Consumer complaint received 2025-12-15 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: TD BANK US HOLDING COMPANY
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
TD Banks response to my prior CFPB complaints ( XXXX and XXXX ) mischaracterizes my dispute and fails to address the facts of what occurred. TD Bank states that my claims were denied because I indicated the transfer was initiated and authorized but I did not receive goods or services. This statement is inaccurate and does not reflect my communications at any point during the dispute process. 

I repeatedly informed TD Bank, both in person at a branch and multiple times by phone, that I was the victim of an impersonation and social-engineering scam. I was contacted by an individual who falsely represented themselves as being associated with XXXX. The communications appeared legitimate and included a XXXX-branded email, a spoofed phone number that appeared as XXXX in my caller ID, and follow-up text messages. I was instructed to screen share from my device and was led to believe that the transfers were necessary to resolve an account issue. At no point did I knowingly authorize transfers to a scammer, nor did I believe I was sending funds to an unknown third party. 

Despite being informed of these facts multiple times, TD Bank did not analyze whether impersonation, deception, or social engineering occurred. Instead, the bank reclassified my dispute as authorized transfers where goods or services were not received, which is not what I reported and does not reflect the nature of the fraud. TD Bank did not explain how it reconciled my repeated statements about deception and impersonation with its conclusion that the transactions were authorized. 

TD Banks response relies heavily on XXXX Terms and Conditions. However, XXXX terms do not override TD Banks obligations under Regulation E. The fact that a customer may have physically initiated a transaction does not, by itself, establish that the transaction was authorized if the action was induced by deception, impersonation, or misunderstanding. TD Bank did not provide evidence demonstrating that my authorization was informed and voluntary, nor did it explain what specific evidence supported its conclusion. 

I am also on the XXXXXXXX XXXX and receive XXXX payments as my primary source of income. I disclosed this during the dispute process because I sometimes communicate differently and may require clearer explanations to avoid misunderstandings. TD Bank did not acknowledge this disclosure, did not offer any communication accommodations, and did not explain how it ensured my statements were accurately understood before denying my claims. I am concerned that my communications were misinterpreted and that this contributed to the improper classification of my dispute. 

TD Banks response does not address critical facts, including the impersonation of XXXX, the use of spoofed communications, the screen-sharing instructions, or how my disability-related communication needs were considered. The bank also did not provide documentation or evidence supporting its conclusion that the transfers were authorized beyond general references to XXXX terms. 

I am requesting that TD Bank be required to re-review my claims under Regulation E with proper consideration of impersonation-based fraud, deception, and accessibility obligations. I am also requesting a clear, evidence-based explanation of how TD Bank concluded that these transactions were authorized despite my repeated statements that they resulted from a scam and misunderstanding. 

This complaint concerns TD Bank claim numbers XXXX and XXXX, which were previously investigated and denied.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation