Consumer complaint received 2026-07-05 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem making or receiving payments
Company: U.S. BANCORP
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
This complaint concerns U.S. Bank, N.A. 's handling of its response obligation on my prior CFPB complaint, No. XXXX, and renews my unresolved demand for restitution of unauthorized XXXX debits. This is new conduct postdating that complaint, not a duplicate. BACKGROUND ( full record at Complaint No. XXXX ) : U.S. Bank 's own XX/XX/XXXX letter ( Ref XXXX ) and attached 3-page spreadsheet document 51 unauthorized ACH debits totaling {$23000.00} from my business account ( ending XXXX, formerly XXXX XXXX ending XXXX ) between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, every entry bearing ACH Company ID XXXX / " XXXX. '' The bank approved two of these claims as unauthorized ( {$560.00} and {$580.00}, XX/XX/XXXX, plus {$72.00} in fees ) and denied the remainder on a XXXX 60-day timing theory measured from each posting date despite my claim being filed XX/XX/XXXX, within days of discovering the fraud. By paying two claims it admitted the debits were unauthorized ; there is no coherent basis to treat the other 49 identical debits differently. Of {$23000.00} documented, {$22000.00} remains unrestored. The documented window is a floor, not the full loss : the fraudulent AutoPay arrangement predates the bank 's visible records by years. THE NEW CONDUCT : XXXX. On or about XX/XX/XXXX, U.S. Bank represented to the CFPB that it had sent me a written response to Complaint No. XXXX. The complaint was closed on that basis. 2. I never received that response not by mail to my business address of record ( the same address the bank used for all prior correspondence ), not by email, not by phone. I have attempted to contact the bank directly to obtain it, without success. I noted the non-delivery in the feedback on the prior complaint. 3. The only written communications I have ever received from U.S. Bank in this matter are its XX/XX/XXXX determination letters documents that PREDATE my CFPB complaint and that I myself submitted as exhibits TO that complaint. If the bank 's XX/XX/XXXX " response '' consisted of those same letters, it did not respond to the complaint ; it returned the complaint 's own evidence. A company response that predates the complaint and was already in the complaint file is not responsive to it. 4. Either way, the result is the same : U.S. Bank obtained closure of a federal complaint on the representation of a response that was never delivered, can not be obtained through the bank 's own channels, and/or was not responsive to the issues raised. Since the prior complaint, XXXX XXXX XXXX the ACH originator has further confirmed in its XX/XX/XXXX response to the FCC ( Ticket XXXX ) that the same bank account was enrolled as the AutoPay payment method on two XXXX XXXX XXXX billing accounts, one of which does not belong to me. XXXX XXXX XXXX previously confirmed in writing that the second account is associated with someone who appears to have used my banking information without authorization. The party that received the funds has confirmed the fraud ; the bank whose duty it is to protect the account still has not. RESOLUTION REQUESTED : 1. Immediate delivery of U.S. Bank 's written response dated XX/XX/XXXX, which the bank represented to the CFPB as sent but which I have never received. XXXX. A substantive written response to the issues raised in Complaint No. XXXX not correspondence that predates that complaint. 3. Restitution of {$22000.00} the unauthorized ACH debits documented in U.S. Bank 's own records for May 2022December 2025 ( {$23000.00} less {$1200.00} credited ). This figure is a floor, not the full loss. 4. Production of the complete ACH debit history for this account, including the predecessor XXXX XXXX period ( account ending XXXX, renumbered XXXX ), covering the entire life of the fraudulent AutoPay arrangement. 5. Full restitution of ALL unauthorized debits revealed by that complete history. The fraud predates the bank 's visible XX/XX/XXXX window by years ; the true loss is a multiple of the documented figure and can not be finalized until the bank produces the complete record it holds as successor to XXXX XXXX. 6. Reinvestigation of this matter as one continuous fraud measured from the date of discovery ( XX/XX/XXXX ), not 51 fragmented cases measured from posting dates. This matter is also pending before the OCC ( Case XXXX, opened XX/XX/XXXX ), the FCC ( Ticket XXXX, provider response disputed ), and the XXXX XXXX Police Department ( Case XXXX, XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX, Business Identity Theft ).

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