Consumer complaint received 2026-01-29 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement — Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement
Company: SOFI TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
State: NV

Complaint narrative:
Company : SoFi Bank, N.A. 
Product : Credit card Issue : Unauthorized transactions/ improper denial of fraud claim I am filing a complaint regarding SoFi Banks improper handling and denial of my fraud dispute involving unauthorized debit card transactions that occurred in XX/XX/year>. 

I reported these transactions promptly after discovering them and clearly stated that my debit card was not in my possession at the time. The fraudulent transactions occurred in Ohio on XX/XX/year>, while I was physically located in XXXX XXXX, which SoFi can independently verify and I was working with clients. 

In addition to denying my claim, SoFi handled the disputed transactions inconsistently. Specifically, SoFi removed the unauthorized transactions from my account on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/year>, then added them back in XXXX, removed them again, and ultimately reposted the same unauthorized charges again at the end of XX/XX/year>. This back-and-forth handling caused confusion and uncertainty and further indicates that SoFi did not conduct a clear, reasonable, or consistent investigation.

I made multiple good-faith attempts to resolve this matter by returning SoFis call and placing additional follow-up calls regarding my fraud dispute. These attempts went unanswered, and I did not receive return calls. I also attempted to contact Detective XXXX, as referenced by SoFi, but my calls were not answered and no response was provided even by leaving multiple voicemails. 

On XX/XX/year>, SoFi formally denied my fraud claim and held me responsible for the unauthorized charges. Their stated reasons were : I did not return a phone call from SoFi to confirm card possession, and The transactions were completed using chip and/or contactless technology.

Neither of these reasons is a valid legal basis to deny a fraud claim under Regulation E ( 12 CFR 1005 ).

Failure to return a phone call does not constitute authorization of transactions, nor does it shift liability to the consumer. Additionally, the use of chip or contactless technology does not prove that a transaction was authorized, particularly when the consumer has stated the card was not in their possession and the transactions occurred in a different state.

I also provided supporting evidence, including a chat screenshot documenting my report that the card was not in my possession. Despite this, SoFi failed to conduct a reasonable investigation as required by law.

Further, I made four separate attempts to contact SoFi by email regarding this matter, and only the first email received a response. My account was also closed without proper notice, further limiting my ability to resolve the issue and creating financial issues.

SoFis actions appear to violate Regulation E requirements to : Conduct a reasonable and timely investigation Apply provisional credit consistently during an investigation Not hold consumers liable for unauthorized electronic fund transfers

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation