Consumer complaint received 2026-05-12 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Mobile or digital wallet
Issue: Unauthorized transactions or other transaction problem — 
Company: Block, Inc.
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
This complaint is filed as an ESCALATION of CFPB Complaint # XXXX ( closed XX/XX/XXXX ), and incorporates by reference all evidence and admissions from that case. This is not a duplicate. The original company response failed to address the core violations and instead admitted to them in writing. This filing exists to enter the rebuttal evidence into the federal record. Cash App 's XX/XX/XXXX response to Complaint # XXXX CONFIRMS the following violations in writing : Cash App admits XXXX denying XXXX separate dispute transactions on a single day ( XX/XX/XXXX ), mathematically incompatible with the individualized investigation required by Regulation XXXX XXXX. Cash App admits to closing my account on the EXACT SAME DAY as the mass denial ( XX/XX/XXXX ), expressly citing 'transaction disputes ' as a reason establishing direct causation between my exercise of Regulation E rights and the retaliatory closure ( UDAAP violation under 12 U.S.C. 5531 ). Cash App 's response makes XXXX reference to the XX/XX/XXXX CFPB consent order against Block , Inc. under which Block was fined {$170.00} XXXX for materially identical conduct. No description of any actual investigation is provided in their response. Only generic language ( 'investigation led us to determine ' ) with no specifics. Identical copy-paste denial language ( 'fraudulent or false ' ) was used across all XXXX denials, proving an automated mass-denial system rather than individualized review. Relief requested : ( XXXX ) escalation to CFPB Enforcement Division for review as a probable consent order violation ; ( XXXX ) full refund of {$1300.00} in wrongfully denied claims ; ( XXXX ) immediate reinstatement of my Cash App account ; ( XXXX ) inclusion in the CFPB redress fund established by the XX/XX/XXXX consent order against Block , Inc. ; ( XXXX ) formal investigation into Cash App 's automated dispute denial system. Additional violation : Cash App 's XX/XX/XXXX response confirms they never reviewed the merchant evidence I provided. Their response makes XXXX reference to ( a ) the video proof of XXXX XXXX XXXX platform outage that I submitted to Cash App support on XX/XX/XXXX ; ( b ) the written email from XXXX XXXX support agent XXXX XXXX acknowledging in writing that the platform failure impacted my production system ; or ( c ) the documented email thread showing XXXX XXXX XXXX refusal to refund a service that admittedly failed. Under Regulation E, a financial institution must actually investigate disputed transactions which requires reviewing evidence submitted by the consumer. Cash App 's failure to acknowledge or address any of this evidence in their formal CFPB response confirms no investigation occurred. I have written admission from the merchant that the service failed, yet Cash App still denied XXXX disputes claiming the transactions were 'authorized ' without ever addressing whether the service paid for was actually delivered. Detailed rebuttal document ( XXXX ) attached, which documents each admission with direct quotations from Cash App 's XX/XX/XXXX response letter.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation