Complaints

This profile includes complaints for Marcus by Goldman Sachs's headquarters and its corporate-owned locations. To view all corporate locations, see Find Local Branches.

close

Find a Location

Marcus by Goldman Sachs has 3 locations, listed below.

*This company may be headquartered in or have additional locations in another country. Please click on the country abbreviation in the search box below to change to a different country location.

BBB accredited

Near

Country

USUnited States

Please enter a valid location.

Filter

• 

  Marcus by Goldman Sachs

  11850 S Election Rd Draper, UT 84020-6887

  
• 

  Marcus by Goldman Sachs

  PO Box 1978 Cranberry Twp, PA 16066-0978

• 

  Marcus by Goldman Sachs

  PO Box 45400 Salt Lake City, UT 84145-0400

  

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:08/01/2023

  Type:Sales and Advertising Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I opened a saving account with **********************, but they closed the account. The account still had an $1,100 balance at the time of closing and they have yet to return the funds. My $1,100 needs to be returned immediately.

  Business Response

  Date: 08/09/2023

  BBB Response ***** ID ********
  **********************, a brand of Goldman Sachs Bank *** (the Bank), received the above referenced complaint via the Better Business Bureau Complaint Portal on August 02, 2023. The Bank appreciates the opportunity to address the concerns raised by ********************* (the Customer) related to accessing their ************** Account (***).
  On May 12, 2023, the Bank received a withdrawal request from the Customer to initiate an outgoing transfer from their *** to an unverified account and the Bank identified security concerns regarding the transaction. On May 25, 2023, the Bank attempted unsuccessfully to contact the Customer to address the security concerns and therefore restricted the Customers ***. On July 13, 2023, due to the unresolved security concerns the Bank made a business decision to close the Customers *** and moved the funds to an internal holding account.
  On July 19, 2023, the Customer contacted the Bank regarding the restrictions on their account; however, the Bank was unable to clear concerns as the Customer disconnected from the call. On August 7, 2023, the Customer contacted the Bank and cleared the security concerns. Subsequently the *** was re-opened and funds moved from the internal holding account to the Customers ***. On August 8, 2023, the Bank contacted the Customer and advised of their account status.
  Based on the above details, the Bank kindly request this complaint to be closed.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 08/10/2023

   
  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  *********************

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/28/2023

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Requested an outgoing wire transfer at 2:30 pm ET on 7/27/23 to a title company for closing on a house, and was told it would go through the same day. Their website advertises same day processing if submitted before 4 pm ET. Closing was supposed to happen the next morning but as of 3 pm ET the next day, 7/28/23, I could get no information whatsoever about the wire status by calling customer support. I eventually found on their website that wires to third parties are not allowed (!). This was not mentioned when I requested the wire transfer over the phone. No answer as to whether this was the reason for the delay of the wire or of any information on the wire status, but I cancelled the wire request and made a new request to wire to my own external bank account (the one linked to Marcus savings) at 3 pm 7/28/23. Was told this might happen the same day but subject to timely verification (but again their website claims same day processing of requests made by 4 pm ET). Called back at 5:48 pm and no update on the wire was available, and as of 7:40 pm ET 7/28/23 it has not gone through. When I called on the status I was told that it could take 1-3 business days because it was over 125k. This limit is not mentioned in their chart on wire and ach timings or anywhere else I can find. So my initial attempt to move the funds on Thursday before the cutoff could take until Wednesday which jeopardizes the entire deal on the house. Their FAQ on wire timings is false advertising.

  Business Response

  Date: 08/04/2023

  BBB Response *******
  ID ********
  Marcus by Goldman Sachs, a brand of Goldman Sachs Bank USA (the “Bank”), received the above-referenced complaint via the Better Business Bureau Complaint Portal on July 29, 2023. The Bank appreciates the opportunity to address the concerns raised by ******* ******* (the “Customer”) related to an outgoing transfer from their Online Savings Account (“OSA”).
  On July 27, 2023, the Customer contacted the Bank to initiate an outgoing wire transfer from their OSA to an unverified external account. On July 28, 2023, the Bank identified that the Customer was attempting to transfer the funds to a third- party account not owned by the Customer. Subsequently, the Bank declined the wire transfer request per the Bank’s Deposit Account Agreement (“DAA”). On the same day, the Bank informed the Customer of wire transfer status and the Customer requested an outgoing wire transfer to a verified external account. On August 1, 2023, the Bank successfully processed the wire transfer request.
  Based on the above details, the Bank kindly requests this complaint to be closed.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 08/07/2023

  
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  1. Response is not accurate, bank did not inform me of the third-party rule but I had to figure it out myself and cancel the wire request after 24 hours of waiting.

  2. Second wire request took two business days two process.  I was told this is the standard for wires above a certain amount not a one-off case.  This contradicts (or is at least omitted in) their FAQ's claims about same-day and next-day wires.  Response did not address this at all.

  
  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  
  
  ******* *******

  Business Response

  Date: 08/14/2023

  BBB Response *******
  ID ********
  Marcus by Goldman Sachs, a brand of Goldman Sachs Bank USA (the “Bank”), received the above-referenced complaint via the Better Business Bureau Complaint Portal on August 7, 2023. The Bank appreciates the opportunity to address the concerns raised by ******* ******* (the “Customer”) related to an outgoing transfer from their Online Savings Account (“OSA”).
  As stated in the Bank’s previous response, on July 27, 2023, the Customer contacted the Bank to initiate an outgoing wire transfer from their OSA to an unverified external account. The Deposit Account Agreement (“DAA”) states that “[t]he account at the external bank the we are sending wire transfers to must be owned by you…” On July 28, 2023, the Bank identified that the Customer requested a wire to an account owned by a third party and cancelled the request. On the same day, the Bank informed the Customer of the wire transfer status, and the Customer requested a new outgoing wire transfer to a verified external account. On August 1, 2023, the Bank successfully processed the wire transfer request within the timeframe outlined in the DAA.
  Based on the above details, the Bank kindly requests this complaint to be closed.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 08/15/2023

  
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  DAA may have 1-3 business day timeframe but this is not at all what is conveyed in the FAQ.

  
  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  
  
  ******* *******

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/27/2023

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  To Whom It May Concern:
  
  In Reference to Goldman Sachs Marcus OSA (Online Savings Account **********), et al.
  
  For approximately the past 25 calendar days, my account has been locked such that I am unable to log in and inspect the account history, or conduct transactions.
  
  In several phone calls to GSM customer support, I was asked to go through a special verification process that would send an SMS text message to my cellular phone. After going through several numbers that I maintain for business or personal use, I was informed that the third-party Verification system utilized by Goldman Sachs Marcus was unable to successfully verify my identity or account with the telephone numbers provided.
  
  As a result, I was asked to submit a notarized "Affidavit of Identity". I obtained a copy of such an affidavit on the marcus.com website, and submitted to the address contained upon that document, which listed a Cranberry Twp, PA mail processing center address. My records indicate that Goldman Sachs Marcus and/or its third-party documents imaging provider at that address physically received that mailing on or about July 6 2023.
  
  After allowing a number of business days to pass to ensure that the mail would be retrieved and scanned in and reviewed, I called Marcus customer support back, and was informed over a series of phone calls conducted over more than a week that they had no record of receiving the Affidavit. This is a response and a story that is echoed in many other complaints on this BBB forum by other customers. More recently, I was told that this AOI was "under review", and, alternatively, that it would most likely not be able to be accepted since it was submitted before Marcus shipped a courtesy copy of the same form to my addresses. On July 24 2023, I submitted a new notarized set of AOI forms via USPS to Draper, UT & GSM's Philadelphia PO Box.
  
  I have not been able to access my funds for nearly a month, with no resolution in sight through ordinary means.

  Business Response

  Date: 08/04/2023

  BBB Response ********
  ID ********
  Marcus by Goldman Sachs, a brand of Goldman Sachs Bank USA (the “Bank”), received the above-referenced complaint via the Better Business Bureau Complaint Portal on July 28, 2023. The Bank appreciates the opportunity to address the concerns raised by ******* ******** (the “Customer”) related to accessing their Online Savings Account (“OSA”).
  Between June 13, 2023, and June 23, 2023, four outgoing transfers were initiated from the Customer’s OSA. On July 3, 2023, the Customer contacted the Bank to dispute the unauthorized transactions from their OSA; however, the Bank was unable verify the Customer. For the protection of the Customer, the Bank restricted the Customer’s account until the security concerns could be resolved, and requested an Affidavit of Identity (“AOI”) from the Customer. On July 10, 2023, the Bank mailed the AOI to the Customer’s address on file.
  On July 12, 2023, the Bank investigated the transactions, and successfully returned all the disputed funds to the Customer’s OSA; however, the Bank still required the AOI to clear concerns related to the Customer’s identity.
  On July 28, 2023, the Bank received the AOI from the Customer, but after further review, the AOI was declined by the Bank. On August 2, 2023, the Bank informed the Customer of the Bank’s decision regarding the AOI. In addition, another AOI was mailed to the Customer later that day.
  The Bank currently is waiting to receive the completed AOI from the Customer.
  Based on the above details, the Bank kindly requests this complaint to be closed.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 08/10/2023

  
  
  Complaint: ********
  I am rejecting this response because:

  As of 10 August 2023, I have received and returned via UPS Next Day Air a newly notarized (with embossed/raised seal) notarized Affidavit of Identity form, and continue to receive delays and run-arounds. The response you provided glosses over the frustrating irrationality and incompetence of what appears to be a mostly work-at-home call center operation based out of metropolitan Houston, TX. 

  On the basis of the information legibly contained on the most recently submitted AOI form, and also the readily verifiable information concerning the notary who certified and embossed the document, there should be no lingering issue or dispute as to the validity of the document itself or its contents.

  The nearly six weeks of not having access to my funds is decreasingly an action that should be characterized as the product of an abundance of caution by your firm, and has begun to rise to the level of becoming a regulatory concern, as an unreasonable account freeze, or conversion/seizure of funds without valid legal process involved.

  If this account is not unlocked within ten business days of your reasonable receipt of my follow-up reply here, I would be left with no other option than to communicate these same concerns with the FDIC and OCC, and ultimately pursue arbitration, in the suitable forum pursuant to the depository agreement for the GSM OSA.  I

  Going forward, going forward, if the documentation thus far submitted should be deemed 'denied' or otherwise unacceptable, the only other satisfactory resolution that would avert my pursuing an arbitration remedy would be to issue a check or checks, to my Michigan residential address, for the balances of my two GSM savings accounts, including any interest due or outstanding as of the date such a request would be processed.

  Sincerely,

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/27/2023

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I've been a Marcus by Goldman Sachs savings customer for years. They've been great for taking my money and offering competitive savings rate, but will not give my money back. I decided to move my savings funds to my local bank as I prepare for major and urgent house repairs. I verified and linked my banking account from my local bank and completed 3 external transfer requests online from my Marcus savings accounts to my local bank. The 3 transfers began processing and being received. 2 went through, 1 didn't. My largest savings account transfer of over $6,000 was being held by Marcus.I logged into my online Marcus account 1 day after the transfer requests and was notified that my account was temporarily locked. I followed their request to call them at ************** (and verified this number through their contact pages and other online searches to make sure it was legitimate). I spoke with an agent who verified my identity and then said they needed to transfer me to a specialist to unlock my account. The agent put me on hold multiple times, then said the specialist would call me back in 3-5 minutes. 3-5 minutes went by, then 3-5 hours went by, no one contacted **** received no written or electronic (email or otherwise) notice that my account was temporarily locked. 2 days later I again called the Savings number for Marcus and went through the same steps and process. This time the agent transferred me to a specialist. The specialist told me that my account was being forced closed (with no reason to offer) and that I needed to call back in 2-3 more business days to check the status and then I might be able to issue a check if I verify my address. The specialist couldn't confirm why my account was locked or why it's supposedly being force closed, couldn't confirm the funds in my account (which I knew the amount) or provide any other details. I'm now desperately waiting to get my money. I'm working on legal actions as well as filing complaints everywhere possible.

  Business Response

  Date: 08/03/2023

  BBB Deposits ******
  ID ********
  **********************, a brand of Goldman Sachs Bank *** (the Bank), received the above-referenced complaint via the Better Business Bureau Complaint Portal on July 27, 2023. The Bank appreciates the opportunity to address the concerns raised by ********************* (the Customer)related to accessing their ******************** held ************** Account (OSA).
  On July 24, 2023, the Customer initiated an outgoing transfer from their OSA to a verified linked account. On July *******, the Bank identified security concerns regarding the transfer. For the protection of the customer, the Bank declined the transaction and restricted the account, until the security concerns could be resolved. On the same day, the Customer contacted the Bank regarding their account access, but were unable to resolve the security concerns.
  On July 27, 2023, the Customer contacted the Bank regarding their account access; however, the Bank advised due to the unresolved security concerns the account is under review. On August 1, 2023, the Customer contacted the Bank requesting to close their account, and receive a check for the remaining balance. On the same day the Bank completed the account closure request and mailed a check, which was delivered to the Customers address on file August 3, 2023.
  Based on the above details, we kindly request this complaint be closed.
  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/25/2023

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Ive been trying to get my money out of Marcus by Goldman sachs savings account now for about six weeks. I spend hours on the phone being transferred with customer service. They locked me out of my account so they could not even have access on the Internet. They refuse to unlock my account. Theres something very wrong with this bank, and I will also file a complaint with FDIC. After approximately one hour and 20 minutes, being on the phone and going to multiple different agents, I close the account and they said I will receive the money in 1 to 3 days. This never happened. I just called again and went through the exact same process, and I think this is something very suspicious, and other consumers need to know not to utilize this bank.

  Business Response

  Date: 08/01/2023

  BBB Response Kuerer ID ********
  **********************, a brand of Goldman Sachs Bank *** (the Bank), received the above referenced complaint via the Better Business Bureau Complaint Portal on July 25, 2023. The Bank appreciates the opportunity to address the concerns raised by *********************** (the Customer) related to accessing their ************** Account (OSA).
  On June 12, 2023, the Customer initiated an outgoing transfer from their OSA to an unverified linked account. The Bank identified security concerns regarding the transfer, declined the transaction and restricted the account, until the security concerns could be resolved. The following day, the Customer contacted the Bank regarding their account access. The Customer cleared the security concerns, and a Bank specialist advised the Customer that the funds needed to be transferred back to the funding account.
  On July 20, 2023, the Customer contacted the Bank to close their OSA. Due to an inadvertent error, the Bank did remove the restriction off the account. On July 25, 2023, the Customer contacted the Bank requesting to re-initiate the closure of their OSA. The Bank specialist removed the restriction, and the Bank successfully closed the account as requested.
  Based on the above details, the Bank kindly request this complaint to be closed.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 08/02/2023

   
  Complaint: 20371794
  
  I am rejecting this response because: clients using their bank need to know these practices are recurring keeping us on The line sometimes more than an hour. Even after these frustrations repetitive calls are needed. Their customer service is suboptimal and there are other similar complaints that have not been addressed. 
  
  I can accept their response but want to make sure it is kept and available to consumers to review. 
  Sincerely,
  
  ***********************

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/25/2023

  Type:Billing Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  GOLDMAN SACHS AND CO/GOLDMAN SACHS GM CARD BY MARCUS PARTIAL ACCOUNT NUMBER ****** ALSO APPLE CARD/GS BANK USA PARTIAL ACCOUNT NUMBER ****** IS IMPACTING MY CREDIT REPORT IN AN ADVERSE MANNER. THIS ACCOUNT DOES NOT BELONG TO ME. PLEASE DELETE THIS ACCOUNT ASAP OFF OF MY CREDIT REPORT.

  Business Response

  Date: 08/01/2023

  Goldman Sachs Bank *** (the Bank) received the above-referenced complaint related to the ** Card and Apple Card via the Better Business Bureau (BBB) Complaint Portal on July 25, 2023. The Bank appreciates the opportunity to address the concerns raised by ************************* (the Consumer) related to identity theft.
  
  The Bank conducted an investigation and confirmed no error occurred. The Bank confirmed the ** Card account was booked on March 3, 2023.The referenced Apple Card account was booked on June 11, 2020. The accounts are currently under review. The Bank requires additional time to complete the investigation. The Consumer will be notified when the investigation is complete. If the Consumer has any additional questions or concerns, the Consumer can contact the Bank directly via phone by calling ************** for ** Card and ************** for Apple Card.
  
  Based on the above details, the Bank kindly requests for this complaint to be closed.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/24/2023

  Type:Billing Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I applied for a GM Master Card of July 10th, 2023 and was approved and received the card and it was activated. I used the card for the first time for a small $20 purchase. I attempted to use the card a second time for , $850 which would go towards the promotion of spend $1000, in 3 months and receive ****** points.July 24, 2023 I went to use the card for $850 and it was declined, which was embarrassing to say the least and I didn't have another credit card so I had to scramble and use my bank card. I contacted them and they said they didn't know that was my transaction. So I lost that amount towards the promotional and they kept sending from one supervisor to another to another and then said I need to call.

  Business Response

  Date: 08/01/2023

  Goldman Sachs Bank *** (the Bank) received the above-referenced complaint related to the ** Card via the Better Business Bureau (BBB) Complaint Portal on July 25, 2023. The Bank appreciates the opportunity to address the concerns raised by *************************************** (the Customer) related to declined transactions, promotional rewards, and customer service.
  
  The Bank conducted an investigation an inadvertent communication error occurred.
  
  The Customer applied for and opened the account on July *******. A promotion applied at account opening provides ****** bonus rewards points when $1,000.00 in spending is completed within 90 days. A card was shipped to the Customer and was activated on July 20, 2023. On July 24, 2023,the Customer made three attempts to complete a transaction with the merchant HDN********************** OFFI for $850.00. The Bank declined the transactions. Per the ** Card Customer Agreement, the Bank may decline transactions for any reason, including suspected or actual fraud.
  
  The Customer contacted the Bank via chat on July 24, 2023 regarding the declined transactions. The Customer was incorrectly advised that assistance could not be offered by chat, and was advised to call the Bank. The Customer contacted the Bank by phone on July 25, 2023 and required verification was completed. The Bank confirmed that the Customers account is active and available for use as of July 25, 2023 and no restrictions are present. The Bank regrets any frustrations the Customer experienced.
  
  Declined transactions amounts are not applied towards the required spending for the above-mentioned promotion. The Customer is invited to make additional transactions within the promotional period to reach the required spending threshold.
  
  Based on the above details, the Bank kindly requests for this complaint to be closed.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/23/2023

  Type:Billing Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I noticed I had late payments from APPLE CARD/GS BANK USA on my credit report. During these months I did not receive anything stating I was late. As you can see, majority of my payments have been on time so I am requesting the removal of these late payments from my account. I am trying to increase my score to purchase a home and would greatly appreciate if you guys can submit a request to the credit reporting agencies to remove the late payments.

