Consumer complaint received 2026-05-20 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I am disputing Wells Fargo 's denial of my fraud claim for unauthorized electronic fund transfers from my checking and savings accounts on XX/XX/year>. On XX/XX/year>, my physical Wells Fargo debit card was stolen. The same day, before I discovered the theft, unauthorized transfers totaling {$5400.00} were initiated from two of my Wells Fargo accounts : Six unauthorized XXXX transfers totaling {$3500.00} - five from my savings account and one from my checking account. Three unauthorized XXXX XXXX debits totaling {$1800.00} from my checking account and two payments to UPG Paymentico for {$49.00} each funded via my stolen Wells Fargo debit card. I discovered the unauthorized activity on XX/XX/year> and immediately reported the stolen debit card and unauthorized transfers to Wells Fargo. I did not authorize, initiate, or consent to any of these transfers. I did not provide my card, PIN, banking credentials, or device to any third party. Wells Fargo denied my claim, stating the transactions came from a recognized device, matched my usual login pattern, and originated from my IP address. Wells Fargo reached this denial within 10 business days of my notification and did not provide provisional credit at any point. While 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( c ) ( 2 ) permits a bank to forgo provisional credit if it completes its investigation within 10 business days, the speed of this denial- for nine unauthorized transactions across two accounts involving a stolen physical access device ( my debit card ) - raises serious concerns about the adequacy of the investigation. Additionally, Wells Fargo has failed to provide a written explanation of its denial findings, as required under 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( d ) ( 1 ). I learned of the denial only through a verbal communication during a telephone call I initiated. To date, Wells Fargo has not mailed or delivered any written explanation of its findings or any notice of my right to request the documents relied upon in making its determination. This is a separate procedural violation of Regulation E, independent of the merits of the denial itself. Also, Wells Fargo 's stated denial rationale does not meet the bank 's burden of proof under 15 U.S.C. 1693g ( b ), which requires the financial institution to prove that a disputed transfer was authorized. " Authorized '' under Regulation E ( 12 C.F.R. 1005.2 ( m ) ) requires actual authority granted by the consumer. A thief in possession of a stolen access device does not have actual authority, regardless of whether transactions appear consistent with prior account activity. Wells Fargo 's assertion that the transactions matched my usual login pattern is also inconsistent with the actual activity. The unauthorized transactions included five rapid sequential XXXX transfers draining funds from a savings account - a pattern entirely unlike my prior account usage. A legitimate account holder does not typically empty savings via repeated XXXX transfers in rapid succession while simultaneously pushing funds to XXXX XXXX from checking. Wells Fargo 's fraud monitoring should have flagged this activity, and its failure to do so reflects inadequate fraud detection - not authorization by me. Device recognition, login pattern, and IP match establish only that the thief had sufficient access to bypass Wells Fargo 's fraud screens- not that I authorized the transfers. CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX makes clear that fraud-induced transfers, including account takeovers, are unauthorized electronic fund transfers under the EFTA. Because I reported the loss of my access device on the same day it was stolen, my maximum liability under 12 C.F.R. 1005.6 ( b ) ( 1 ) is {$50.00}. I request that Wells Fargo : -Reverse the denial of my claims. -Reinstate {$5400.00} to the affected accounts. -Provide all documents relied upon in reaching the denial determination, as required under 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( d ) ( 1 ) ( ii ), including but not limited to device identifiers, IP addresses, geolocation data, and transaction metadata for each of the nine disputed transactions. -Identify whether any new device was enrolled to either account between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/year>. -Provide the XXXX recipient information for each of the six transfers. -Provide the written explanation of findings required under 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( d ) ( 1 ), including notice of my right to request the documents relied upon in the determination.

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