Consumer complaint received 2026-04-13 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: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
Complaint Against Bank of America Improper Handling of Fraud Dispute I am filing a complaint regarding Bank of Americas handling of a fraud dispute involving XXXX charges totaling {$520.00}. I disputed these charges as unauthorized. Bank of America denied my claim based on documentation provided by XXXX, primarily citing an IP address match, account history, and billing ZIP code verification. However, I believe this determination was made without properly evaluating the full circumstances or the substantial evidence I submitted. Lack of Meaningful Review of Submitted Evidence After the initial denial, I submitted extensive documentation demonstrating that I was not present at the location of the XXXX reservation and did not use the service. This evidence included : Airline travel records showing I traveled to XXXX, XXXX prior to the reservation dates Bank transaction history confirming purchases, hotel charges, and financial activity in XXXX during the reservation period Money transfer records tied to a specific town in XXXX XXXX photographic evidence confirming my presence in XXXX during the stay Despite this, Bank of America upheld their denial using the same original reasoning and did not address or acknowledge any of the evidence I submitted. XXXX XXXX The XXXX reservation was for XXXX XXXX. During the reservation dates, I was physically located in XXXX, XXXX, which is a separate city approximately XXXX hours away. Additionally, the XXXX XXXX authorizations for these charges occurred while I was physically in the United States. These facts create a clear geographic inconsistency that was not addressed in the banks decision. Lack of Account Access / Potential Account Compromise I had not actively accessed or used my XXXX account since approximately XX/XX/year>. The email associated with this account had become significantly overloaded and difficult to monitor due to its use across multiple services. Because of this, I was not aware of any unauthorized access or activity at the time the booking was made. I now believe it is possible that my email and/or XXXX account was accessed without my authorization, which raises concerns of account takeover. The fact that confirmation emails were sent does not establish that I personally authorized the transaction. Insufficient Proof of Authorization Bank of Americas determination appears to rely primarily on an IP address match, account information, and ZIP code verification. However, an IP address identifies a network connection, not a specific individual or device. It does not confirm that I personally authorized the transaction. Additionally, the documentation provided does not include : Any confirmation of XXXX XXXX biometric authentication ( Face ID or Touch ID ) Any device identification linking the transaction directly to me Any evidence of cardholder presence at the time of authorization Given these gaps, reliance on IP matching and account data alone is not sufficient to conclude that the transaction was authorized by me. Pattern of Prior Unauthorized Activity I would also like to note that my card experienced unauthorized or suspicious activity between approximately XXXX and XX/XX/year>, within a similar timeframe leading up to this disputed transaction. This raises additional concerns regarding the security of my account and whether my card or associated accounts may have been previously compromised. This pattern further supports the possibility that the XXXX transaction was not authorized by me and should have been evaluated with heightened scrutiny. Requested Resolution I am requesting : A full and fair reinvestigation of this claim A written explanation that specifically addresses the evidence I submitted Clarification on what authentication method was used to determine authorization Reversal of the {$520.00} charge if proper authorization can not be demonstrated I believe this dispute was not handled in accordance with reasonable investigation standards, and my submitted evidence was not meaningfully considered. Supporting documentation has been submitted separately, including the evidence previously faxed to Bank of America.

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