A Locksmith

AccountNow accounts may be funded by deposits in the customer's name and all deposits are subject to verification and deposit limitsDeposits not in the customer's name or with details which do not match the customer account profile are subject to verification and may be returnedThe customer account was restricted for a deposit which originated from a state which is not the customer state on fileAfter a review of the customer documentation, we removed the restriction.On 3/29/we left a message for the customer.The customer may contact us at [redacted]

AccountNow GreenDot has done our due diligence by processing a chargeback with the merchant on behalf of the cardholder in an attempt to resolve the dispute with the merchantThe merchant has represented the chargeback and we are attaching the merchant representment documents for the cardholder’s viewing with the responseIf the USPS tracking number provided is incorrect, the cardholder can contact USPS to verify the tracking number or the merchant to confirm the tracking number providedWe apologize the cardholder has experienced inconvenience, however, the cardholder will need to resolve the matter with the merchant directly

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/08/07) */ The customer account was restricted when the customer reported unauthorized chargesIn these circumstances, our policy is to block the existing card from further use and to mail a replacement card to the address on fileIf the caller requests that the replacement card be sent to a new address, we ask verification questions to validate the customer identity Our research has determined that the caller failed to answer the questions correctlyIn order to safeguard the customer's account, our policy is to request documentation to verify the customerOn 8/4/15, customer documentation was approved We apologize that the customer's account was restricted during the time we worked with her to obtain valid documentationA replacement card was sent to the customer via express delivery on 8/5/15, with no fee assessed.The card was activated on 8/7/and the account is active

On June 28, 2017, upon receipt of the complaint a re-review was doneOur investigation and determined the following: The card is still in the cardholder’s possession/the card is with the cardholder There were no declined transactions due to invalid pin There were no pin updates/pin was not changed immediately prior to the dispute The funds were not “drained” immediately On July 3, AccountNow contacted the cardholder at the telephone number providedThe cardholder was informed that we had completed the re-review of the claim and the denial decision will standHe stated at the onset of that call that he did not want the reason for denial and that he did not want us to send him the reason for denial in writingThe denial decision will standThe cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted] .Tell us why here

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 7, 2015/07/21) */ The fees are charged as disclosedA surcharge free ATM means that the ATM will not charge an additional feeThere is still the fee to withdraw the fundsThis is disclosed in the terms

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/08/04) */ The fee for an over the counter cash advance is 3% The $represents the fee that was assessed for the $cash advanceThis is disclosed in the fee schedule available to all customersTherefore this fee is validCustomers have the option to withdraw cash from Automated Teller Machines or perform purchase cashback transactions for lower fees

On March 1, 2017, the cardholder received an ACH direct deposit in the amount of $The cardholder contacted AccountNow indicating that she lost her card and requested an expedited replacement card The cardholder failed the security questions and verification documents were requested to include a photo identification card and a utility bill On March 7, 2017, we reviewed the cardholder documents to include a photo identification card, a social security card and address verification The replacement card was expedited to the cardholder and the block was removed On March 9, 2017, the expedited card was received and activated On March 11, 2017, the account was blocked for further verification due to the card to card activityWe requested the cardholder provide a photo identification card, a social security card, a utility bill and the name of the recipient of the card to card transfer for a final checkBecause the cardholder provided her photo identification card and a bill on March 7, 2017, we only needed the cardholder to verify the name of the recipient On March 15, 2017, we received the cardholder’s verification of address and still needed card to card transfer activity verification On March 16, 2017, we received verification of the card to card transfer activity and the account was reopened On March 17, 2017, the account was blocked again for further verification of the card to card activityThe cardholder contacted AccountNow to inquire about the card status and the agent advised the card had been blocked again for the same reason The cardholder was upset and the agent submitted a ticket to find out if the block was in error or if the prior documents would suffice The account was reinstated On March 18, 2017, the account was blocked again for further verification of the card to card activityThe account continued to get blocked as once all documents were received a final check should have been issued, instead the agent continued to open the account On March 20, 2017, we provided the cardholder with a one-time access to funds before permanently closing the account and issuing a final expedited check for the balance of $via UPS due to the inconvenience the cardholder experiencedThe UPS tracking number is [redacted] and the check was delivered on Mar 24, The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted]

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/05/27) */ We did conduct an investigationUnder Regulation E, we are not required to obtain copies of the receipts in order to complete an investigation We provided the facts that we used in arriving at our decision to the consumer Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2015/05/28) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) This business sent me a decision days after my claim in the letter with the decision it says I can request documents that were used to investigate this matter however I never received anything except a call from a risk specialist telling me since I had my card in my possession I was aware of the fraud charges which is totally incorrect as the other times I had this fraud issue I always had my card but this time I feel as though this company did not investigate as they won't show me proof as they advised I can request when sending the decision I want proof I made these charges as I did NOT and they are allowing a the if to just steal my money and get away with it Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 9, 2015/06/09) */ The facts related to the decision regarding the claim filed, have been mailed Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (3000, 13, 2015/06/15) */ ***Document Attached [redacted] My clock in information I work at [redacted] plaza [redacted] floor [redacted] XXXXX portal.ADP.com my username is [redacted] Welcomelook at my clock in times for 4/as bank says I made charges this day it is impossible

Response: August 09, through August 10, 2017, AccountNow experienced an external and internal outage of all programs including AccountNow’s online website, automated system and SMS text alerts via a mobile telephone numberDuring the outage listed above, AccountNow customers were still able to use their prepaid debit cardsWe do apologize for the inconvenience this may have caused youThis issue has been resolved as of August 11, The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted] .Tell us why here

Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution is satisfactory to meThank you!Sincerely, [redacted] ***

On April 28, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow and filed a dispute indicating there were unauthorized transactions on her accountThe agent filed the dispute and issued a replacement cardThe agent advised the cardholder to provide written notification regarding the disputeLater that day the cardholder submitted her written notification On May 2, 2017, an AccountNow investigator concluded its investigation and determined the following: The cardholder is in possession of the card The dispute was filed for transactions on April 20, 2017, with THE GENERAL for $and ATM transaction at DAVENPORT-F.C LVD DAVENPORT FL for $ There were previous undisputed ATM transactions at DAVENPORT-F.C LVD DAVENPORT FL since January 13, and of those transactions were for $ The disputed ATM transaction was PIN-based and there were no PIN failures There was a POS-transaction at CITY OF DAVENPORT GOV for $on April 20, and minutes after the disputed ATM transaction at DAVENPORT-F.C LVD DAVENPORT FL at 07:CST With the facts available to us, it appears that no error has occurred On May 4, 2017, the dispute final resolution letter was mailed to the cardholder On May 5, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow regarding the dispute denial, and the agent submitted a callback request to provide further details On June 8, 2017, an AccountNow investigator reached out to the cardholder at the telephone number provided and advised the cardholder of the dispute denial reasonsThe cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted]

On 4/5/we advised the customer that a one-time courtesy credit would be providedThe customer account was credited for $on 4/5/

