Consumer complaint received 2021-10-21 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account — Transaction was not authorized
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/21, there were a series of unauthorized transactions on my Wells Fargo Visa Debit Card amounting to {$7500.00} in total.

Within the same day, or no longer than 24 hours after the initial transactions had gone through, I called to report the unauthorized activity immediately.

I was told by a claims specialist that Wells Fargo would " promptly '' investigate the claim and that it would issue a provisional credit if it needed more time.

After several follow up calls with Wells Fargo customer services reps and claims specialists, I was repeatedly informed that my claim was still under investigation. 

On the XXXX and final business day, I logged onto my account and saw that my claims were closed with absolutely no explanation. 

I called and spoke with a claims rep and was told for the first time that my claims were now closed. 

I was told that my claims were being put under 'reconsideration '' and that the bank would need more time. This is in blatant violation of Regulation E.

Time limits and extent of investigation - ( 1 ) Ten-day period. A financial institution shall investigate promptly and, except as otherwise provided in this paragraph ( c ), shall determine whether an error occurred within 10 business days of receiving a notice of error. The institution shall report the results to the consumer within three business days after completing its investigation. The institution shall correct the error within one business day after determining that an error occurred. 

( 2 ) Forty-five day period. If the financial institution is unable to complete its investigation within 10 business days, the institution may take up to 45 days from receipt of a notice of error to investigate and determine whether an error occurred, provided the institution does the following : ( i ) Provisionally credits the consumer 's account in the amount of the alleged error ( including interest where applicable ) within 10 business days of receiving the error notice. If the financial institution has a reasonable basis for believing that an unauthorized electronic fund transfer has occurred and the institution has satisfied the requirements of 1005.6 ( a ), the institution may withhold a maximum of {$50.00} from the amount credited. An institution need not provisionally credit the consumer 's account if : ( A ) The institution requires but does not receive written confirmation within 10 business days of an oral notice of error ; or ( B ) The alleged error involves an account that is subject to Regulation T of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System ( Securities Credit by Brokers and Dealers, 12 CFR part 220 ).

( ii ) Informs the consumer, within two business days after the provisional crediting, of the amount and date of the provisional crediting and gives the consumer full use of the funds during the investigation; ( iii ) Corrects the error, if any, within one business day after determining that an error occurred ; and ( iv ) Reports the results to the consumer within three business days after completing its investigation ( including, if applicable, notice that a provisional credit has been made final ). 






What happened here instead was, on the tenth and final business day before Wells Fargo would be required under law to provide a provisional credit, I beleive tthat this was done deliberately by Wells Fargo so as to avoid having to credit me while their investigation continues ( and had barely even begun ) I was then told that there was " no way '' for Wells Fargo to issue a provisional credit despite the clear statutory law under a " 45-day '' investigation period. Again, clearly contradictory to the statute.

Additionally, during my calls with various wells representatives regarding the present issue, I was given the impression that a special " fraud department '' or " claims specialist '' would need to receive notice directly. Again, in violation of the law : Notice to financial institution. 

( i ) Notice to a financial institution is given when a consumer takes steps reasonably necessary to provide the institution with the pertinent information, whether or not a particular employee or agent of the institution actually receives the information. 

( ii ) The consumer may notify the institution in person, by telephone, or in writing. 




-- -- Additionally, the way that Wells Fargo characterized my claim was a " Do not remember or recognize charge. I specifically informed a claims rep during the initial that the transactions were unauthorized! 

As you can also see, during my most recent call on XX/XX/21, additional time was needed because the claims rep needed more information - How could this be when my claim was already denied? 

Help please thanks.

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