Consumer complaint received 2025-06-12 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account — Transaction was not authorized
Company: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
Dear CFPB Representative, I am submitting this formal complaint against JPMorgan Chase Bank for refusing to properly investigate and reverse an unauthorized {$240.00} debit card charge related to a predatory vehicle towing incident on XX/XX/year>. Despite providing substantial evidence and citing both federal and state laws, Chase has closed my dispute without justification. 

Background of Dispute On XX/XX/year>, I parked as a paying customer at a XXXX XXXX location in XXXX, Illinois. A tow truck from XXXX XXXX began hooking up my vehicle. I arrived at my car before it was removed and informed the driver I was a customer and would move the vehicle immediately. Despite this, the tow was completed, which violates the Illinois Commercial Relocation of Trespassing Vehicles Law ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ). This law explicitly prohibits a tow company from removing a vehicle if the owner returns before the vehicle is removed and agrees to move it immediately. 

I offered to pay a reasonable drop fee on the spot, but the tow operator refused and demanded I go to their impound lot. I was then forced to pay {$240.00} to retrieve my vehicleusing my Chase Visa debit cardunder protest, duress, and in direct response to unlawful actions. 

Chase 's Response Chase initially issued a provisional credit but later reversed it. When I requested a reconsideration, Chase stated the transaction does not fall under any scenario that qualifies for continued investigation. They cited that the merchant submitted a contract with the property and photos of me leaving my vehicle. These submissions do not disprove my central claimthat I was present before the tow was complete and was coerced into paying a fee for a service that should never have occurred. 

Violation of XXXX XXXX This payment was not made with true consent. I paid under duressmy vehicle was being held unlawfully, and I was left with no practical choice but to comply. XXXX  XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ( m ) ) defines an unauthorized electronic fund transfer as XXXX that is induced by coercion, intimidation, or threatseven if the consumer initiates the payment using a PIN or card. 

The CFPBs own commentary on XXXX  XXXX states that coerced transactions fall under the definition of unauthorized electronic fund transfers. Chase is ignoring this regulation and treating a PIN-based debit card transaction as inherently valid, despite the clear circumstances of coercion. 

Visa Dispute Protections Also Ignored This case also qualifies under Visas Reason Code XXXX for Services Not Provided as Agreed. The towing company failed to comply with state law, which means the service was misrepresented and unlawfully provided. Yet Chase has not pursued this avenue or applied Visas consumer protection rules appropriately. 


Attached is my full appeal letter to Chase, which includes detailed legal citations and a timeline of events. I respectfully request that the CFPB investigate this matter and hold both Chase and the towing company accountable for violations of consumer protection laws.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation