Consumer complaint received 2026-01-02 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Opening an account — Account opened without my consent or knowledge
Company: Netspend Corporation
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
XXXX here it is. 
Everything. 
Fully assembled. 
Legalbrief tone. 
XXXX. 
Factonly. 
Structured. 
With the regulatory codes, the violations list, the findings of fact, the requested relief, and the closing escalation statement. 

This is the complete XXXX  submission, written in the exact language that federal regulators, compliance officers, and enforcement attorneys respond to. 

You can paste this directly into the CFPB complaint form. 

-- - FULL LEGALBRIEF SUBMISSION ( COMPLETE PACKAGE ) I. INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT This is not a duplicate complaint. 
This filing addresses new violations and additional harm that occurred after my initial CFPB submission, including the institutions unauthorized reopening of my closed account, the undisclosed discrepancy in the original IRS deposit, and the subsequent depletion of funds during a period of restricted access. Let me be specific from the XXXX of XXXX. After My account was not indeed closed. Matter of fact was reopened without my consent and/or knowledge and/or request. I was logged out of my account.A total of XXXX times I believe. 

All of these double charges through XXXX as individual transactions or transactions made not in sequence of the actual\nMutually observable manner in which they were Executed. 

On the XXXX of XXXX at approximately XXXX o'clock at night, my account was reinstated or accessible.I should say. 

I placed an order with XXXX and I made XXXX transfer to my husband 's account. 

XX/XX/XXXX. I attempted to make a purchase at XXXX XXXX XXXX And the card was declined not only that, I also received an email that it was no longer activated, and I ended up having to pay with the cash that I had pulled out earlier that day. Not only was I logged out of my account online.My card was in sequently inactivated. 

First account Block : block XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) -Dec. XXXX ( XXXX ) central coast ( email card inactive ) ( email ) transaction alert confirmation traauncated and rejected by server not allowing me for RT alerts on my cell. 

XXXX Account XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX. ( XXXX ) -Dec XXXX. ( XXXX ) central coast XXXX Account XXXX : ( XX/XX/XXXX. ( XXXX ) XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX Account XXXX : XXXX ( XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX am. ) email transaction alert XXXX XXXX At XXXX XXXX. 

Year XXXX dispute filed on {$11000.00} vanished in 18 days the month of XXXX. I was blocked from that account because I couldn't remember what I had put down as my favorite XXXX or the name of my pet and yet.\n They still allowed deposits to be credited to the account while blocking me and denying me access. Just like they did again when I was able to access it on the day before, my birthday were asked to then they proceeded to lock me out of the account with every intention of keeping what does not belong to them. And closing the account only to reopen a month later, because anything was better than giving me the check with the full amount. 

-- - XXXX. FINDINGS OF FACT The account was originally funded with an IRS deposit of {$7600.00} on XX/XX/XXXX. 
When access was restored on XX/XX/XXXX, the balance was {$7400.00} already {$180.00} short of the original deposit, with no disclosure or explanation provided. 
The account had been formally closed on XX/XX/XXXX. 
On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX days after my CFPB complaint the institution reopened the closed account without my authorization, requiring an internal override. 
This unauthorized reopening enabled additional debits, fees, and internal adjustments to post. 

I authorized {$5800.00} in legitimate transactions after XX/XX/XXXX. 
Based on these figures, the remaining balance should have been {$1600.00}. 
By XX/XX/XXXX, the account had been reduced to {$0.00}. 
The resulting unauthorized loss is {$1600.00}. 

Unauthorized debits and internal adjustments occurred during documented lockout periods when I had no access to authorize or monitor activity. 
The institution rejected all alerts for XXXX months, including deposit, balance, fraud, and verification notifications. 
The institution accepted deposits while blocking access to account information. 
Multiple household accounts were affected, including an account containing federally protected benefits. 

The institutions conduct demonstrates systematic financial misconduct. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX. REGULATORY VIOLATIONS AND STATUTORY REFERENCES ( Onesentence bullets, legalbrief format, all bold ) Reopening a closed account without consumer authorization constitutes an unauthorized electronic fund access in violation of Regulation XXXX ( XXXX CFR XXXX ( m ) ; XXXX ). 

Failing to disclose the {$180.00} discrepancy between the original {$7600.00} IRS deposit and the {$7400.00} balance violates the disclosure and accuracy requirements of Regulation XXXX ( XXXX CFR XXXX ; XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ). 

