Date Received: 2023-04-14
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account
Subissue: Transaction was not authorized
Consumer Complaint: The following is a security concern regarding debit-card transactions posted to my bank account by unrecognized and apparently unidentifiable merchants. On XX/XX/XXXX a {$35.00} debit card charge appeared on my Bank of America ( BOA ) checking account initiated by a merchant identified only as ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CA ON XX/XX/XXXX. ) Because I had not made a purchase for that amount, nor did I recognize the merchant by the posted identification, I immediately contacted bank of America. To my surprise, BOA could not identify the merchant beyond what was posted. Consequently, as a security precaution BOA cancelled my debit card. Shortly afterwards, using the XXXX search engine, I discovered that XXXX had an office located at what was seemingly a transaction identified by only a street address. Although the amount of the charge was still puzzling, I had used the service provided by XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, therefore I contacted them seeking more information. XXXX claimed they could find no record of making the {$35.00} charge. They did verify placing a {$130.00} hold on my account. After completing the service event they released the {$130.00} hold and debited {$94.00} which was the actual amount due. As usual those transactions were clearly identified as XXXX. Despite my appeals to the CEO, XXXX has not acknowledge the {$35.00} debit transaction or the use of the obscured ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CA ON XX/XX/XXXX ) merchant identification. Although the amount was relatively de minimis, I regard the unidentified {$35.00} debit transaction as a significant security concern. Accordingly, I contacted XXXX XXXX XXXX for help in definitively identifying the merchant initiating the transaction to my bank account. To date, I have not received a reply to my email sent on XX/XX/XXXX to their security team, and my call to the XXXX help center resulted in the representative declaring he could not help with the identification of the merchant. The mysterious {$35.00} debit charge was not finalized and it disappeared from my bank account after 7 business days. Nonetheless, I am left to wonder was the debit charge simply a mistake or something more serious. It is alarming to me that both Bank of America, and XXXX XXXX XXXX, were unable or unwilling to ascertain the identity of the merchant in question. I have used the service provided by XXXX for years, but I have never known them to charge my bank account with a transaction identified only by a street address. Still, I have lost confidence in XXXX because I dont believe they have been as cooperative in this security concern as they should have been. Furthermore, my confidence in the overall system for processing debit card transactions is in considerable question. Since the XX/XX/XXXX incident another debit-card charge, identified only by an apparent street address, was posted to my BOA bank account. I was able to more quickly determine the merchant identity as XXXX Eats. After some initial obfuscation, XXXX did confirm that the ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, CA ) merchant identification posted to my account is the address of their corporate office. Again, the debit charge was not finalized and it disappeared from my account after 7 days. Over the years of doing business with XXXXXXXX XXXX, I am not aware of them initiating a transaction to my account that was identified by a street address. I realize that it is common practice for a merchant to place an authorization hold on an account. However, the use of street addresses that mask the true identity of the merchant initiating the transaction creates opportunity for fraud. Consumer bank accounts can not be effectively monitored if merchants are allowed to initiate transactions using a variety of obscured identifications. At the very least the merchant has a responsibility to notify the consumer of just how their charges will be identified for each transaction. I dont know just where to direct this matter, so I hope you can help. I believe a standard for readily identifying the merchant on all transactions is needed. Of course if the transaction is to be finalized the bank has to know the merchant ID for the account to which the funds will be transferred. Nonetheless, Consumers need readily identifiable merchant identifications to validate all transactions as they are posted to their bank account. Based on my recent experience it doesnt appear that Bank of America or XXXX XXXX XXXX will take any action until and unless a charge is finalized and disputed by the consumer. I suspect there will be inappropriate charges overlooked because of the time required to meticulously track unidentified charges and ensure they are only authorization holds that will not be finalized. It appears that the consumers only current options are to simply tolerate the various identifications used by a merchant, or refrain from doing business with the merchant. In summary I think two process corrections are urgently needed : Readily identifiable merchant identification, consistent with the advertised name of the business, must be used on all transactions with real-time notification to the consumer regarding the identification to expect as the transactions are posted to their bank account. Card issuers need a readily available method of identifying merchants on all transactions involving the accounts of their card holders.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: GA
Zip: 30005
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-04-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-04-14
Issue: Fraud or scam
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: BANK OF AMERICA HAS FRAUDULENTLY ALLOWED MY PERSONAL ISSUED GOVERNMENT CHECKS WITH TO BE CASHED WITHOUT MY ( AUTHORIZATION ). I HAVE A STATEMENT FROM XXXX XXXX OF ON XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX HAS ( FRAUDULENTLY ) CLAIMED TO BE THE LANDLORD OF THE PROPERTY STATED IN A WRITTEN VERIFIED STATEMENT THAT HER BANK DOES NOT REQUIRE ( 2 SIGNATURES ) BUT ON XX/XX/XXXX XXXX THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MADE A MANDATE THAT IS WAS MANDATORY FOR ALL CHECKS TO BE SIGNED BY TWO PARTIES. I HAVE A CASE IN FEDERAL COURT ON XXXX XXXX XXXX Of ( ON XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). BANK OF AMERICA ALLOWED THESE FUNDS TO BE DEPOSITED AND CASHED. I AM SUBPOENAING ALL TRANSACTIONS WITH MY NAME AND ASSOCIATION TO ARKANSAS RENT RELIEF PROGRAM. BANK OF AMERICA IS APART OF THIS *STATEWIDE* GOVERNMENT SCAM. THAT HAS BEEN EXPOSED.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: AR
Zip: 72401
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-04-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-04-14
Issue: Managing an account
Subissue: Banking errors
Consumer Complaint: Bank of America has stone walled me and refuses to return an item I presented on XX/XX/XXXX for payment at a financial institution. Also I have a 17 year relationship and the bank refuses to disclose the location of debt securities and other notes due to my familys trust on my behalf. Bank of America also allowed XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX XXXX to commit fraudulent acts on my accounts from XXXX to XXXX and refuses to pursue the criminals and has penalized me. I have been caused great emotional stress and economic loss. Transactions were timely reported pursuant to federal regulations as unauthorized. Also my draft was not honored or returned in accordance with law and equity. Bank also kept unemployment funds due from state of Maryland and refuses to return or credit.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: MD
Zip: 206XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-04-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-04-14
Issue: Getting a credit card
Subissue: Application denied
Consumer Complaint: On XX/XX/XXXX, I received a letter from BOA in regard to a denied credit application. This was done without my knowledge. I called and spoke with a person in the BOA Fraud Department. I was assured that BOA would notify the 3 credit bureaus of this fraudulent activity. In addition, I placed a security alert on my credit file on XX/XX/XXXX. As of the date of this complaint, this inquiry is still showing on XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, I called BOA to inquire and was told since it was over 6 months, I needed to take this up with XXXX. And because there was no credit extended to me, BOA could not provide me with any documentation. I called XXXX and they said they could not help me unless I filed a complaint with FTC.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: TX
Zip: 75068
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-04-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-04-15
Issue: Opening an account
Subissue: Account opened as a result of fraud
Consumer Complaint: I recently received some emails from Bank of America stating I opened two account with them. One of them was for savings and the other apparently for sales. It seems like someone is using my SSN to apply for this, I wish to take further actions. I called Bank of America and I was told I will receive a letter any time soon.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: NJ
Zip: 07032
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-04-15
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-04-15
Issue: Fees or interest
Subissue: Problem with fees
Consumer Complaint: Bank of America has an awful method to set up autopay for small businesses. There is no easy way to set up autopay for my credit card to pay the statement balance. I tried to going in an setting up autopay for paying my balance in full and there is no direct option to set it up. I have to jump through hoops like go to this bill pay feature request ebills and then once I get an ebill set up autopay. When I asked why can't they have an easy autopay option to pay the balance in full like other banks ( eg. XXXX ) they told me they use a 3rd party for this service and that is what causes this. Given the size of bank of america they could have chosen to make this easier for their customers by investing in some simple technology that makes it easier. But they choose to ignore this problem because it is a way to generate easy revenue through late fees and interest by confusing customers and making them jump through hoops to set up autopay in full statement balance. This has caused me to miss my bill by one day. The bill was due on XX/XX/XXXX and I have paid it manually on XX/XX/XXXX and they charged me a {$39.00} fee. I called in and told them it is because of the complicated process they have for setting up autopay that I missed this bill and they still did not waive the fees. And they used the term " fair lending '' to say why they can not waive the fees. There is nothing " fair '' about this. I am attaching a screenshot of the billpay screen I see which does not given option to pay the bill in full automatically. In addition to this they have charged about {$210.00} in account fees on my checking account for me not maintaining the minimum balance. This was also deceptive. When I signed up they told me the account is free because I qualified because of the balance I have demonstrated previously and I will not have maintain the minimum balance going foward. But I never got a notification that they will start charging a fee after a certain time period. They only waived {$60.00} of the {$210.00} ... because of their " policy ''.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: CA
Zip: 94568
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-04-15
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with monetary relief
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-04-13
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account
Subissue: Money was taken from your account on the wrong day or for the wrong amount
Consumer Complaint: In XXXX of last year, a {$9500.00} check for my XXXX checking account was stolen in the mail and cashed at Bank of America. I filed a Declaration of Unauthorized Endorsement with XXXX, who said they intend to get back to me ( and likely recoup my money ) in 90 days. However it is now XXXX and that hasn't happened. I have called both banks many times. XXXX says they are waiting on a response from Bank of America and Bank of America says they can not tell me the status of this claim. This is a very frustrating and very unfair experience.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: NY
Zip: 11217
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-04-13
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-04-13
Issue: Other features, terms, or problems
Subissue: Privacy issues
Consumer Complaint: In 2013, I XXXX XXXX entered Into a consumer credit transaction XXXX XXXX, bank of America NA which became serving provider a consumer credit transaction is a transaction in which a finance charge is involved. Pursuant to 15 usc 1605 is the sum of all charges in a consumer credit transaction, because I know the finance charge is the sum of all charges I was not expecting a bill, shortly after that I received a bill which is a violation of 15 usc 1692k, 15 usc 1692 b2 also the company failed to provide me with a right to rescind which is a violation of 15 usc 1635, also failed to provide me with option to opt out of all credit reporting 15 usc 6802, ( b ) Opt out ( 1 ) In general A financial institution may not disclose nonpublic personal information to a nonaffiliated third party unless ( A ) such financial institution clearly and conspicuously discloses to the consumer, in writing or in electronic form or other form permitted by the regulations prescribed under section 6804 of this title, that such information may be disclosed to such third party ; ( B ) the consumer is By willfully doing this XXXX XXXX has violated many laws according to truth and lending & fdcpa .Also all consumer credit transaction are not supposed be reported without my consent 15 usc 1681b permissible purpose company failed to provide me with opt notice which is a violation of Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. I attached my invoice and my license.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: TX
Zip: 76140
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-04-13
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-04-13
Issue: Fraud or scam
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Commencing on or about XX/XX/2019, I fell victim to two multi-layered scam operations run by XXXX XXXX XXXX which involved me making deposits for a total amount of XXXX USD from my XXXX XXXX account to Bank of America at the instructions of the scammers.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: TX
Zip: 759XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-04-13
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-04-13
Issue: Managing an account
Subissue: Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed
Consumer Complaint: Someone stole a check that I wrote and altered the payee and the amount. He/She either cashed it or deposited it into his/her Bank of America account XXXX Even though the check has very obviously and clearly been altered, Bank of America cashed it. My bank is trying to get the original check and funds back from Bank of America. It has been 6 months and this case hasn't been resolved.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: IL
Zip: 60651
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-04-13
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A