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, 9, 2015/10/27) */
The customer account was debited for $336.33 on 9/30/15 by an Automated Clearing House direct debit transaction. We received a dispute from the customer for an unauthorized transaction. We advised the customer on 9/30/15 that we received her...

dispute and we would initiate an investigation.
On 10/9/15, a credit of $336.33 was posted to the customer account and a letter was sent to the customer advising that a provisional credit was applied to her account. On 10/14/15 the customer transferred the funds from her account. On 10/15/15, a letter was sent to the customer advising the provisional credit is a permanent credit. We provided our telephone number for the customer to contact us with any additional questions.
The customer has received a credit for the $336.33. We consider this issued resolved. The customer may contact us at (XXX) XXX-XXXX with any questions.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 11, 2015/10/28) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
I got their attention!

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 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.

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 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].

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 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].

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.

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...

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]

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 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 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.

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

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].

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 September 20, 2016, AccountNow contacted the cardholder at the number on file ending in 5687and left a voicemail message as the cardholder was unable to be reached.
 
On September 28, 2016, AccountNow contacted the cardholder at the telephone number provided in the complaint ending in 1705.  We confirmed with the cardholder the account number and routing number to ensure that she had provided the merchant with the correct account information. The cardholder confirmed that the she has provided the merchant with the correct account number and routing number.  The cardholder requested compensation for the dishonored transaction.  We advised the cardholder that to date we do not show any ACH debit attempts or rejects to her account from the merchant GC Services in the amount of $60.00 and that on September 12, 2016, we reversed her monthly maintenance fee in the amount of $9.95 as a courtesy. The cardholder advised that we do not have to issue her a compensation credit but she would continue to keep her claim open and disconnected the call.  If the cardholder can provide documentation from the merchant showing that the correct account number and routing number was used and there was an error on AccountNow which resulted in her payment being dishonored then we will re-review the complaint.
 
The cardholder may contact AccountNow with any remaining questions at ([redacted]

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 10, 2016/01/12) */
On 12/3/15 the customer called to provide an updated address. The customer's card had been recently reissued to her old address and therefore the card was closed, the customer address was updated and a replacement card was generated.
On...

12/15/15 the customer called to report she had not received the replacement card and we advised the customer that the card should be received by 12/17/15.
On 12/16/15 the customer called again to report that the card had not been received. We advised the customer that if the card was not received by 12/17/15 a replacement card would be expedited to her.
On 12/17/15 the customer called and reported that the card had not been received. We closed the current card and issue a replacement. The replacement was shipped Federal Express for a 12/21/15 delivery date.
On 12/21/15 the customer received the card.
As a one-time courtesy, AccountNow has credited the customer for fees totaling $45.00.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 13, 2016/01/14) */
As of today the company has reimbursed my fees and I have had access to my account. Thank you for assisting me with this issue.

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.