Consumer complaint received 2025-05-26 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Savings account
Issue: Closing an account — Funds not received from closed account
Company: GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
This is a formal complaint being filed by XXXX XXXX XXXX to XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. Details follow below. A spreadsheet showing discrete events throughout the process is included with this document. 

Overview This complaint is being filed due to a premature closure of a Marcus high yield savings account and 4 CDs. The account closure occurred on XX/XX/XXXXXXXX  and as of the time when this is being written I have not received any documentation from XXXX whatsoever on any aspect of this incident, and most importantly, how the {$60000.00} which was in the account will be transferred back to me. 

Personal Background My name is XXXX XXXX XXXX and I am both an XXXX  and XXXX  citizen. I am a retired XXXX, who has done business in XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX I have worked for vendors as well as directly for some very large companies. I am used to dealing with large companies and their pros/cons. 
I am part of a large extended family, who have deep ties to the XXXX XXXX XXXX, including at very senior levels. I have shared most details with them and they are just as perplexed as I am as to what happened and especially the poor customer service provided by XXXX  after the incident occurred. 

Financial Objectives with XXXX I am going through a complete rework of my fixed income portion of my portfolio. As part of that effort, I received reasonable advice to purchase CDs and create a CD ladder a fairly standard portion of many fixes income portfolios. However, I must note that the CDs were a small portion of the fixed income changes and not my primary focus. 
My goal was to transfer $ XXXX in total from my XXXX and XXXX accounts, which I have both had for over 30 years, and deposit {$25000.00} in each of the CDs. When the account was prematurely closed, I had already transferred {$60000.00}. That was XXXX transfers from XXXX- {$100.00}, {$25000.00} and {$20000.00}, as well as a {$15000.00} transfer from XXXX. Another {$30000.00} transfer from XXXX was in progress, but never went through, and was returned to my XXXX account by XXXX. The exact transfers are detailed in the spreadsheet. XXXX has removed the link to the Marcus account. 

Incident High Level Description As noted in the spreadsheet, the account was originally created in the days after XXXX XXXX. I couldnt initially complete the online application and your website asked me to call the Marcus customer service number. The agent couldnt get it to work and suggested a second account. He tried to create the 2nd account, but couldnt finalize it that day, so I was told to call back after 24 hours. I did call back and finally the account was active, though the other account remained open. I was told it would disappear after 28 days. 

At that point, I made the first {$100.00} transfer. Subsequent transfers are noted in the spreadsheet with the exception of when each of the individual CDs were purchased. ( Marcus doesnt seem to send out email confirmations for each account. ) On XX/XX/XXXX, I tried to log in and noticed that the account was blocked. I then called XXXX customer service. 

XXXX Marcus Customer Service From my interactions with your company, XXXX maintains two levels of Customer Service. Lets call them Level 1 and 2. Level 1 answers the phone initially and Level 2 appears to answer Security related issues.

My high-level impressions were that Level 1 was very good polite and fairly knowledgeable. I wish I could be as kind about Level 2. They seemed to be low-wage employees, who mostly read their scripts. They werent knowledgeable and lacked the proper tool/information to resolve customer issues. In addition to employees that werent suited to the job, there was another major problem Authentication. 

High Level - Authentication Process XXXX  Authentication process requires that they send a text message to a cell phone, but it cant be the cell phone that you made the call on. I hope this is not new news, but few people have a XXXX cell phone. I asked about sending a message to my email, but was told this was possible, either. The alternative that they suggested was to send paper info to my address ( which never happened ). I would then have to go to a bank and get it notarized, return it and then they could authenticate you. I dont think in todays modern age, anybody is going to realistically do that. Its not XXXX anymore. At a high level, I think that there are few people, who would think this process is practical. I am amazed that XXXX would have allowed this process to ever have been put into practice. 

Effectively, this process blocks the vast majority of todays population from being authenticated. Even more importantly, this prevents a person from obtaining vital information about what is happening. 

After working for 40 years, I would guess that whatever manager had approved this process, never had to sit and answer calls like the poor Level 2 customer support employees. If they did, the total impracticality of this approach would have been stunningly obvious. This process MUST be replaced. 

Put yourself in my position. You have shut down my account. I have no visibility into my funds or what is happening. Then, your customer service effectively blocks me from resolving the issue. 

My Experience - Authentication Process On XX/XX/XXXX, when I called, I asked the agent if I could stop by one of your offices. I live in downtown XXXX - one of the largest financial markets in the world, so it would be trivial to go there. Heck, I could walk. She was totally unhelpful as to where I could go. 

I then went to your large office on XXXX XXXX with my passport to be able to show a human from your company that I was indeed, who I purported to be. However, theres no way to get to that floor to even meet a human. Its also blocked. If I could have talked to a real, live human being in person, this issue could have been quickly resolved. 

At that point, I called back and I was finally able to get through the Authentication process. The agent told me that the account was closed ( first time I heard that ). She said that XXXX would not tell me any info about why it had been closed. However, my funds would be returned to their original funding sources within 1-3 business days. That never happened. 

After giving it the required 1-3 business days, I called back again, after finding a 2nd phone to get through the ludicrous Authentication process. This time, the agent told me that I would receive a letter within 7 days, stating what would happen, and that a check would be mailed some days later. So far, I have received absolutely nothing. 

So, Ive talked to 2 agents about the closure, with 2 very different accounts of what would happen. Bottom line is that Ive received nothing in writing. Hopefully, everybody agrees that is unacceptable.

Honestly, I just want to talk to a human being, in person preferably, like you can do at the other financial organizations, so we can walk through the process how those funds will be returned. What I need is VISIBILITY into what is occurring. 

Recommendations XXXX  is a large company with a rather impressive reputation. Of course, my impression is rather different after watching this incident be bungled from the time I first opened the account until now. This incident demonstrates that XXXX needs to address many important areas within the Marcus organization. Heres a list of recommendations that I would have made if I had still been a consultant, like I was during my career, to remedy the issues outlined here. 

1. Fund Transfer Transparency a. XXXX  needs to provide as many guidelines, as possible, to understand what limitations there are on transfer frequency, as well as amounts, to understand what are the boundaries. Right now, its a complete guessing game and guessing is bad for everybody. 
b. Provide a human resource that one could call to understand if a person might question if a transfer might run afoul of any guidelines. It seems unbelievably stupid and cost prohibitive to guess the rationale as to why somebody is making whatever transactions, then terminate somebodys account at great time and expense to all, instead of having a couple resources available to contact, who could help that determination. Human conversations would likely resolve 95 % of issues. 
c. If a questionable transaction occurs, XXXX should contact that person, like the Fraud Audit departments of other financial organizations to have a human conversation with the individual to understand the context of what the person is trying to achieve. Humans can make discrete decisions for many reasons. You cant just look at transactions in some back room and try to connect the dots without context as to why somebody made that decision. Life isnt as black and white as wed like it to be i. Another reason to contact the person is that this could be a golden sales opportunity. You could kill 2 birds with one stone find out the rationale for transfers, but also determine if there are other XXXX products you might be able to sell them. 

1. Obviously, nobody with sales experience designed the current process d. If any of a ), b ), or c ) been in place, its almost guaranteed this incident would not have occurred. If you understand the rules, like football or basketball, you can play the game successfully. Guessing just leads to bad outcomes for everybody.

2. Improved Authentication Process a. XXXX  current Authentication is laughably out of touch with modern reality. XXXX  needs to totally revamp it to made it practical and pragmatic. 
b. The way this currently feels to the customer is that you are intentionally trying to block access to us getting our funds. Id be guessing thats not what you would intend to achieve, but thats the net effect. 
3. Improved Level 2 Customer Support a. XXXX  needs to improve the quality of people they hire for Level 2 and pay them adequately. 
b. XXXX  needs to provide more organizational resources for level XXXX employees. Right now, they are basically worthless. 
4. Account Closure Work Process a. If XXXX decides to close an account, the client should immediately be contacted via both email and a letter sent to their mailing address. This letter should detail what will happen during the closure process. 
b. XXXX  needs to follow up per the process in a way that provides total visibility. 
c. A case number and contact person should be assigned that will work with the client throughout the closure process.

d. None of this occurred during this incident, making XXXX look like a 3rd rate company. 

Summary XXXX prematurely closed my high yield savings account and 4 CDs with no explanation. XXXX had no guidelines as to what fund transfers were legitimate or those that might not pass muster. There were no individuals that one could contact for guidance. 
Right now, I am owed {$60000.00} dollars and have not been notified from XXXX how that will be resolved. 

Its difficult, at best, to talk with the people who can resolve the issue given the many issues within Level 2 customer support. They seem to be unqualified for the jobs they are performing, as well as not receiving enough organizational resources to be able to adequately resolve client issues. XXXX  doesnt have in-person resources, at either the beginning or later in the process, like other organizations, that one could meet to have in-person human conversations that could provide context to resolve issues.

Its great to think that we can do all these services online without human support. I believe in automation. Heck, I have a US patent to optimize and automate various aspects of oil refining. But, there are limits to automation and the lack of humans involved in this process shows the failure of that approach.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation