Consumer complaint received 2026-05-06 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: BANCFIRST CORPORATION
State: OK

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a complaint against BancFirst regarding their handling of unauthorized electronic fund transfers under Regulation E. On XX/XX/year>, six ( 6 ) unauthorized XXXX XXXX transactions totaling {$2100.00} were processed from my account to an individual I do not know. I did not initiate, authorize, or benefit from these transactions. The bank initially issued provisional credit on XX/XX/year>. On XX/XX/year>, I was notified that my claim was denied and the provisional credit would be reversed. On XX/XX/year>, I contacted BancFirst and spoke with an officer ( XXXX XXXX to understand the basis of the denial. I was advised that the matter was not the banks responsibility and that my dispute should be directed to XXXX XXXX. I explained that I believed I was protected under Regulation E through my financial institution. I requested documentation supporting their determination. As of XX/XX/year>, I had not received any documentation and submitted a written request through the banks website, as no email contact was provided in the denial notice. As of XX/XX/year>, I still had not received documentation and had to call customer service to obtain it. I was then transferred to a supervisor who advised they could not discuss my case and instructed me not to respond via email. I nevertheless followed up via email requesting clarification as to how the bank determined that I authorized the transactions. I was told my inquiry would be forwarded to the investigations team, but I have received no further response. The documentation I eventually received includes transaction receipts and a statement indicating that a passcode ( PIN ) was used and that the transaction was authenticated using a device and IP address. However, this documentation does not establish that I authorized the transactions. Authentication ( such as use of a passcode ) is not equivalent to authorization by the account holder under Regulation E. Additional concerns include : -The IP address provided does not align with my location nor is my active IP address -I do not use a PIN for these transactions and instead rely on biometric authentication -While I do have possession of the device originally associated with my account, I had not actively used the application and did not initiate or authorize these transactions. Possession of a device does not establish that I authorized the transfers Further, the banks fraud monitoring practices appear inconsistent. I was contacted regarding two transactions, which were blocked after I confirmed they were unauthorized, yet seven back-to-back transactions to the same recipient were allowed to process without interruption, totaling {$2100.00}. Separately, on XX/XX/year>, my debit card was blocked after two legitimate transactions from a known vendor, without any prior notification or attempt to contact me. When I called, they advised they " flagged '' my card due to two back-to- back transactions. This raises additional concerns regarding the consistency and reliability of the banks fraud detection and response practices. Overall, BancFirst : -Failed to demonstrate that I authorized the transactions -Relied solely on authentication factors rather than establishing authorization -Failed to provide timely and clear documentation upon request -Provided inconsistent fraud monitoring and response I am requesting that BancFirst : -Reconsider its determination -Recredit the {$2100.00} to my account -Ensure proper application of Regulation E protections

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation