A Locksmith

(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)I do not accept this because as of 8:09am april 1st, 2016 I spoke to social security and they said my number wasnt issued prior to birth, and I was not deceased, and I was not a victim of any identity theft, so therefore I believe I have been lied to like others before so they can hold my money and gain an interest on it, because they told me it would take 6 to 12 weeks for it to go back to the IRS, I spoke with them also, and that is also untrue, my middle ground is I want them to give me my money back, they should not be allowed to do this to people who work hard for their money! I have two other account now cards, they can put it on one of those, thank you!

On February 20, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow to advise she was reading the terms and conditions of her account and noticed that she could not have a deposit over $10,000.00 post to the account.  The cardholder indicated that her tax refund was over $10,000.00 and she was not...

aware of the limits before she set up her direct deposit to the account.  The cardholder asked if it was any way that the deposit could be accepted. The agent advised the cardholder that the tax refund would reject as it exceeded the limit and would be reversed back to the sender within 72 hours. The cardholder indicated she had another account as well. The agent also advised the cardholder to contact the sender to see if they could split the direct deposit amongst two accounts so that it would not to exceed the $10,000.00 threshold.  The cardholder acknowledged.
On February 22, 2017 the cardholder contacted AccountNow regarding a tax refund that she was expecting that was more than $10,000.00.  The cardholder indicated that she has already contacted the Internal Revenue Service regarding her deposit.  The cardholder indicated that the deposit was going to be over the limit and wanted to know what our process was.  The agent advised that he currently did not have a notification of a deposit posting and advised the cardholder of the posting windows.  The cardholder indicated that the deposit was going to be over $10K.  The agent advised if the deposit was going to reject it would be at the same date and time it was due to post.  The cardholder wanted to know the deposit is rejected do we advise the Internal Revenue service of the rejection reason and the agent advised no. The cardholder confirmed the direct deposit posting windows with the agent and the call ended.
On February 23, 2017, an ACH direct deposit in the amount of $10,522.04 posted to the account.
On February 24, 2017, the account was restricted for further review due to the deposit had posted that surpasses the 10k threshold. In order for the cardholder to gain access to the funds the cardholder needed to provide verification documents to consist of a photo identification card, a social security card, a utility bill and verification of the deposit.
 
On February 25, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow regarding her account. The agent advised the cardholder that the deposit did not reject and that it posted to the account and in order to gain access to the funds verification documents were needed.  The agent advised the cardholder if she did not want to send documents the funds could be returned and the timeframe for the return was 6-12 weeks. The cardholder requested to speak with a supervisor as she didn’t understand why she needed to send in documentation to verify herself.  The supervisor advised the cardholder that because the deposit posted to the account it was subject for verification. The supervisor provided the cardholder with the upload website to provide the documents.  The cardholder stated that she felt it was against the law to request verification documents as she indicated that she did not have a bill in her name and that her social security card was damaged.  The agent advised the cardholder that she could send in a paystub as well for verification of address.  The cardholder then decided that she did not want to provide documents and requested that the funds be returned back to the Internal Revenue Service.  The supervisor advised the cardholder that a request to return the funds would be submitted and advised of the Internal Revenue Service return timeframe of 6-12 weeks. 
 
On February 27, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow regarding another card in her name. The agent advised the cardholder that there were no other active cards in her name. The agent then advised the cardholder to send documents for verification for this account and advised of the review timeframes. The cardholder called back and indicated that she opted not to send in documents and wanted the funds to be returned back to the Internal Revenue Service.
 
On February 28, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow several times regarding the funds on the account. The agent then advised the cardholder that a letter of indemnification was needed from the originator to return the funds.  The cardholder requested a supervisor.  The agent informed the supervisor that the prior agent advised her to send a letter of recall to have the funds returned and she was not sure of what that was.  A letter of recall was requested by the prior agent in error and coaching has been provided.  The cardholder indicated that she wanted the funds returned back to the Internal Revenue Service and for the account to be closed. The supervisor informed the cardholder that the account will be closed and a request has been put in for the funds to be returned. 
 
On March 1, 2017, the request to return the funds back to the Internal Revenue Service was processed.
 
On March 2, 2017, the funds in the amount of $10,522.04, was removed from the account.  The timeframe for the Internal Revenue Service is 6-12 weeks. The cardholder can contact the Wage and Investment Division of the Internal Revenue Service for follow-up.
 
On March 3, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow regarding the direct deposit.  The agent advised the cardholder that the funds had been removed for return.
 
On March 6, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow regarding the direct deposit. The caller indicated that she was the lawyer of the cardholder.  The agent advised the caller that the cardholder needed to authorize the lawyer to speak on her behalf. The cardholder authorized her lawyer Sherry Kettle to speak on her behalf.  The agent advised the lawyer that the funds have been removed for return back to the Internal Revenue Service as of March 2, 2017. The lawyer stated that they have spoken with the Internal Revenue Service and they indicated that the funds have not been received.  The agent initially stated the timeframe for the return was 72 hours, and then he corrected himself and advised that the timeframe for funds to be returned back to the Internal Revenue Service is 6-12 weeks. The lawyer stated that the Internal Revenue Service advised her that we should have returned the funds immediately.  The agent advised the lawyer that the Internal Revenue Service can take up to 6-12 weeks to update their records.  The agent offered to do a three way call with the Internal Revenue Service and the lawyer indicated that they have already confirmed that the funds have not been returned.  The agent advised that the reason the Internal Revenue has not received the funds yet is because the funds are returned by a batch check process and the timeframe can take from 6-12 weeks. The lawyer wanted to confirm that the account was closed and there were no other accounts attached to the cardholder.  The agent confirmed that there were no other cards. The cardholder did have a previous account established in 2007 with another AccountNow portfolio that is no longer in existence and the account is closed and purged from our system.
 
On March 7, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow regarding the return of the tax deposit.  The agent again advised the cardholder that the funds have been processed for return back to the Internal Revenue Service and the timeframe for the return is 6-12 weeks. The cardholder requested a supervisor, and the supervisor advised the cardholder of the Internal Revenue Service timeframe for processing returns.  The cardholder became escalated and a ticket was created for a customer care agent to contact the cardholder.  
 
On March 8, 2017, a customer care agent contacted the cardholder at the telephone number provided.  There was no answer and no option to leave a voicemail message.   The cardholder’s complaint was that she wanted the funds to be returned immediately back to the sender, however, the funds would have needed to be returned within 24 hours of them posting to the account.   The request to return the funds was not made until February 25, 2017 and again on February 28, 2017.  The agents provided the cardholder the option of providing verification documents and if verified she would not have to wait the Internal Revenue Service timeframes of 6-12 weeks, just the timeframes to review the documents and if valid the funds could be released to her.  The cardholder opted not to provide documents and the funds were returned per her request. The cardholder can contact the Wage and Investment Division of the Internal Revenue Service for follow-up.

Response:
August 09, 2017 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 cards. We do apologize for the inconvenience this may have caused you. This issue has been resolved as of August 11, 2017. The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted].Tell us why here...

In reviewing the customer account history, it appears that the customer experienced access issues on 3/29/16. We apologize for the inconvenience that the customer experienced.The monthly fee assessed on the customer account is $9.95. The March fee was assessed on 3/2/16. On 4/7/16 we called the...

customer to review the complaint and to advise that we have credited the account for the March monthly fee. The call was dropped and we called a second time. We were unable to reach the customer and we left a message. The customer may call us with any additional questions or concerns at [redacted]

On February 16, 2017, AccountNow issued a replacement card for card ending in 1857 due to notification of possible compromised card. The card ending in 1857 would remain active for up to 45 days. Once the replacement card is received by the cardholder it should have been activated which would...

cause for the old card ending in 1857 to close.  
On March 23, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow  and indicated that she was expecting  to receive an ACH deposit over $10k.The agent advised the cardholder that the deposit may be rejected due to our $10k threshold limit and if the deposit die post verification documentation may be requested. The cardholder acknowledged.
On March 24, 2017, AccountNow received an ACH deposit that surpassed the $10k threshold in the amount of $13,190.00. The account was restricted and verification documents were requested to include a photo identification card, a social security card, a utility bill and verification of the deposit received.
On March, 31, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow to inquire about the restriction on the account and the agent advised of the cardholder of the possible compromised card ending in 1857 and that a replacement card was issued, the agent also advised that verification documentation was requested due to the deposit that posted that surpassed the $10K threshold. The cardholder advised the agent that the replacement card was not received due to she had moved.  Later that day, AccountNow received a photo identification card and a Social Security Administration document. The Risk agent requested the cardholder provide a signed social security card, a utility bill and verification of the deposit.
From April 1, 2017 through May 02, 2017, AccountNow did not hear from the cardholder or receive any further documentation.
On May 3, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow for the balance on the account. The agent provided the cardholder with the account balance and the call ended.
On May 10, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow to advise that card her card was not working. The agent advised the cardholder that the account was restricted and that a social security card, a utility bill and verification of the deposit was still needed in order to remove the restriction and process a replacement card.
On May 16, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow to advise that they do not have a social security card to provide. The agent advised the cardholder to obtain a letter of indemnification from the originator of the deposit to recall the deposit.
On May 31, 2017, AccountNow received a social security card. The Risk agent requested a utility bill and verification of the deposit.
On June 2, 2017, Account Now received a utility bill and a 1095G form.  These documents were submitted to upper management for further review.
On June 6, 2017, AccountNow accepted and approved all documents as valid. The address was updated and a replacement card was processed for the cardholder. The cardholder should allow 5-7 days to receive the replacement card. The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted].

