A Locksmith

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/12/03) */
On 11/19/15, customer verification was required due to the receipt of a deposit in the name of an individual other than the customer name. The account was restricted and the customer was advised that copies of the customer's current photo...

identification, social security card, recent utility bill and documentation from the third party authorizing credits in their name to the account was required.
On 11/20/15 the customer documentation was reviewed and the restriction was removed.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/11/23) */
On 10/11/15, the customer called AccountNow to add a second name to her account. The customer account had a $0.00 balance at the time. The customer was advised that a fee was $10.00 was assessed for the manufacture of a Visa card with the second...

cardholder name and that her account must have funds in order to pay the fee.
On 10/13/15, the customer funded the account and called AccountNow and requested that the second name be added to her account and a Visa card for the second name to be created and sent to her. The customer was advised of the $10.00 fee and the 7-10 day timeframe for the Visa card to be delivered. The second name was then added to the account and the fee was assessed.
On 10/29/15, the customer called AccountNow and asked about deposit capabilities for the second cardholder and was advised that the second cardholder could make deposits into the account.
On 10/31/15, the customer called AccountNow and asked for the second customer name to be removed from the account and reported that the second card had never been received. We advised the customer that her account would need to be closed because the card was lost and we offered to send replacement cards. The customer declined the offer and hung up.
On 11/12/15, the customer called AccountNow and requested a refund for the $10.00 fee that was assessed to add a second name and generate a second Visa card and for the $8.00 credit balance on her account. We advised the customer that a credit for the fee could not be provided, however we would issue her a replacement card for the second name. The customer hung up.
On 11/18/15, our review of the 11/12/15 call indicates that we did not clearly advise the customer that her account was restricted due to the lost card. We also failed to clarify that the customer's account was not permanently closed and we did not provide the customer with the option to access her funds.
On 11/18/15 we called the customer at the telephone number provided in the complaint. We were unable to reach the customer and there was no voicemail option. We sent an email to the address provided in the complaint and we have not received a reply.
We request the customer contact us at (XXX) XXX-XXXX in order to make arrangements for her credit balance to be provided to her and to assist her by issuing replacement cards or closing the account.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/11/25) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
All you did was send me another card that the funds were not even available on. How was that solving the problem? And no card has EVER COME IN MY HUSBAND'S NAME, still a waste of $10.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 10, 2015/12/03) */
The customer has accessed her credit balance and the account has been closed with a $0.00 balance.
On 12/2/15 a call was placed to the customer at the new telephone number provided to address her complaint rebuttal. We were unable to reach the customer and a message was left requesting the customer contact AccountNow. The customer may call us at (XXX) XXX-XXXX.

The customer filed a dispute on 3/10/16 for $180.00. Our investigation determined that a $200.00 deposit was posted to the customer account on 3/8/16 and the disputed ATM withdrawal for $180.00 occurred 39 minutes later. The disputed transaction is PIN based , the customer has possession of the...

card, and there are no pin failures. There were no balance inquiries and the disputed $180.00 transaction almost depleted the balance. Based upon the facts available to us, it appears that no error occurred and the claim was denied. On 3/22/16 we mailed the customer a Dispute Denial letter.On 3/24/16 we returned a call to the customer and we provided the dispute denial reasons.Based upon the facts available to us, we stand behind the denial reason.The customer may contact us at [redacted] with any additional information or questions.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/09/18) */
On 9/14/15, we spoke to [redacted] in the Accounting Department at the hotel W Chicago-City Center. Mr. [redacted] confirmed an authorization hold was placed on an account belonging to [redacted] on 7/31/15. The $200.00 authorization...

hold was placed on the account for incidental hotel charges, should any occur. Mr. [redacted] stated that he had advised the customer that the hold would be released in 7-10 business days and the full $200.00 amount restored to Mr. [redacted]'s account if there were no charges. A review of Mr. [redacted]'s AccountNow account shows that there are no current authorization holds and the hotel has not posted a debit to Mr. [redacted]'s account.
We contacted Ms. [redacted] and she advised that Mr. [redacted] is her fiancé and he accompanied her during the stay at the hotel W Chicago-City Center. We advised Ms. [redacted] that authorization holds can be placed on accounts by merchants. This is described in the Cardholder Agreement. The duration of an authorization hold is based upon the transaction type. The duration of the hold for a hotel is 10 business days.
We advised Ms. [redacted] that there are no authorization holds from the hotel W Chicago-City Center at this time. Ms. [redacted] stated Mr. [redacted] believed $200.00 was still being held and unavailable to him.
On 9/15/15, we spoke to Mr. [redacted] and advised him that there are no current authorization holds on his account and based upon the 10 business day hold, the $200.00 authorization placed on his account by hotel W Chicago-City Center, would have expired on 8/14/15.
We reviewed the transactions on the account with Mr. [redacted] from 7/30/15, the day before the $200.00 authorization hold and after. Mr. [redacted] requested we speak to Ms. [redacted] and we reviewed the transactions with Ms. [redacted]. We advised Ms. [redacted] that she and Mr. [redacted] may review transaction history through the AccountNow customer center. The Customer Center will display all credits and debits that have posted to Mr. [redacted]'s account. If they identify a discrepancy, they are encouraged to contact AccountNow at (XXX) XXX-XXXX.
At this time, we consider the issue resolved.

On 1/13/16 we received notice of a possible compromise of the customer Visa card number. To protect the customer's funds, we issued replacement cards. The replacement cards were mailed to the customer address on file.On 3/9/16 the customer updated their address and reported non-receipt of the...

replacement cards. We advised the customer that we would issue replacement cards to the new address. On 3/10/16 replacement cards were mailed.On 3/10/16 the customer requested one-time courtesy access to their account, however the customer was unable to verify the card number in her possession. On 3/11/16 the customer requested free expedited delivery of a replacement card. We advised the customer that expedited delivery was a customer expense and the customer declined expedited delivery.On 3/14/16 the customer received the replacement cards.We apologize for any inconvenience the customer experienced.

On March 23, 2017, the account was restricted for further review due to an ACH direct deposit posted that caused the account to exceed the $10K threshold. Verification documents were requested to include an identification card, a social security card and a bill.
On March 27, 2017, we received...

the cardholder’s illegible (due to blurriness) photo identification card, illegible (due to blurriness) social security card and a utility bill. We requested that the cardholder provide clear copies of the verification documents provided.
On April 13, 2017, we received the cardholder’s illegible (due to blurriness) photo identification card, blurred social security card that we will accept as we can make out the information and the social security letter.  We attempted to contact the cardholder at the telephone number provided but there was no answer and a voicemail message was left.  We contacted the cardholder a second time and advised him that we need a clear copy of the photo identification card. The cardholder indicated that this is as clear as he can get the documents as it is old.  As an exception we advised the cardholder that we will accept the photo identification card but that he also needs to maintain a balance below $10k, so that the account will not get restricted for being over the limit in the future. The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted].

On March 22, 2017, the cardholder received an ACH tax deposit in the amount of $7392.00. The cardholder’s account was later blocked due to excessive purchase cash back activity. 
On March 23, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow due to she was unable to use the card.  The agent...

advised the cardholder that the account was blocked due to the excessive cash back activity and verification documents were needed to include an identification card and a current bill.  The cardholder’s date of birth on file was also incorrect.  The cardholder was given the upload site address to send the documents as well as a copy of the cardholder agreement was emailed to the cardholder.
We received the cardholder’s illegible identification card and a bill showing a different address that was on file. We requested that the cardholder provide a clear copy of the phot identification card.
On March 24, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow for the status of her documents and was advised that we still needed a clear copy of the photo identification card.
On March 25, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow regarding sending the clear photo identification card.  The cardholder indicated she did not want to send it via fax as the document comes out too dark.  The cardholder was provided with the upload site to send in the documents.
On March 27, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow and stated that she was having an issue with the upload site.  The cardholder was provided with the Customer Care email to send her documents.   The document was received by Customer Care and forwarded to the Risk Department for review.
On March 28, 2017, the cardholder contacted ACcountNow and requested that the deposit be returned back to the Internal Revenue Service.   The cardholder’s documents were reviewed to include a clear copy of the photo identification card and the block on the account was removed. The agent advised the cardholder that the block was removed. 
On March 29, 2017, the cardholder contacted AccountNow to see what the cash out options on the account were.  The agent advised the cardholder of the Cash Advance options.  The cardholder has depleted the account to the balance of $0.00. The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted].

On September 1, 2016, the cardholder contacted AccountNow regarding an ACH debit in the amount of $60.00 from GC Services that was expected to debit from the account on 8/30/2016. The agent advised the cardholder that a transaction for this amount had not posted nor was there a pending...

transaction in the amount of $60.00. The agent asked the cardholder if the transaction was to be made as an ACH debit using the account number and routing number or was her card used. The cardholder stated the transaction should come off of the card. The agent advised the cardholder that a three way call could be made to the merchant to inquire about the transaction.  The cardholder called the merchant on another line and placed the call on speaker so that the agent could hear the call.  The cardholder explained to the merchant that the transaction had not posted to her AccountNow account and wanted to confirm that the transaction was in process.  The merchant advised that the payment was made using the account number and routing number and gave the generic check number of 9501 for the ACH debit. The agent advised the cardholder that the current balance was $111.71, and to allow a few days for the ACH transaction to post. The agent also advised the cardholder to keep the $60.00 available in her account so that the transaction would not decline.  The cardholder acknowledged.
 
On September 8, 2016, the cardholder contacted AccountNow and was concerned that the ACH transaction of $60.00 had not posted to her account.  Her scheduled maintenance fee of $9.95 was due to post on September 9, 2016 and she wanted to make sure there were enough funds in her account to cover the $60.00 transaction. The agent advised the balance was $64.04 at the time of the call and that the monthly maintenance fee of $9.95 would be deducted from the balance on September 9, 2016.
 
On September 9, 2016, the cardholder contacted Account Now claiming that the merchant GC Services attempted to debit the transaction on 08/30/2016 or $60.00 and that AccountNow declined the transaction. Because of the declined transaction the cardholder was requesting the $9.95 monthly maintenance fee to be reversed. The agent advised that we do not see that the merchant attempted a transaction and we show no declined transactions.  The agent advised that the last transaction on the account from GC Services for $60.00 was on July 30, 2016. The cardholder insisted that we dishonored the transaction and requested a reversal of the monthly fee to make things right.
 
On September 12, 2016, AccountNow’s Customer Care Research team received a ticket regarding the customer’s request to reverse the $9.95 monthly maintenance fee. Although we confirmed that there were no declined transactions on our end we reversed the $9.95 monthly maintenance fee as a courtesy.  As of September 20, 2016, an ACH debit in the amount of $60.00 still had not posted to the account.  AccountNow contacted the cardholder at the number provided but we were unable to reach them and left a message.  We have notated the account to provide the account number and routing number to the cardholder in the event the merchant had the incorrect account number and routing number which caused the transaction to decline on the merchants end.
 
The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted].

the ATM location of [redacted] in the amount of $502.00, plus the $2.50 ATM fee. The agent filed the unauthorized dispute and advised the cardholder to submit the written notification. Later this day, AccountNow received the cardholder’s written notification.
On August 3,...

2017, an AccountNow investigator concluded its investigation and determined the following:
The card is still in the cardholder’s possession.
There were no declined transactions due to invalid PIN, during the disputed transaction occurred.
There were no PIN update, PIN was not changed immediately prior to the dispute. Funds were not drained immediately.
Based on the facts available to us, we did not find that an error has occurred.
On August 7, 2017, the dispute final resolution letter was mailed to the cardholder. Later that day, the cardholder contacted AccountNow in regards to an update on the dispute, the agent advised that the dispute was denied.
Upon receipt of this complaint on August 14, 2017 from the Revdex.com and FRB, AccountNow has re-reviewed the cardholder’s dispute and determined the following:
The disputed transaction occurred in Canton, GA but the cardholder resides in Chalmette, LA.
The cardholder has no prior activity in the state of Georgia.
There were balance inquiries made on the card while the disputed transactions occurred and there were declined transactions made on the card after it was blocked.
The card was then attempted to be used at an ATM in Florida on August 10, 2017, after the card had already been shut down.
It appears the card was skimmed due to being used in multiple states.
This is the cardholder’s initial dispute and has been a direct deposit customer since 2015. We do not have chargeback rights on card present transactions.
Based on these facts we have issued the cardholder a permanent credit in the amount of $502.00 and the ATM fee of $2.50 on August 15, 2017. The investigator contacted the cardholder at the telephone number provided and informed the cardholder of AccountNow’s decision to overturn her dispute. The cardholder was satisfied with the resolution. The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted]Tell us why here...

On August 18, 2017, AccountNow received a call back from Ms. [redacted], she requested to close the account and have a check processed to her address on file. We expedited her a check with the remaining balance of $279.33 on August 18, 2017. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused you. The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted].

On March 1, 2017, the cardholder received an ACH direct deposit in the amount of $8810.03. 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 activity. We 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 check. Because 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 activity. The 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 activity. The 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 $1318.97 via UPS due to the inconvenience the cardholder experienced. The UPS tracking number is[redacted] and the check was delivered on Mar 24, 2017. The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted].

On 4/5/16 we advised the customer that a one-time courtesy credit would be provided. The customer account was credited for $25.00 on 4/5/16.

On July 31, 2017, the account was restricted due to cash load verification for an attempted cash deposit in the amount of $1,012.67.  AccountNow requested for a photo identification card and the cash load receipt.
On August 24, 2017, AccountNow received a direct deposit in the amount of...

$1,283.36 from DEVEREUX.  The cardholder contacted AccountNow later this day to inquire why the card was being declined when purchases were attempted. The agent escalated this issue to our Risk department and the restriction was removed.
Upon receipt of this complaint, the cardholder has been using the card successfully since August 24, 2017. The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted].

On August 23, 2017, the account was restricted for further review of the tax deposit in the amount of $1,764.00.  In order for the cardholder to gain access to the funds we requested a photo identification card, a social security card and a utility bill.   Later that day, the cardholder...

contacted AccountNow in regards to the restriction on the account and the agent advised the cardholder to submit a photo identification card, a social security card and a utility bill.   On August 26, 2017, we received the cardholder’s photo identification card, a social security card and a partial utility bill. The agent requested for a full current utility bill. On August 31, 2017, AccountNow received a full utility bill and the account was reopened. As of August 31, 2017, the cardholder is actively using the card. The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at [redacted]. Tell us why here...

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/05/08) */
We have been unable to reach the cardholder at any of the numbers that we have available to us. We have submitted a check request to mail a check for the balance to the address that we have on file.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7,...

2015/05/11) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
They have not called me or sent me mail. They do have my phone number, and when I call I still get the run around. They don't want to give me my money. The longer it stay there they get the month service fee
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2015/05/19) */
A check was requested as stated in the complaint response. A total of $29.85 in monthly fees was reversed before the check was processed. The account remains closed so there will not be any additional fees applied nor deposits accepted.
Final Consumer Response /* (2000, 11, 2015/05/22) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
I got a check

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 me. Sincerely, [redacted]

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/05/27) */
The claim was filed in our office on 5/11/15. We asked for written confirmation of the error, which as of 5/27/15, has not been returned. If the written confirmation is not returned within 10 business days, under regulation E, we may extend...

our investigation to 45 days without issuing provisional credit. This is explained in detail in the terms and conditions.
The investigation was however completed today and ruled in favor of the customer. We did not issue provisional credit, instead we issued final credit. The claim is finalizing and final credit will be applied to the card account by the end of business 5/27/15 and all applicable notifications will be mailed.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/08/04) */
On 7/20/15 the customer reported an unauthorized ACH (automated clearing house) debit transaction for $623.67 that posted to her account on 4/6/15. Our policy when we receive a report of an unauthorized ACH transaction, is to close the...

customer account to prevent additional unauthorized transactions. The account was closed on 7/20/15 and we provided the customer with the reason for our policy.
Also on 7/20/15, we opened a dispute to research the unauthorized transaction. On 7/23/15, we reopened the account and the customer removed the remaining funds with the exception of $1.27. We also sent account statements to the customer as she requested.
A review of the disputed $623.67 transaction with the customer identified this debit as a transaction that she had initiated on behalf of her son.
A check for the remaining $1.27 balance on the customer's account has been sent to the customer. Checks may take up to 3 weeks to receive.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/08/05) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I never disputed a transaction in that amount. I disputed a transaction in the amount of 353.30 on 7/13/15 and no the one for 30.00 that was also in July. So I have no idea where they are getting the information from butane if they had people who spoke English they would not have these kind of problems. And I called to ask where a transaction was made to and NOT to dispute the charge but when I asked who the merchand was they took hat as an unauthorized charge and closed my account and now I am is missive over 1400 direct deposit and can not pay bills because they closed the account because I inquired about a transaction and told them I did not want account closed and they took it upon themselves to say I was reporting an unauthorized transaction when in fact I was just inquiring about transaction.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 14, 2015/09/04) */
We have no record that shows that the customer has called at any time after 7/23/15. On 8/11/15, a telephone message was left for the customer at (XXX) XXX-XXXX. A direct contact telephone number was provided. We have no record of the customer returning this call. On 8/27/15, a call was placed to the customer at the telephone number; XXX XXX-XXXX. The customer could not be reached and a message with a direct employee telephone number was left for the customer. A second call was placed on 8/27/15 to the customer at the telephone number listed on the AccountNow account; (XXX) XXX-XXXX. That telephone number is disconnected. The customer may also contact us at (XXX) XXX-XXXX.
The customer claim for the $353.30 and $30.00 transactions was denied based upon the facts available to us; the customer provided her account number to the merchant CRAS NBS. The customer did not contact AccountNow prior to 7/20/15 to advise us to block transactions to CRAS NBS.
On 7/28/15, two denial letters were sent to the customer regarding the $353.30 and the $30.00 disputed transactions.
Based upon the facts available to us, denial of the claim stands.
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 16, 2015/09/07) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I did NOT provide my account number to CRAS and the transaction in NOT in my name and there is NOT anyone else listed as an authorized user on MY account. I authorized a charge from CRAS in February and that is it! I NEVER gave them my account number again and I believe that the first time I used a debit card and NOT an account number and never gave them an account number. I have NEVER received any denial letters or anything in the mail from this company. I do not wish to speak to anyone from this company as they everytime I call I get someone that speaks broken English and I have no wish to speak to someone that can't spell English. That I believe was the problem I. The first place.

Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because:
Company did finally refund the dispute amount to my account on 8-31-17,however, they turned around and charged me a $9.99 service fee on 9-4-17. I called the company letting them know that that was money that should have been in my account the third week of August,and I was not going to use  the account until I spent my money  that was owed to me- so, technically, they only refunded the amount of $241.00.  I spoke with an agent and a supervisor who told me that the fee was automatically generated by the system,and since I had used the card in August-the fee could not be refunded. I tried to explain to them that that was money that should have been in my account ANYWAY, and since no more deposits were going to hit that account due to the fraud for the month of September,that was money that was owed to me and should not have went towards any "service  fee." I was advised to spend the $2.00 and some odd cents to bring the account to a zero balance after I notified them that I wanted to close out the account. I have indeed spent the meager $2,but have no closed the account as of date, because I am anxious to see the final decision of their dispute. I am confident that someone within that organization utilized and/or sold my card information. I am very careful about making purchases online ,and not even my employer knew EXACTLY when my funds were going to hit that account.  Then,to get hit with a service fee after what I went through,and no willingness to work with the issue, only inflames my suspicions of the practices of this business. Sincerely,[redacted]

The customer account referenced in the complaint was opened in April 2015. On 2/3/16 the account was restricted by caller request in the AccountNow customer center. On 2/3/16, we received a second call and the customer stated that he had not performed the transaction. This indicates that multiple...

callers are contacting AccountNow with the customer's information and accessing the customer account. Documentation is required when there are multiple callers to verify the customer's identity and address.We received several additional customer calls on 2/3/16 and after advising the caller that documentation was required, the caller hung up.On 2/22/16 we received documentation which was incomplete. On 2/26/16 we received documentation which was incomplete. On 3/2/16 we received documentation which was incomplete.On 3/15/16 we received the required documentation and we contacted the customer. The customer stated that he had closed the account by mistake. We advised the customer that his account was being reopened. On 3/16/16 the customer accessed his funds.