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 8, 2015/12/11) */ On 11/11/15, the customer reported a lost card and requested a replacement be mailed to a new addressThe customer was required to answer security questions before the address was updated and the customer failed to answer security questions correctlyThis security failure caused a restriction to be placed on the customer account On 11/12/15, the customer stated that she had lost her card, however she did not want a replacementShe requested that the two paycheck deposits that posted to her account and which belong to a third party, be returned to the third party's employerWe advised the customer that her account no longer held the full amount and that a letter from the Employer written on the employer's company letterhead, describing the deposits, and requesting their return, was required On 11/16/15, we advised the customer that no employer letter had been received On 11/18/15, the customer called and requested a replacement cardWe advised the customer that due to her failure to answer security questions correctly, and her request to change the address on the account, we require a photo ID to verify her identity and a bill if her address was to be updated On 11/18/15, we received the customer's photo ID, however no bill was receivedThe customer stated the card should be mailed to her current address and a card request was processedThe standard delivery timeframe for a replacement card is 5-business days On 11/20/15, the customer called to request the status of her replacement card and was provided with the estimated delivery timeframe of 11/25/ On 11/30/15, the customer called and stated that her card had not been received and requested a replacement card to a different addressWe advised the customer that an address change required a bill as verification and the customer refused to provide On 12/2/15, the customer called and requested the status of the employer deposit recall letterWe advised the customer that no employer letter had been received On 12/2/15, we received a handwritten letter from the paycheck owner requesting return of his paychecks to his employerWe advised the customer that the letter was not sufficient and that we required an employer letter as previously described On 12/4/15, we received a handwritten letter from the employerIt did not meet the requirements and we advised the customer that the letter must be on the employer letterhead (stationary) On 12/8/we called the customer at the telephone provided in the complaintThe telephone number is disconnectedThe telephone number on the customer account is the same numberWe called the Community Center telephone number on the fax coversheet that the customer submitted and we were unable to reach the customer, however we did leave a message for the customer at the Community CenterWe were successful in locating a telephone number for the Employer and we described the letter format requirement for the return of their employee deposits On 12/9/15, the customer called and requested a replacement card and address changeThe customer was advised that an address change required a bill with the new addressThe customer provided the bill, the address was updated and a replacement card was processed as an expedited request with a delivery timeframe of days On 12/9/15, AccountNow obtained a letter from the employer of the deposit owner requesting return of the paycheck deposits On 12/10/15, we credited the customer account at our expense and we then removed the entire balance which represented the two deposits belonging to the third party and returned the two deposits electronically to the third party deposit owner's employerWe advised the employer that the funds would be returned electronically within days On 12/10/15, we closed the account The customer may contact us at (XXX) XXX-XXXX with any questions

On August 9, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow GreenDot regarding a merchant transaction double hold that was placed on his account in the amount of $from Fado Chicago LLC The cardholder indicated that he only made one purchase for $74.54, and agent advised the cardholder of the merchant hold processThe merchant charged the cardholder twiceThe agent advised the cardholder that the hold was due to release back into the account no later than August 10, Per the cardholder agreement listed under the section titled, “Money On Your Card May Be Held Until a Transaction is Completed” indicates the following: When you use your Card to pay for goods or services, certain merchants may ask us to pre-authorize the transaction in advance and may estimate the final purchase amountWhen you use your Card at an ATM or for a teller cash withdrawal transaction, we generally pre-authorize the transaction in advance (including all applicable fees)When we pre-authorize the transaction, we will place a “hold” on your Card’s funds for the amount indicated by the merchant, and this transaction will show as “pending” in your transaction historyWe also may add an amount for certain merchants to ensure that sufficient funds will be available to cover the final transaction amount (such as to cover a tip at a restaurant)Transactions at certain merchants that preauthorize high dollar amounts, especially rental car companies and hotels, may cause a “hold” on your available balance for up to daysYou will not be able to use the money on your Card that is “on hold.” We will release any remaining amount when the transaction finally settles On August 10, 2017, the transaction from Fado Chicago LLC settled on the account for $and the additional funds that were held in the amount of $were released back into the cardholders account Please note from August 09, through August 10, 2017, AccountNow experienced an external and internal outage of all programs including AccountNow’s online website, automated system and SMS text alerts via a mobile telephone number During the outage listed above, AccountNow customers were still able to use their prepaid debit cardsWe do apologize for the inconvenience this may have caused you This issue has been resolved as of August 11, The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted]

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/05/05) */ The cardholder was sent a new cardA dispute for three transactions was opened and the investigation into the matter is ongoingThe fees stand as disclosed Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 14, 2015/05/15) */ The representative told me I will be contacted within hrs I have another hrs to go haven't heard back from them yet also requested a transaction summary to be sent to email but representative hasn't sent yet Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 16, 2015/05/19) */ We mailed the basis for our decision to the customer on 5/14/ Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (4200, 18, 2015/05/23) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I feel that the decision was wrongfully decided I've called on several occasions to speak with someone and am told they willCall me back that they don't see where I have a claim and that they shouldn't make a decision based on not being able to get in contact with me they should try to contact more than once and have s direct extension I can call back I need my money I don't have any to give s way

The customer account referenced in the complaint was opened in April On 2/3/the account was restricted by caller request in the AccountNow customer centerOn 2/3/16, we received a second call and the customer stated that he had not performed the transactionThis indicates that multiple callers are contacting AccountNow with the customer's information and accessing the customer accountDocumentation is required when there are multiple callers to verify the customer's identity and address.We received several additional customer calls on 2/3/and after advising the caller that documentation was required, the caller hung up.On 2/22/we received documentation which was incompleteOn 2/26/we received documentation which was incompleteOn 3/2/we received documentation which was incomplete.On 3/15/we received the required documentation and we contacted the customerThe customer stated that he had closed the account by mistakeWe advised the customer that his account was being reopenedOn 3/16/the customer accessed his funds

On March 1, 2017, the cardholder ordered a replacement card On March 4, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow, and was given one time access to her funds while awaiting for the replacement card On March 6, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow requesting a card to card transfer to another account as the new card has not been received The agent advised the cardholder to allow for the new card to be received as it was still within the timeframes On March 13, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow for the status of the replacement card ordered on March 1, The cardholder provided the cardholder with the timeframes to receive the card On March 15, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow for the status of the replacement card, the agent advised the card was still in process On March 20, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow for other options of paying her rent and accessing the funds as the replacement card still had not been receivedThe agent advised the cardholder that she could pay via ACH debit On March 21, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow and requested a replacement card be expedited The cardholder failed the security questions and the agent advised expediting the card would not be an optionThe agent processed a replacement card for delivery and the $replacement card fee was assessed On March 22, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow regarding the account balance The cardholder requested that the second $replacement card fee be waived since the original replacement card was not receivedThe agent advised that the replacement card fee was valid and the cardholder requested to speak with a supervisorThe supervisor reversed the $replacement card fee as a courtesy Upon receipt of the complaint, AccountNow Risk department attempted to contact the cardholder at the telephone number provided so that we could process a courtesy card to card transfer while the cardholder waited for the new replacement card, but there was no answer and a voicemail message was left On March 23, 2017, as a courtesy a card to card transfer in the amount of $was successfully processed to the cardholders requested active account On March 27, the replacement card ending in [redacted] was received and activated The cardholder has been actively using the cardThe cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted]

On August 16, 2017, AccountNow received a deposit in the amount of $4,from IRS TREAS AccountNow temporarily restricted the account requesting for a photo identification card, a social security card and a utility bill listing his current address for further verification Later that day, AccountNow received a photo identification card, a social security card and a utility bill via our upload portal On August 09, through August 10, 2017, AccountNow experienced an external and internal outage of all programs Due to this outage it has caused a few days delay in review of our cardholder’s documentation submitted for review On August 22, 2017, AccountNow reviewed the photo identification card, a social security card and a utility bill received and the account was reinstatedWe do apologize for any inconvenience this may have cause Mr***The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted]

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/05/04) */ A new card has been received and activated

On July 29, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow and filed a dispute indicating transactions were unauthorized On July 31, 2017, we received the cardholder’s written notification On August 3, 2017, an AccountNow investigator concluded its investigation and determined the following: There were no declined transactions due to invalid PIN, during the disputed transactions occurred Card in possession, PIN not mentioned during the dispute intake call There were no PIN updates, PIN was not changed immediately prior to the dispute Funds were not drained immediately There were not any attempted card present transactions made on the card after it was closed, which indicates the user of the card was aware the card was blocked without attempting a transaction Based on the facts available to us, we do not find that an error has occurred On August 4, 2017, the dispute final resolution letter was mailed to the cardholder The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted] .Tell us why here