  Business Response

  Date: 07/28/2023

  Goldman Sachs Bank *** (the Bank) received the above-referenced complaint related to Apple Card via the Better Business Bureau (BBB) Complaint Portal on July 24, 2023. The Bank appreciates the opportunity to address the concerns raised by ************************* (the Customer) related to credit reporting for Apple ************************ conducted an investigation and confirmed no Bank error occurred. The Customers account did not receive the required minimum payment due for the months of May 2023, and June 2023. The Bank sent Payment Due Reminders, Missed Payment Reminders and Eligible for Bureau Reporting reminders to the email address associated with the Apple ID provided by the Customer when the Apple Card account was opened. As a result, the Bank reported the account to the credit reporting agencies as past due. The Bank confirmed the credit reporting is correct and accurate, the Bank is obligated to report accurately to the credit reporting agencies. The Customers account remains delinquent and overdue. The Customer should continue to make on time payments to avoid any additional adverse credit reporting. The Bank is unable to remove the Customers past due credit reporting.
  
  Based on the above details, the Bank kindly requests for this complaint to be closed.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/22/2023

  Type:Product Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I am a graduate student at Stanford University since 2021. I opened my online savings account in Marcus at Goldman Sachs on June 24, 2023. I deposited $11,500 to my OSA on June 26, 2023.
  On the morning of June 27, 2023, I logged in to my account and found that my account has been temporarily locked and I need to call Marcus to get it unlocked. They sent me an Affidavit of Identity on July 12, 2023. But being an Indian citizen, I do not have a US government photo ID. In this case, I requested them to just reverse the transactions and close my account. The representative verified all my details and said that I will receive back my funds in 2-3 business days.
  
  
  I did not receive the funds till July 19. After several calls, and confusing messaging from the representatives, some of them told me to wait for five more days while one of them told me to wait till July 20. I spent around 3 hours on call with Marcus on that day.
  
  
  I called them again on July 21, 2023 to know the status. They informed me that they are expediting my case, but still can give me no timeline. I talked to a supervisor, but they could not give me a timeline. I filed a claim for compensation, stating all the troubles I have suffered due to them.
  
  
  Marcus has been holding on to my money for more than 25 days. I had to cancel all my scheduled transactions because of them. I have spent more than five hours on calls with them, but still have not even received an approximate timeline for when I would receive my funds. They have repeatedly changed the information in each call. Their representatives and supervisors have been unwilling to understand my situation as a graduate student who needs funds back. I request that my funds, along with interest, be returned to me as quickly as possible and that I receive compensation of $1000 for all the time I have wasted and for all the mental anguish this situation has caused me.
  
  
  Case Number – ************ 
  
  Complaint Number (for compensation) - ************

  Business Response

  Date: 07/28/2023

  BBB Deposits *******
  ID ********
  Marcus by Goldman Sachs, a brand of Goldman Sachs Bank USA (the “Bank”), received the above-referenced complaint via the Better Business Bureau Complaint Portal on July 22, 2023. The Bank appreciates the opportunity to address the concerns raised by ********* ******* (the “Customer”) related to accessing their Online Savings Account (“OSA”).
  Per Bank records, the Customer opened and funded an OSA with the Bank on June 25, 2023. The Bank identified security concerns regarding the Customer’s identity and for the protection of the customer, the Bank restricted the account, until the security concerns could be resolved. On June 27, 2023, the Customer contacted the Bank regarding their account access; however, the Bank was unable to clear the security concerns. As an alternative verification method, the Bank requested an Affidavit of Identity (“AOI”) from the Customer, which the Bank mailed on July 3, 2023. On July 12, 2023, the Customer contacted the Bank requesting two outgoing transfers from their OSA; however, due to the unresolved security concerns, the Bank declined the transfers. On July 19, 2023, the Customer contacted the Bank requesting to close their OSA and transfer the funds back to the respective funding accounts. On July 26, 2023, the Customer initiated separate outgoing transfers to the respective funding account, which was successfully processed by the Bank.
  Based on the above details, we kindly request this complaint be closed.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 07/31/2023

  
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because: I have filed a claim for compensation, stating all the troubles I have suffered due to them. Marcus held on to my money for more than a month. I had to cancel all my scheduled transactions because of them. I have spent more than six hours on calls with them, where their representatives were very unhelpful. They repeatedly changed the information in each call. Their representatives and supervisors were unwilling to understand my situation as a graduate student who needed funds back. I request that I receive compensation of $1000 for all the time I have wasted and for all the mental anguish this situation has caused me.
  
  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ********* *******
  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/21/2023

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Claim against: Marcus Card by Goldman Sachs [Card Ending 8609]On 07-MAY-23 / SUN @ 6:57 P [CST - 1 Hr. + 12 Min.] I called & spoke with ************ who transferred me to Supervisor Ms. ******* I said I was charged a "$48 Late Fee" by Goldman Sachs, & had "NOT been late", & I wanted full Reimbursement of Late Fee & clear my Credit. Checking Ms. ****** discovered the Online Account that we used to make our payments "Did NOT match the Web Site Account", [No Access]. She agreed that this was a serious problem & basically said she would turn in a Claim for Reimbursement & also get with ****************** to resolve the problem that can effect all account holders. I said this is Goldman Sachs Error not mine & needs to be resolved & fix my ************************* 01-JUN-23 / THU @ 8:32 P [CST - 52 Min.] I called & spoke with **************** who transferred me to Supervisor ************** & asked about my Reimbursement, etc. & went through all of the above issues with Ms. ****** on Accounts NOT Matching. He checked & verified that there were "Discrepancies" between the **************** Accounts.He turned in another Claim for Reimbursement & for the Problem to be resolved. He also stated on 13-MAY-23 that ************************** Claim was "CANCELLED & Removed" due to ""Inactivity".On 12-JUN-23 / MON @ 2:44 P [CST - 32 Min.] Ms. ****** called me on my Reimbursement Claim & basically wanted me to take screen shots of the **************** Accounts & send it to them. I basically stated that I don't work for Goldman Sachs & are not responsible or capable of fixing their Errors & would not do it... She basically said then you will not get Reimbursed. I basically told her that I was done with Goldman ***************************** had ********************************** I was going to file Claims with the ************************************** She basically I was welcome to do what ever I wanted. On 14-JUN-23 / WED @ 2:44 P [CST - 49 Min.] Ms. ****** called me & basically said GS would not pay me.

  Business Response

  Date: 07/28/2023

  Goldman Sachs Bank *** (the Bank) received the above-referenced complaint related to the ** Card via the Better Business Bureau (BBB) Complaint Portal on July 21, 2023. The Bank appreciates the opportunity to address the concerns raised by *********************** (the Customer)related to late fees, payments, and technical issues.
  
  The Bank conducted an investigation and confirmed inadvertent communication errors occurred. The Customer contacted the Bank on May 7, 2023 and June 1, 2023 to discuss concerns regarding minimum payment amounts and late fees. The Bank failed to provide an accurate explanation of monthly billing statements and how minimum payments are displayed within the online account. In response to the Customer request for fee waivers, the Bank sent an email advising that fees were unable to be rebated on May 11, 2023.
  
  A review of the Customers account and interactions was conducted. The Bank determined that no technical issue occurred. The Bank contacted the Customer on June 12, 2023 and June 14, 2023. The Bank failed to provide accurate billing explanations during these interactions to explain the info displayed in the online account and on monthly billing statements.
  