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/10/27) */
AccountNow account fees are disclosed within the Cardholder Agreement. The Cardholder Agreement is available on the AccountNow website and is provided to the customer with the AccountNow Visa card.
This customer has opened 5 AccountNow...

accounts since July 2013 and fees have been assessed on previous accounts. The fee assessed on the customer's current account was assessed based upon her activity and according to the Cardholder Agreement and will not be reversed.
To avoid future fees, the customer may, at her option, close the account.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/10/28) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Because they never charged me on my first deposit. I will just close the account. Fees are to high for poor service they provide.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2015/11/13) */
Account closed per customer request on 10/28/15.

On April 3, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccocuntNow and filed a dispute for four transactions that he indicated were unauthorized that occurred on 12/4/2016 with the merchant [redacted] $43.50, a bill  payment on 12/9/2016 with the merchant [redacted] $509.95 and on 2/8/17 with the...

merchant [redacted] for $110.14 and $108.54. The cardholder was advised to send in written notification of the dispute. The cardholder then requested to be transferred to the bill payment department regarding the 12/9/2016 transaction with [redacted] for $509.95.
 
On April 10, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow regarding the dispute status, the agent advised the cardholder that the dispute was still in process. 
 
On April 11, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow back offices on several occasions requested to speak with a representative.  A customer care manager spoke with the cardholder and advised that his dispute was in process and that a written notification was requested.  The customer care team emailed the cardholder the written notification. A dispute investigator reached out to the cardholder at the telephone number provided and a third party answered the telephone and advised that we had the wrong telephone number.
 
On April 12, 2017, a Risk investigator attempted to contact the cardholder again at a different telephone number and but the telephone number provided was not accepting calls and there was not an option to leave a voicemail message.
On April 13, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow to verify the dispute transactions and inquired if there was an update on the dispute. The agent advised that the dispute was still in processed. We later received the cardholder’s dispute written notification. AccountNow received the cardholder written notification.
 
On April 14, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow to see if we received the written notification. The agent advised the cardholder that it was received.
 
On April 14, 2017, AccountNow concluded its investigation and determined the following:
The disputed transactions took place between 12/4/2016 and 2/8/2017.
The cardholder has the card in his possession and has undisputed transactions occurring in between the disputed transactions.
The PIN was not reported as lost or compromised, yet there were not any PIN failures while the disputed transactions occurred.
The cardholder checked his account balance and recent transactions 31 times between 12/4/2016 and 2/21/2017 while the disputed transactions occurred from the telephone number ending in [redacted]. This telephone number is linked to another account for the cardholder under GreenDot Bank AccountNow.
The disputed Walmart transactions occurred at store #0787, the cardholder has six prior transactions at Walmart store #[redacted] since November 2016.
 
Based on the facts available to us, we do not find that an error has occurred. AccountNow mailed the cardholder the final dispute resolution letter.  The cardholder contacted AccountNow’s back office and the call was transferred to an investigator who advised the cardholder that the dispute was denied and advised him of the reasons. The cardholder was not happy with the resolution.  The dispute final resolution letter was mailed to the cardholder to the address on file. The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted].

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/08/25) */
The history for this customer shows that he applied four times for an account. On 7/5/15 and 8/3/15 applications were submitted but not approved due to invalid Social Security Numbers. A third application was denied on 8/3 for duplicate entry....

The customer's fourth application on 8/3/15 was approved and account XXXXXXXXXXXXX was opened.
We show that there are no transactions on account XXXXXXXXXXXXX. We tested the automated system and it is functioning properly.
On 8/11/15, a call was made to Mr. [redacted] at the telephone number listed on the account and a message was left for the customer. There has been no reply and a second call was placed on 8/25/15, however the telephone number on the account record is now disconnected. The telephone number provided in the complaint, (XXX) XXX-XXXX has a voicemail greeting announcing [redacted]'s Painting and Powerwashing as the telephone owner. A message was left on this telephone voicemail for Mr. [redacted] on 8/25/15.
We request the customer contact us at (XXX) XXX-XXXX so that we may address any remaining 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 $74.54 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 process. The merchant charged the cardholder twice. The agent advised the cardholder that the hold was due to release back into the account no later than August 10, 2017.  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 amount. When 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 history. We 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 90 days. You 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 $87.54 and the additional funds that were held in the amount of $74.54 were released back into the cardholders account.
Please note from August 09, 2017 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 cards. We do apologize for the inconvenience this may have caused you.  This issue has been resolved as of August 11, 2017. The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted].

On March 27, 2017 the cardholder contacted AccountNow to file a dispute for an unauthorized transaction with the merchant YIDIO LLC $23.88.  The cardholder was advised that since she was filing a dispute on a transaction that was unauthorized a replacement card would need to be issued. ...

The cardholder was advised that we could give a onetime access with the old card to funds but in order to process the dispute the card would need to be closed. The cardholder refused and requested to speak with a supervisor.  The supervisor advised the cardholder of the same and indicated that the card would have to be replaced so that no further unauthorized transactions could occur. The cardholder requested if a new card be issued that it be expedited and the fee waived. The cardholder failed the security questions and verification documents were requested.
On March 28, 2017 we received the cardholder’s identification card and an envelope. We requested that the cardholder provide a utility bill.
On March 29, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow regarding her document status and was advised to send in a utility bill.  The cardholder indicated that she did not have any bills.  AccountNow later received the cardholder’s paystub that showed a different address than the one that was on the previous envelope provided.  The agent again requested a current utility bill.  The cardholder indicated again that she had no other proof of address and requested that the funds be returned back to the originator.  The agent advised that a recall letter would be needed in order to return the funds.
On March 30, 2017, the cardholder provided a full paystub and advised that the paystub address was the current address.  The address was updated and a replacement card was issued to the cardholder at no charge.

We are unable to locate the account that is referenced in the complaint.On 3/29/16 we called and left a message for the customer.On 3/30/16 we placed a second call and we were unable to reach the customer.We require additional information to investigate this complaint. The customer may call us at...

[redacted]

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/12/14) */
The customer was requested to send verification for the 9/17/15, $97.50 deposit. On 11/27/15, the customer provided a listing of transactions. However, the documentation lacked the heading for the Financial Institution and there is no listing...

for the $97.50 transaction.
On 12/11/15 we called the customer at the telephone number provided in the complaint. We were unable to reach the customer and we left a voicemail message requesting a return call.
On 12/14/15, we placed a second call and the telephone is now disconnected.
In the absence of verification, we will return the funds to the deposit originator upon receipt of a written request. The request may be faxed to AccountNow at (XXX) XXX-XXXX.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/09/03) */
On 8/28/15, we spoke to the consumer Ms. [redacted]. Ms. [redacted] stated her tax preparer; Marline [redacted], has prepared her tax return for the past 4 years. The last 3 years Ms. [redacted] has received her tax refund without issue. Ms. [redacted]...

stated that her refund should have been deposited into her Bank of America account and the tax preparer opened the ReadyDebit account without her consent.
Ms. [redacted] stated Ms. [redacted] won't return her calls. Stated she has contacted the Internal Revenue Service regarding the fraud. Ms. [redacted] stated she had also filed a police report with the [redacted], CA police department.
This is a case of tax fraud. The ReadyDebit account was opened using consumer data that was not blocked. The tax refund deposit had no restrictions and met the deposit limit.
We have advised Ms. [redacted] that the account has been closed and there is no remaining balance. We advised that we can provide account records upon receipt of a court order. We offered to contact the [redacted] police department and provide our contact information. Ms. [redacted] provided the police report number and the [redacted] Police Department telephone number. On 8/28/15, we spoke to Detective Cursey of the [redacted] police department and provided our subpoena address and fax telephone number.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/07/21) */
A check for the remaining balance was submitted for processing on 7/14/15. The check will be mailed to the address on the account.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/07/23) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the...

response from the business.)
Account Now should be accountable for the overdraft fees and late fees that was caused by the delay in the funds. We are looking to receive an additional 250.000 dollars to cover those fees

On August 9, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow regarding her pending ACH deposit. The agent advised the cardholder that we are not showing anything pending at that time for an ACH deposit.
In review of the deposit history, On August 10, 2017, AccountNow received an ACH deposit in the...

amount of $424.00 from TWC-PAYCARD. As stated in the cardholder agreement funds from direct deposits will generally be available on the day the Bank receives the transfer or one day prior to the settlement date. 
 
AccountNow has confirmed that all ACH deposits have posted to the account on the settlement date provided in the NACHA file. The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted].Tell us why here...

On July 26, 2017, the cardholders account was blocked due to an ACH tax deposit received under the name of Robert Crisp in the amount of $5,792.02. AccountNow requested verification documents to include a photo identification card, a signed social security card and a utility bill listing her...

current address.
 
On July 28, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow regarding the block on the account.  The agent advised that the account had been blocked for further verification and advised the cardholder that she will need to provide verification documents to include a photo identification card, a signed social security card and a utility bill listing her current address. The agent advised the cardholder of the document review time once received can take up to 72 business hours. Later that day, AccountNow received a submission from the cardholder via the AccountNow upload portal. The cardholder submitted a photo identification card, a signed social security card and a mailer. Please be advised that AccountNow does not accept mailers as a form of address verification.
On July 31, 2017, AccountNow received a submission from the cardholder via the AccountNow upload portal. The cardholder submitted medical documents verifying her address.
Upon receipt of the cardholder’s complaint, August 7, 2017, AccountNow reviewed the cardholder’s concern and determined that we have received the sufficient amount of documentation needed for verification of the account. On August 7, 2017, the account has been reopened and we have made an attempt to contact the cardholder to provide further assistance; however, we were unable to leave a message. As a courtesy, AccountNow has reversed the monthly maintenance fee of $9.95 on August 7, 2017. The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted]Tell us why here...

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/12/02) */
The complaint does not identify the account number which received the deposit. On 11/24/15 a call was placed to the author of the complaint. Mr. [redacted] provided the name and account number related to the deposit and sent the letter described in...

his complaint. On 11/30/15, we advised Mr. [redacted] that we have directed our Bank to return the deposit via ACH (Automated Clearing House) to the originating financial institution. The reversal process can take up to three business days.
We consider the matter resolved. Additional questions may be directed to (XXX) XXX-XXXX.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 7, 2015/12/08) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
Our bank finally advised that we received the money back.

On May 26, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow and indicated that her brother made an ACH deposit to her card using her account number and routing number. The agent advised the cardholder of the timeframes for an ACH deposit to post is 3-5 business days.
On May 27, 2017, the cardholder...

contacted AccountNow in regards to an ACH deposit that she was expecting to post to her account. The agent advised the cardholder that we have not received any ACH Deposits at this time.  The cardholder then indicated she was trying to process a Western Union load using her account number and routing number. The agent advised the cardholder that when processing a Western Union cash load she would need to provide the merchant with the full card number and not the account number and routing number. The cardholder then requested to speak with a manager. The manager advised the cardholder in order to load funds through our cash loading partners such as Western Union, the full card number is needed, and they do not request the account and routing number. The manager went through the process on how to load cash deposits through our cash load partners.
As of May 30, 2017, AccountNow has not received any ACH deposit’s or cash loads on the cardholder’s account. The cardholder will need to contact the originator of the funds and follow up with them directly. The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted].Tell us why here...

On July 14, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow advising that the card ending in [redacted] was not received and a deposit was received in the amount of $122.36 from N.C. STATE UNIV. The cardholder advised that she had moved and requested to update the address and process a replacement card. The...

agent informed the cardholder that she would be required to answer security questions in order to process the request. While processing the address update with the agent, the cardholder failed the security questions and verification documents were requested to include a photo identification card and a utility bill listing her current address.
On July 20, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow requesting for an update on the documentation that the cardholder sent through email. The agent advised that we do not accept documentation through email and we can only accept them via the AccountNow upload portal or by fax.
On July 26, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow for an update regarding a new card replacement and was advised by the agent of the review timeframe of the documentation can take up 3 business days to review, once the documents are received.
On July 27, 2017, AccountNow received a submission from the cardholder via the AccountNow upload portal. The cardholder submitted an identification card and a bill. The bill received did not list the cardholder’s name. The bill was under [redacted], we cannot accept any bills for address verification that are not under the cardholder’s name.
Upon receipt of the cardholder’s complaint, on July 31, 2017, reviewed the cardholder’s concern to process a card to card transfer request to the cardholder’s current card ending in 7291. The cardholder acknowledge that card ending in 7291 was in her possession and agreed to the card to card transfer. As a courtesy, AccountNow has issued the cardholder the monthly maintenance of $9.95. The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted].Tell us why here...

I have filed a police report and opened an investigation with the federal reserve and the federal trade commission  on account now and won't settle for less then what they owe me! I'm done waiting and playing this "account was accessed 18 times from same IP" or "there's similar past charges so they were authorized" etc . Bottom line, I was 2,749 miles away from home during this so how can I be in both places especially to authorize an illegal charge? Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because:Sincerely,[redacted]