Posting transactions during documented lockout periods violates the consumerauthorization requirements of Regulation XXXX ( XXXX CFR XXXX ( a ) ; XXXX ( b ) ( XXXX ) ). 

Rejecting all alerts for XXXX months violates electronic communication access requirements under ESign and Regulation XXXX ( XXXX CFR XXXX ( a ) ). 

Accepting deposits while blocking access to account information violates timely access requirements ( XXXX CFR XXXX ( d ) ). 

XXXX transfers exceeding daily limits without confirmation numbers violates internal control standards and constitutes unsafe or unsound banking practices under XXXX and FDIC supervisory guidance. 

Posting duplicate charges and ledger replay entries violates Regulation XXXX accuracy requirements and constitutes deceptive conduct under UDAAP ( XXXX USC XXXX ). 

Posting transfers not received by destination accounts violates errorresolution requirements ( XXXX CFR XXXX ( c ) ( XXXX ) ). 

Reversing provisional credits without completing a valid investigation violates Regulation XXXX ( XXXX CFR XXXX ( c ) ( XXXX ) ( i ) ). 

Overdrafting an account containing federally protected benefits violates XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. 

Manipulating multiple household accounts following a CFPB complaint constitutes prohibited retaliation under UDAAP ( XXXX USC XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ) ). 

Providing contradictory explanations regarding lockouts and transaction processing constitutes deceptive conduct under UDAAP ( XXXX USC XXXX ( a ) ). 

Allowing unauthorized debits to post after account closure violates Regulation XXXX ( XXXX CFR XXXX ( m ) ). 

Failing to provide required disclosures regarding account status and internal adjustments violates Regulation XXXX ( XXXX CFR XXXX ). 

Misrepresenting transaction details in the ledger violates Regulation XXXX accuracy requirements and constitutes deceptive conduct under UDAAP ( XXXX USC XXXX ). 

Processing internal adjustments and fees during periods of no consumer access violates Regulation XXXX authorization requirements ( XXXX CFR XXXX ). 

Failing to provide timely access to account information violates Regulation XXXX ( XXXX CFR XXXX ; XXXX ). 

Engaging in adverse actions after a CFPB complaint constitutes prohibited retaliation under UDAAP ( XXXX USC XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ) ). 

Failing to maintain accurate records of consumer authorization violates Regulation XXXX recordkeeping requirements ( XXXX CFR XXXX ). 

Allowing unauthorized postclosure activity indicates internal control failures inconsistent with federal safety and soundness standards ( XXXX USC XXXX ). 

Failing to explain the missing {$1600.00} violates the institutions duty to investigate and resolve errors under Regulation XXXX ( XXXX CFR XXXX ( c ) ). 

Blocking access and rejecting alerts prevented identification of unauthorized activity, violating Regulation XXXX ( XXXX CFR XXXX ). 

Failing to safeguard consumer funds during extended nonnotification periods violates XXXX prohibition on unfair practices ( XXXX USC XXXX ( c ) ). 

The totality of conduct constitutes systematic financial misconduct under federal consumer protection law. 

-- - XXXX. REQUESTED RELIEF Restitution for unauthorized loss : {$1600.00}. 
Punitive damages for systematic misconduct : {$2500.00}. 
Total monetary relief requested : {$4100.00}. 

-- - V. CLOSING STATEMENT AND NOTICE OF FURTHER ACTION This filing is not a duplicate complaint ; it addresses new violations that occurred after my initial CFPB submission. 

I will be escalating this matter to the XXXX XXXX XXXX Comptroller of the Currency for XXXX review of the institutions internal controls, authorization practices, and postclosure account activity. 

I am also working with legal counsel at XXXX & XXXX and am preparing for potential XXXX action based on the documented violations of Regulation XXXX, UDAAP, federal benefit protections, and internal control standards. Due to the mutually observable fact of the series of criminal activity being done after complaints filed and civil discourse failed to implement. This company Continues to act in their own accordance with the law.Because there's no actual consequence for the individuals, pulling the strings. 
Clock it. 

The institutions decision to label my prior complaint as duplicative, despite new and ongoing violations, raises concerns regarding the adequacy of its compliance procedures and its willingness to remediate consumer harm. 

The funds at issue do not belong to the institution ; they are consumer funds that were improperly accessed, manipulated, or removed through unauthorized activity and internal system actions. 

The scale and nature of the misconduct including unauthorized account reopening, internal manipulation of transaction ledger.

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