Consumer complaint received 2026-01-25 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem caused by your funds being low — Overdrafts and overdraft fees
Company: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a formal complaint regarding excessive, disproportionate, and potentially unfair overdraft fee practices by Chase Bank across both my business and personal checking accounts. Between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX charged me XXXX overdraft fees totaling {$1100.00}, of which only {$230.00} was reversed, leaving me with {$950.00} in net overdraft charges. 

ACCOUNT-SPECIFIC BREAKDOWN Business Complete Checking ( ending in XXXX ) : Period : XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX Total overdraft fees : XXXX fees Total charged : {$470.00} Reversals : {$0.00} Net fees : {$470.00} Total Checking ( ending in XXXX ) : Period : XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX Total overdraft fees : XXXX fees Total charged : {$710.00} Reversals : XXXX fees totaling {$230.00} Net fees : {$470.00} Combined Impact : Total fees charged : XXXX fees totaling {$1100.00} Total reversals : XXXX fees totaling {$230.00} Net fees paid : {$950.00} Total transaction value that triggered overdrafts : {$3900.00} Net fees represent XXXX percent of the underlying transaction value SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS AND CONCERNS Unconscionable fee-to-transaction ratios Chase charged {$34.00} overdraft fees on transactions as small as {$6.00}, creating effective charges that exceed XXXX percent. 

{$6.00} transaction charged a {$34.00} fee equals a XXXX percent effective charge ( Personal account, XX/XX/XXXX ) {$6.00} transaction charged a {$34.00} fee equals a XXXX percent effective charge ( Personal account, XX/XX/XXXX ) {$7.00} transaction charged a {$34.00} fee equals a XXXX percent effective charge ( Business account, XX/XX/XXXX ) {$8.00} transaction charged a {$34.00} fee equals a XXXX percent effective charge ( Business account, XX/XX/XXXX ) {$9.00} transaction charged a {$34.00} fee equals a XXXX percent effective charge ( Personal account, XX/XX/XXXX ) {$14.00} transaction charged a {$34.00} fee equals a XXXX percent effective charge ( Personal account, XX/XX/XXXX ) {$16.00} transaction charged a {$34.00} fee equals a XXXX percent effective charge ( Business account, XX/XX/XXXX ) {$16.00} transaction charged a {$34.00} fee equals a XXXX percent effective charge ( Personal account, XX/XX/XXXX ) {$18.00} transaction charged a {$34.00} fee equals a XXXX percent effective charge ( Business account, XX/XX/XXXX ) {$18.00} transaction charged a {$34.00} fee equals a XXXX percent effective charge ( Business account, XX/XX/XXXX ) These ratios far exceed any reasonable measure of compensation for extending credit and appear designed to maximize fee revenue rather than cover actual costs. 

Systematic fee clustering pattern The fees demonstrate a concerning pattern of multiple charges concentrated on single days, suggesting systematic processing designed to maximize fees rather than assist customers. 

XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX fees totaling {$230.00} across both accounts XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX fees totaling {$100.00} ( Business account ) XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX fees totaling {$68.00} ( Business account ) XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX fees totaling {$100.00} ( Business account ) XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX fees totaling {$100.00} ( Personal account ) XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX fees totaling {$100.00} ( Personal account ) On XX/XX/XXXX alone, my business account was charged XXXX overdraft fees in a single day totaling {$230.00}, including fees on transactions as small as {$8.00}. 

Lack of adequate opt-out options under Regulation E I was not provided adequate opportunity to decline overdraft coverage on everyday debit and check card transactions as required under Regulation E. Many of these fees, particularly the smallest transactions, could have been declined at point of sale, preventing both the overdraft and the fee. 

Disproportionate impact violating fairness standards The {$950.00} in net fees represents XXXX percent of the total transaction value that triggered the overdrafts. This appears designed to maximize fee revenue rather than reasonably compensate the bank for providing credit. For context, many payday lenders charge lower effective rates and face strict regulatory scrutiny for similar practices. 

Inconsistent and arbitrary fee application XXXX reversed XXXX fees totaling {$230.00} on my personal account on XX/XX/XXXX, acknowledging those charges were inappropriate. However, XXXX continued assessing similar fees on comparable transactions afterward, including : A {$6.00} transaction on XX/XX/XXXX ( fee charged, not reversed ) A {$6.00} transaction on XX/XX/XXXX ( fee charged, not reversed ) A {$7.00} transaction on XX/XX/XXXX ( fee charged, not reversed ) This selective reversal pattern suggests inconsistent or arbitrary fee assessment policies that violate fairness standards. 

Failure to process deposits before debits Many of the clustered fees on XX/XX/XXXX and subsequent dates occurred despite deposits being made to the accounts. Chases transaction ordering appears designed to maximize overdrafts rather than minimize customer harm. 

LEGAL AND REGULATORY CONCERNS These practices appear to violate the following : Regulation E ( 12 CFR Section 1005.17 ), requiring affirmative opt-in for overdraft services on ATM and one-time debit card transactions CFPB guidance on Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices, particularly regarding disproportionate fees Truth in Savings Act, requiring clear disclosure of fee structures and costs Good faith and fair dealing standards, as charging fees that exceed XXXX percent of transaction value appears designed to harm consumers

Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief