Consumer complaint received 2025-07-25 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Savings account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
Subject : Complaint Update Regarding Fraudulent Transactions Violation of Regulation XXXX Obligations Dear Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, I am writing to provide an important update and formal rebuttal regarding my pending complaint against Wells Fargo Bank XXXX. ( XXXX XXXX : XXXX ). 

Wells Fargo has denied my claim for reimbursement of {$2400.00} in fraudulent transactions, specifically XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX transfers, on the grounds that I authorized these transfers and that the funds are now gone from my account, making them unable to reverse the transactions. 

However, this position is fundamentally flawed and directly contradicts the protections afforded to consumers under Regulation XXXX ( XXXX CFR Part XXXX, Electronic Fund Transfer Act ). 

Key Points : 1. Fraudulently Induced Authorization is Not Valid AuthorizationWells Fargo has already acknowledged that the initial transfer of {$2000.00} from my savings to my checking account was an unauthorized and fraudulent transaction performed by a scammer.The subsequent Apple Pay and Cash App transfers were made under the explicit instructions of the scammer, who deceived me into believing these actions were necessary to safeguard my funds.Under Regulation E, authorization obtained through fraud, deception, or coercion is not considered valid authorization, and these transactions must be treated as unauthorized.

2. Funds Are Gone is Not a Valid DefenseWells Fargos argument that they are unable to reimburse me because the funds are gone is a misrepresentation of their legal obligations under Regulation E.Regulation E mandates that a financial institution must reimburse a consumer for unauthorized electronic fund transfers, regardless of whether the funds can be retrieved from third parties like Cash App or Apple Pay.The banks duty is to the consumer, not to the payment networks or scammers who received the funds.

3. Chain of Fraud ArgumentWells Fargo can not reasonably separate the fraudulent savings-to-checking transfer ( which they acknowledged as unauthorized ) from the ensuing transfers I made while under the scammers influence.The entire sequence of events was part of a single fraudulent incident, and Wells Fargos refusal to refund based on arbitrary distinctions between these steps is improper.

Request for CFPB Assistance : I am requesting that the CFPB require Wells Fargo to : * Fully investigate the matter in compliance with Regulation E.

* Reimburse the {$2400.00} in fraudulent transactions that were induced under deception.

* Provide a detailed written explanation of their findings and legal rationale.

Wells Fargos dismissal of their responsibilities under Regulation XXXX and their attempts to blame payment platforms ( like XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) are unacceptable. The burden of loss from such scams is explicitly placed on financial institutions, not consumers, per federal law. 
Thank you for your attention to this serious matter. 

CFPB case # : XXXX Wells Fargo Claim # XXXX : XXXX, XXXX

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