Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Prepaid card — General-purpose prepaid card
Issue: Problem with a purchase or transfer — Charged for a purchase or transfer you did not make with the card
Company: Block, Inc.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I filed an Official Police Report with the XXXX XXXX Police Department concerning this same issue on XX/XX/XXXX with Detective XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Formal Rebuttal to Cash Apps XX/XX/XXXX Response To the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau : I submit this response to formally dispute and rebut Cash Apps XX/XX/XXXX letter. I remain wholly dissatisfied with Cash Apps response, which fails to meet the requirements of federal consumer financial law and does not meaningfully address the unauthorized electronic fund transfers that resulted in a loss of {$8500.00} from my account on XX/XX/XXXX. Cash Apps response is conclusory, boilerplate in nature, and devoid of the factual findings, evidentiary support, or legal analysis required under applicable law. It does not demonstrate compliance with the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ), 15 U.S.C. 1693 et seq., or Regulation E, 12 C.F.R. Part 1005, nor does it establish that Cash App conducted a reasonable, good-faith investigation into my claim of unauthorized transfers. I. Nature of the Unauthorized Transactions On XX/XX/XXXX, an unknown and unauthorized third party gained access to my Cash App account and initiated two peer-to-peer withdrawals totaling {$8500.00}, with a third attempted transaction failing due to insufficient funds. These transactions were not authorized by me, were not initiated by me, and provided no benefit to me. I did not share my credentials, did not approve any such transfers, and did not engage in any conduct that would constitute authorization under Regulation E. Upon discovering the activity, I acted promptly and responsibly by notifying Cash App, filing a dispute, and later submitting an appeal when Cash App denied my claim. II. Cash Apps Response Fails to Satisfy Regulation E Cash Apps letter does not satisfy the requirements imposed by Regulation XXXX on financial institutions handling claims of unauthorized electronic fund transfers. Under XXXX C.F.R. XXXX, a financial institution must : XXXX a reasonable investigation ; Determine whether an error occurred ; Provide the consumer with the results of the investigation ; and Correct the error promptly if found. Cash Apps response does none of the above in any meaningful way. Instead, it merely : Restates that prior communications occurred ; Confirms the dollar amounts of the transactions ; and Asserts denial without explanation. The response contains no description of the investigative steps taken, no findings, and no evidence supporting the conclusion that the transactions were authorized. XXXX. Absence of XXXX XXXX XXXX Cash App has failed to provide any proof that the transactions were authorized by me. Specifically, Cash App has not produced : Device identification records IP address logs Login timestamps correlated to my known activity Authentication or multi-factor verification records Evidence that security protocols functioned as intended Any consumer-initiated authorization record Under Regulation XXXX, the burden of proof rests with the financial institution to show that a transaction was authorized or that the consumers liability applies. Cash Apps response does not meet this burden. Conclusory statements that a claim was addressed or reviewed are not evidence and do not constitute a legally sufficient investigation. IV. Improper Shifting of Liability to the XXXX XXXX XXXX handling of this matter appears to improperly shift liability to the consumer without establishing any basis under the XXXX. Under XXXX XXXX. XXXX, consumer liability for unauthorized electronic fund transfers is limited and conditioned on specific findings. Cash App has not alleged, much less proven, that : I authorized the transfers ; I engaged in fraud ; I failed to timely report the unauthorized activity ; or Any exception to consumer protections applies. Absent such findings, denial of reimbursement is inconsistent with federal law. V. Failure to Demonstrate Reasonable Security Controls Cash Apps response does not address how an unauthorized party was able to access my account or whether Cash Apps security systems failed. This raises broader concerns under : The XXXX ; CFPB supervisory expectations ; and Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ( UDAAP ) standards. If Cash Apps systems permitted unauthorized access without effective detection or prevention, and then denied reimbursement without substantiated findings, such conduct XXXX constitute an unfair practice, as it causes substantial consumer injury that is not reasonably avoidable and is not outweighed by countervailing benefits. VI. XXXX XXXX and Supervisory Concerns Cash Apps letter appears to be a standardized boilerplate response, lacking any individualized analysis of my specific account activity. This raises concerns about whether Cash App : Systematically denies unauthorized transaction claims without adequate investigation ; Fails to provide required documentation to consumers ; and Relies on automated or cursory review processes inconsistent with XXXX XXXX Such practices are of supervisory and enforcement interest to the CFPB XXXX XXXX. Requested Regulatory Relief and Resolution Given the deficiencies in Cash Apps response, I respectfully request that : The CFPB require Cash App to demonstrate compliance with Regulation XXXX by producing evidence of authorization or a documented investigation ; Cash App be directed to reimburse the {$8500.00} withdrawn without my authorization absent such evidence ; and The CFPB consider whether Cash Apps handling of this matter reflects broader compliance or UDAAP concerns warranting supervisory or enforcement review. XXXX. Reservation of Rights I reserve all rights and remedies available under federal and state law. Nothing in this response should be construed as a waiver of any legal claims or defenses. XXXX. Conclusion Cash Apps XX/XX/XXXX response fails to meet the standards required by federal consumer financial law. It does not establish authorization, does not document a reasonable investigation, and does not justify denial of reimbursement. I respectfully request continued CFPB involvement and review, as this matter implicates not only my individual loss but also Cash Apps compliance with core consumer protection obligations. Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Florida

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation