Consumer complaint received 2025-08-08 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Closing an account — Company closed your account
Company: SOFI TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
State: MA

Complaint narrative:
UPDATED CFPB COMPLAINT - ESCALATING HARM FROM SOFI 'S UNFAIR PRACTICES Complaint ID : [ Reference previous complaint # XXXX ] Date : XX/XX/year>2025 Company : SoFi Bank , N.A.

Product : Checking Account Issue : Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ( UDAAP ) - Escalating Financial Harm EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - ONE MONTH LATER : HARM CONTINUES TO MOUNT This is an urgent follow-up to my XX/XX/scrub> 2025 complaint regarding SoFi Bank 's unjustified account closure. ONE MONTH has passed with XXXX response, XXXX remediation, and XXXX accountability from SoFi, while the financial damage to my life continues to compound daily. 

CONCRETE FINANCIAL HARM - $ XXXX AND GROWING Immediate Out-of-Pocket Losses : {$600.00} in XXXX. Postal Service money orders - Can not be cashed due to banking blacklist Multiple ATM fees- Forced to use predatory prepaid cards charging {$7.00} per transaction Check cashing fees - Unable to access normal banking services Money transfer fees- Paying excessive fees for basic financial transactions Long-term Economic Damage : Complete banking exclusion - Can not open accounts at XXXX XXXX Forced into predatory alternatives - High-fee prepaid cards and check cashers Lost employment opportunities - Many employers require direct deposit Credit impact - Banking exclusion affecting overall financial profile UDAAP VIOLATIONS- CLEAR AND DOCUMENTED 1. UNFAIR PRACTICES Legal Standard : Practices that cause substantial consumer injury that is not reasonably avoidable and not outweighed by benefits.

SoFi 's Unfair Practices : Substantial Injury : $ XXXX in immediate losses, ongoing fees, banking exclusion Not Reasonably Avoidable : Transactions with XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX are normal commerce No Offsetting Benefits : XXXX fraud prevention benefit from flagging XXXX companies 2. DECEPTIVE PRACTICES Legal Standard : Practices likely to mislead consumers acting reasonably. 

SoFi 's Deceptive Practices : False Representations : Marketing as " modern, member-focused '' while employing arbitrary closure practices Material Omissions : Failing to disclose that routine transactions would trigger closure Bait and Switch : Attracting customers with promises of transparency while operating in complete secrecy 3. ABUSIVE PRACTICES Legal Standard : Practices that materially interfere with consumers ' ability to understand terms or take unreasonable advantage of consumer circumstances.

SoFi 's Abusive Practices : Exploiting Vulnerability : Taking advantage of consumers ' dependence on banking services Unreasonable Advantage : Using vague terms of service to avoid all accountability Material Interference : Preventing understanding by refusing to explain decisions ESCALATING SYSTEMIC HARM- THE BANKING BLACKLIST EFFECT SoFi 's actions have triggered a cascading crisis : XXXX XXXX XXXX Likely negative reporting preventing new accounts Banking Industry Exclusion - Can not access XXXX XXXX XXXX  Predatory Alternative Dependence - Forced into high-fee, limited-service options Economic Marginalization - Pushed outside the normal financial system Ongoing Financial Bleeding - Daily fees and limitations compound losses ONE MONTH OF INSTITUTIONAL SILENCE Despite filing complaints with : Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Office of the Comptroller of Currency Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation State banking regulators SoFi has maintained complete silence - no contact, no explanation, no remediation, no accountability.

REGULATORY FAILURES ENABLING ABUSE This case demonstrates how current oversight gaps allow financial institutions to : Destroy consumers ' financial lives without explanation Ignore regulatory complaints with impunity Use automated systems to make life-altering decisions without human accountability Hide behind terms of service to avoid all responsibility SPECIFIC UDAAP VIOLATIONS REQUIRING IMMEDIATE ACTION Unfairness Violations : Disproportionate Response : Account closure for routine transactions causes massive harm Unavoidable Injury : Consumers can not predict what normal activities will trigger closure No Consumer Benefit : XXXX fraud prevention from flagging mainstream companies Deceptiveness Violations : False Marketing : Advertising transparency while operating in complete secrecy Hidden Standards : Failing to disclose account closure criteria Misleading Silence : Refusing to explain decisions creates false impression of legitimacy Abusiveness Violations : Exploiting Dependence : Taking advantage of consumers ' need for banking services Preventing Understanding : Refusing explanations interferes with consumer comprehension Unreasonable Terms : Using vague policies to escape accountability DEMANDED RELIEF - IMMEDIATE AND COMPREHENSIVE Immediate Financial Remediation : {$600.00} immediate reimbursement for uncashable money orders Fee reimbursement for all ATM and transaction fees incurred Punitive damages for willful harm and regulatory defiance Credit monitoring to address potential credit impacts Account Restoration : Immediate account reinstatement with full explanation of closure reasoning Database correction - removal of all negative reporting Written guarantee of no future retaliation Systemic Reforms : Human oversight mandate for all account closures Transparency requirements for suspicious activity determinations Due process protections before database reporting Appeals process with independent review Regulatory Enforcement : CFPB enforcement action against SoFi for UDAAP violations Civil money penalties for systematic consumer abuse Consent order requiring comprehensive policy reforms Industry-wide guidance on account closure practices THE BROADER THREAT TO XXXX  CONSUMERS This case represents a dangerous precedent : If routine commerce with mainstream companies triggers banking exclusion If financial institutions can ignore regulatory complaints If consumers have no recourse against algorithmic discrimination Then no American consumer is safe from financial authoritarianism CONCLUSION - REGULATORY INTERVENTION NOW ESSENTIAL SoFi 's month of silence in response to serious consumer harm demonstrates institutional contempt for regulatory authority and consumer rights. Their practices constitute textbook UDAAP violations that demand immediate enforcement action. 

The time for institutional courtesy has passed. The time for enforcement action is now. 

I respectfully demand : Immediate CFPB investigation and enforcement action Emergency intervention to prevent ongoing harm Full financial remediation for documented losses Systemic reforms to prevent future abuse Every day of regulatory delay allows SoFi to continue harming consumers and makes a mockery of consumer protection laws. 

Submitted with urgency and expectation of immediate action, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, MA

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation