollar transfers in a short window of time ) represents a clear " velocity spike '' that should have immediately triggered an automated merchant or issuer block. The system 's negligence allowed these highly irregular, rapid-fire transactions to process unchecked, failing to protect my funds despite obvious, automated indicators of an ongoing account raid. Consumer Resolution Demanded : Under Regulation E / EFTA, the burden of proof rests entirely on the financial institution to disprove a claim of unauthorized accessnot on the consumer. I demand that XXXX, XXXX. and Netspend immediately cease stalling tactics, officially close this investigation in my favor based on the clear systemic evidence of a breach, and permanently credit the full {$870.00} to my possession today.

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