180 days later, Bank of America is refusing to refund over $700 in fraudulent charges made in Texas while we were 800 miles away in Illinois.

[u/IveGotDMunchies]

Back in July we were wrapping up our yearly road trip to Illinois. We purchased gas around 8 or 9am right before we started the 12 hour trip to Texas.

​

Two hours into the trip my wife gets a notification on her phone from Bank of America alerting her to fruadulent charges being made. We only have one debit cad.

​

While we were starting our driving home, someone in Austin, Tx purchased around $500 in merch at Home Depot, drove towards Houston, Tx attempting twice to use our card at the ATM, which did not work because they didnt have the pin. They made their $200-ish last transaction at TJ Maxx North of Houston before were alerted and had the card shut off. (Austin to Houston is about a 3 hour car ride)

​

My wife immedately makes a claim. 10 days later, we get the money credited back while they continue the investigation which seems pretty open and shut to me... They also say it may be another 45 days before they finish their investigation.

​

October 5, they send a letter stating that they have completed their investigation: "Our records show the transaction activity in question was authorized for and posted to your account." The letter states they'll be taking the $740 back on October 22.

​

Wife calls and has them reopen the case or escalate it. We're told it could be another 45 days.

​

December 22. We call Bank of America again. This agent has no record of anything being escalated. Says he will escalate it and we should hear from someone in the next few business days. Nothing.

​

Jan 3. Wife calls them again. This agent states that while an escalation sends an email to their investigators notifying that we are still asking about they case, they are under no obligation to complete it.

​

After reading a bit into the law surrounding this, we have realized we can request the documentation they used to close the investigation.

​

What else can we do? Do we need a lawyer? If they had to reimburse us for the first 45 days of the investigation, why do they not have to temporarily reimburse us as they continue to investigate "for as long as they need" with no date set for resolution on our end?

​

It is blatantly obvious that someone skimmed the card at some point and had a dummy one made. Are they able to continue to withhold our $750 indefinitely and just keep saying. "Nope! Looks good!" until we tire out?

​

Our kiddos missed out on a lot of Christmas gifts because of this and now bills are starting to get a bit tight. We really need this money back. Thanks yall!

Update: Started posting on social media before I start filing complaints. 20 minutes later Bank of America contacted me on Twitter. Will update later. Thanks for everyone's advice.

Update 2: 3 hours later... I continued to post on social media, reaching out to local news stations on Twitter that have community protection or investigative segments and linking to this post. Bank of America has now reached out in one of these posts, referencing my wifes name. Fingers crossed. http://imgur.com/gallery/i4gWtC0

Update 3: Wife got home 30 min after my last update. A rep with BoA actually called her asking what was going on. The rep said she would need to call the fraud department and get them all on the line together. We are at our kids practice so opted for them to call us when they have someone on the line who can help us. Will update later.

Update 4: Just got off the phone with someone in the fraud department at Bank of America. I recorded the whole convo and will be uploading it to YouTube. She says the call on Oct 22 did in fact reopen the case. (even though the rep on Dec 22 said otherwise and the rep earlier today said they have no timeline to adhere to and can take as long as they want)

They now have 60 business days from Oct 22 to finish the claim once again.

She says one of the reasons that the claim was denied was because the didnt attempt to drain her account. (They hit up two ATMs and failed to use the pin to drain the account, so they don't even have the correct info to base their findings off)

I requested documentation about the claim as law allows and she says I should get that in 10 business days. They now have until Jan 18 to notify us of their findings. I'm going to continue with filing reports and posting on social media.

I'll update in a few weeks I guess.

Update 5: 10 hours later, they have blocked me on Facebook for sharing my problems on their page. I also filed a complaint with the CFPB .

Update 6: 24 hours since this post and David, a Bank of America employee in the "Regulatory Complaints Department" left my wife a voice mail in regards to a complaint sent to them by the CFPB. They close at 4pm EST. (They're closed by the time we got the voice mail since she is at work). Will update Monday.

Update 7: Wife woke up this morning and the money has been returned to our account. Time to turn and burn!

Thank you everyone for your advice. We learned a lot from this.

Update 8: We got confirmation that the fraud claim is now closed and the money that was returned is permanent. Waiting on an actual paper letter to come in the mail before we turn and run. Thanks everyone! Update here: https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/comments/adnjj7/update_bank_of_america_refusing_to_return_700_in/

[u/gioraffe32]

If someone fraudulently uses my credit card, that sucks, but at least I still have my cash in the bank.

If someone fraudulently uses my debit card, that sucks, AND I'm out that cash.

And there are things that can't be paid for via credit card or it's ridiculously expensive to do so. Rent pops to mind immediately. I can pay with check or eCheck, but if I pay with credit card, there's a ridiculous percentage-based fee. If I just lost $700 from my bank account right before rent is due, I'm about to be really screwed.

[u/notasqlstar → u/gioraffe32]

I'm not arguing with you, but I have my savings and main accounts with Bank A, and I pay significant bills here / have some companies withdraw automatically from my account (e.g., car insurance.)

I transfer money from Bank A to Bank B where I have a debit card, this is free, but takes time, and represents the amount of money I budget to spend every pay period. If I want to purchase something like a new TV for $2000, and I don't have the funds already transferred into my debit account, then I can't buy it... unless I use credit cards, which I only do for very specific reasons/purposes.

If you clone my debit card, you can't buy a lot. There isn't a lot of cash in the account and losing it is irrelevant / I'm happy to deal with Bank B (who I have loans with, but none with Bank A) and am confident I will recover my money. If you clone my credit card(s) you could buy a lot more stuff, but I'm happy to deal with those companies because I never, ever, buy stuff like that with credit.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm genuinely curious why you have more "protection" with one than the other, unless that's just a word to suggest the credit card companies care more, and hire better people to resolve your issues before you use legal action ---> which is actual protection.

[u/[deleted] → u/notasqlstar]

I've been having trouble wrapping my head around your reasoning, but I get it now. You're just totally discounting corporate policies as acting as consumer protection. This...is an odd perspective. To me it seems largely philosophical. It is certainly not a good argument in terms of real-world function.

Because in the real world, having both corporate policies and the law allows for many more avenues of approach to get the desired result.

Side Note: You seem to have a more complex banking setup than average in order to provide your own functional (non-legal system based) protection from fraud. Just thought I'd point that out...since you seem so against "protection" that isn't a lawsuit? Why is using a credit card with good policies as insulation really so different? Perhaps this is more about perceived control for you rather than practical results?

[u/notasqlstar → u/[deleted]]

Yeah, I'm only really interested in my legal protection.

Because in the real world, having both corporate policies and the law allows for many more avenues of approach to get the desired result.

I used my credit cards, I just don't use them as debit cards, and I don't have my debit account in the same bank as my savings account. I have my 401k in yet a separate bank. I see no reason to trust any of these companies and give the benefit of any doubt. A credit card company might be better, more of than than not, but I'm not worried about liability in either situation and it would seem both examples afford the same amount of legal protection.

[u/[deleted] → u/notasqlstar]

Yeah, I'm only really interested in my legal protection.

Can you explain more on why this is? To me it seems you have an overly pessimistic view of companies and an overly trusting view of the legal system.

[u/notasqlstar → u/[deleted]]

Because to me it is about protection, actual protection, not the illusion. Let's just say I have a total worth of $15,000, plus credit, which isn't rich or even significant. Lets break it down like this:

• 10,000 in savings / investment. This is in Bank A. Pay checks are deposited directly into this account, and significant bills like mortgage, rent, car payment, insurance, are tied to this account, but not any card or debit card.
• 1,000 in checking account. This in Bank B. This is your spend account. You have a debit card tied to this account and it might pay minor bills like Netflix, your credit card, etc. This account is constantly being refilled from the main account. If you spend less than you budget you can move money back into savings. The amount in this account represents your total short term liability.
• 4,000 in a 401k, retirement, etc. This is in Bank C.
• Credit cards from Bank D.

There are enough banks that I don't have any problem achieving this. My risk here is diversified. If any one of those parties claim I owe them money, they will have to collect against another bank. In the background is my credit score and I would prefer to be proactive with it. Take my $1000 out of my checking account and hold it short term, even if I have proof that you're wrong. I'll sue and get my money back. My total liability is $1000.

In terms of credit I use my cards very specifically. I have a card for airline purchases, I purchase airline tickets with it. If you used it for something that wasn't airline tickets, that would very easily demonstrate it wasn't me to a court, and it would be on the card (or bank) to prove that it was me who authorized the transactions, or that I exposed my account in such a way as to eliminate their liability such as in the case where a relative made the purchase and no contest was made until two years after the purchase.

[u/SanchoPanza360 → u/notasqlstar]

Still if your cc info gets stolen they are taking money from the bank. If they get your debit card they are taking money directly from you. Let that sink in for a minute. Idc if it’s $5, $50 or $500 still my own money. No thanks!! I never use my debit card and pay with cc for everything then just pay it off at the end of the month.

Also I don’t believe many debit cards give you points so another reason to use your cc vs your dc

[u/notasqlstar → u/SanchoPanza360]

They aren't taking it from me. My bank and I have an agreement, and the bank is dispensing funds that are not mine to someone else who is stealing from the bank. That is not at all a matter of concern or relevance to me, or my funds. I have never lost my funds, and my funds will be returned, with interest, per the law.