Consumer complaint received 2025-09-22 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Money order, traveler's check or cashier's check
Issue: Lost or stolen money order — 
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a complaint against Wells Fargo regarding their mishandling of a cashiers check that rightfully belongs to me. Wells Fargo claims they mailed the check to my old address even though I had already informed the bank that I was a victim of account takeover ( ATO ) and identity theft. For my safety and security, I moved to a new residence and provided my updated address, yet Wells Fargo still mailed the funds to a compromised address. This action put me at further risk of fraud and left me without access to my own money. Wells Fargos actions are not only negligent but also violate multiple consumer protection laws. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681, and the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act ( FACTA ), financial institutions must take specific steps to assist and safeguard identity theft victims. By knowingly mailing a negotiable instrument to an invalid and compromised address after being notified of my identity theft, Wells Fargo failed in this duty. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, 12 U.S.C. 5531, prohibits unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices ( UDAAP ). Wells Fargos refusal to reissue my funds to the correct address and the delay in providing me access to my money is both unfair and abusive. Furthermore, Regulation E ( 12 C.F.R. Part 1005 ), under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, requires banks to investigate and resolve errors promptly. While cashiers checks are not electronic transfers, Wells Fargos handling of this transaction falls under their general duty to reasonably resolve account access errors. Courts have consistently found banks liable when they fail to act reasonably in protecting customers from fraud : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX, XXXX, XXXX43 F. Supp. 3d 827 ( C.D. Cal. 2015 ) held that banks may be liable for failing to act reasonably in protecting customers from fraud. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank, 681 So.2d 1364 ( Ala. 1996 ) found a bank liable for failing to exercise due care in verifying a customers identity, which parallels Wells Fargos lack of care in mailing my check to the wrong address. XXXX v. XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ) confirmed that banks have affirmative duties under the FCRA to conduct reasonable investigations when a consumer reports identity theft or account fraud. Wells Fargo failed to act on this duty. XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) demonstrates that financial institutions can be held accountable under federal law for failing to implement adequate safeguards to protect consumers. Additionally, under UCC Article 4A ( Funds Transfers ), banks are required to use commercially reasonable security procedures. Mailing a cashiers check to an outdated address after notice of fraud is not commercially reasonable. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( 15 U.S.C. 68016809 ) also requires financial institutions to protect the security and confidentiality of customer information, a duty Wells Fargo failed to uphold. Because of Wells Fargos negligence, I have been deprived of my rightful funds, placed at increased risk of further fraud, and subjected to stress, financial strain, and emotional hardship. Their lack of accountability has caused me serious harm. I am requesting that the CFPB require Wells Fargo to : 1. Immediately reissue my cashiers check and send it to my verified, current address ; 2. Provide written confirmation that the original check has been stopped and can not be cashed ; 3. Compensate me for the delay, negligence, and security failures ; and 4. Review and correct their internal procedures to ensure identity theft victims are properly protected going forward.

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