Consumer complaint received 2025-08-27 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
CFPB Complaint Against Wells Fargo Please take special note, my calls with WF are recorded and all contradictory information can be verified through these lengthy phone calls which are not able to be attached here. 

* * Claim Reference : * * Wells Fargo Dispute Claim # XXXX Total amount disputed {$91000.00} as they would only go back 120 days. I have requested an investigation to go back further. 

I am filing a complaint against Wells Fargo for repeated violations of Regulation E ( 12 CFR 1005.11 ), systemic failures in fraud monitoring and antimoney laundering obligations, and serious mishandling of my unauthorized merchant transaction dispute. 

XXXX. Mischaracterization of Claim Wells Fargo mischaracterized my initial claim as I dont remember making these charges. 

After I pointed this out, they changed the reason to Claim reason unavailable, instead of correctly classifying it as unauthorized merchant transactions. 

They have refused to correct this despite multiple requests. 

XXXX. Claim Status Misrepresentation My claim showed as closed on or before XX/XX/XXXX, yet Wells Fargo representatives insisted it was open due to an escalation. 

On recorded calls, staff in both the Executive Office and line-of-business departments gave contradictory explanations. 

At times they admitted it was closed, while still claiming it was open, creating deliberate confusion. 

3. Provisional Credit Rule Violations I filed my claim on XX/XX/2025. 

By law, Wells Fargo was required to issue provisional credit or resolve the claim within 10 business days no later than XX/XX/2025. 

They failed to do so. Instead, they provided contradictory explanations, at times claiming the deadline restarts if a claim is reopened or escalated which is not supported by Regulation E. 

To date, no provisional credit has been issued. 

4. Refusal to Provide Written Communication Wells Fargo has refused to provide updates in writing. 

They falsely claimed there was no way to communicate via secure Wells Fargo email. 

Each phone call yields different explanations, with no consistent or verifiable record. 

5. Failures in Fraud Detection & XXXX XXXX XXXX Wells Fargo flagged a {$9.00} charge as suspicious but allowed over {$2200.00} in casino transactions in less than an hour. 

In one month, they permitted over {$24000.00} in spending, despite my account having minimal prior activity. 

No fraud alerts, calls, or emails were sent to verify this abnormal pattern. 

Multiple rapid XXXX XXXX deposits ( 10+ ) were immediately funneled into a casino account not in the cardholders name. 

These patterns are classic red flags for fraud and potential money laundering ( unusual volume, velocity of transactions, and third-party transfers inconsistent with the customer profile ). 

Wells Fargos failure to act raises serious concerns about their compliance with the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  and broader antimoney laundering obligations. 

6. Failure to Block Casino Transactions After Report On XX/XX/XXXX, I specifically requested Wells Fargo block all casino-related transactions. 

Despite this, XXXX XXXX connected to my card is still being used for casino payments, including $ XXXX in about an hour. 

7. Consumer Impact I made reasonable requests for resolution, which Wells Fargo ignored. 

They misrepresented facts, failed to follow Regulation XXXX, and refused to implement basic safeguards even after I disclosed that my significant other has a gambling addiction and is actively seeking treatment. 

Conclusion Wells Fargo has : - Mischaracterized and mishandled my claim. 

- Misrepresented its status. 

- Failed to comply with Regulation Es 10-day provisional credit requirement ( deadline XX/XX/2025 ). 

- Ignored repeated requests for written updates.

- Allowed obvious fraud and failed in their suspicious activity monitoring systems.

- Neglected antimoney laundering obligations under th

e Bank Secrecy Act. - Failed to block high-risk transactions after explicit requests.

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