  The statement generated March 3, 2023 reflected a minimum payment amount of $29.00 due by March 28, 2023. A payment was not received by the due date of March 28, 2023. As a result, the Bank charged a late fee of $29.00 on March 31, 2023. On April 3, 2023 the Customer made a payment of $35.00 via the online account. The late fee charged is not included into the minimum due amount until the which took place at end of day on April 3, 2023.As a result, the minimum payment displayed online when the payment was completed on April 3, 2023 was $29.00. The statement generated on April 3, 2023 reflected a minimum payment amount of $48.00 due by April 28, 2023. The minimum payment amount included the late fee of $29.00 applied on March 31, 2023. A payment was not received by the due date of April 28, 2023. As a result, the Bank charged a late fee of $40.00 on May 1, 2023. The statement generated on May 3, 2023 reflected a minimum payment amount of $108.00 due by May 28, 2023,which included a past due amount of $48.00. A payment of $108.00 was received on May 6, 2023. Please refer to the ** Card Customer Agreement for more information regarding minimum payment calculations.
  
  The Bank furnishes to the Credit Bureaus on a monthly basis.The Customer has been reported to the Credit Bureaus as current with no past due balance on related furnishing dates of April 10, 2023, May 8, 2023, and June 5, 2023. The Bank confirmed the credit reporting is correct and accurate.The Bank is obligated to report accurately to credit reporting agencies and is unable to update the Customers credit reporting.
  
  As a courtesy, the Bank mailed a reimbursement check of $40.00 to the Customer on July 25, 2023. The Bank is unable to provide further compensation. The Bank regrets any frustrations the Customer experienced.
  
  Based on the above details, the Bank kindly requests for this complaint to be closed.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 08/07/2023

   
  Complaint: ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

   

  I Reject Goldman Sachs's, [** S.], Offer in totality for the following reasons. 

  
  

  [1.]  G S. states.  "... confirmed inadvertent ... errors occurred."   *My Response is:  ** S. fails to factually address that their ****** Account, where my payments were made, did NOT match their Website Account of which I did not have access to, in the past or currently.  I am sure that I am not alone with this issue, since thousands of customers access the ** S. ****** Account daily. 

  
  

      [A.]  On 07-MAY-2023 / SUN @ 6:57 P [CST]  Supervisor Ms. ****** verified and documented my Account Records to show that in fact the ** S. ****** Account and the **S. Website Account did NOT match.  The Payment Values in the ****** Account were less than the Website Account.  I also mentioned to Ms. ****** that thousands of other ** S. Customers are accessing the ****** Account and having the same problems with Late Fee Charges and she said yes this is a big problem and she would turn it in to be corrected.

  
  

      [B.]  On 01-JUN-2023 / THU @ 8:32 P [CST]  Supervisor ************** again verified and documented my Account Records that the ** S. ****** and ** S. Website Accounts had "discrepancies" and did NOT match.

  
  

          [1.]   ************** also basically stated that on 13-MAY-2023 ******************** for Reimbursement was "Cancelled" and her Records were "Removed", due to inactivity by ** S.   I do not understand exactly what ** S. means by "inactivity".

  
  

  [2.]  RE:  1., 1.A., 1.B.1. Above.   ** S. ************* ******** failed to provide an accurate explanation of monthly billing statements and how minimum payments are displayed within the online account."  *My Response is:  The ****** Minimum Payments were displayed with NO Late Fees & I paid that Amount or a greater

  Amount.

  
  

      [A.]  On 07-MAY-2023 When I spoke with Ms. ******* I requested that I start receiving a "Printed Hard Copy Billing Statement" since I had never received one before.  The first mailed Printed Statement was received on 13-MAY-2023.  This was a Billing Statement for April 4 - May 3, 2023 which was paid on 06-MAY-2023.

  
  

     [B.]   Also on 07-MAY-2023 All of the JAN-23 through MAY-23 Payment Values that I paid were discussed with Ms. ******************* She provided the Website Values shown below.  All Payments I made were equal to or greater than the Minimum Payments in ****** Account. 

  
  

         [1.]  On 02-JAN-2023 / MON An ****** Payment of $25.00 was made for 28-JAN-2023 and I was current.

  
  

         [2.]  On 03-FEB-2023 / FRI An ****** Payment of $35.00 was made for 28-FEB-2023 and I was current.  [The Website Amount was $49.00 per Ms. ***************************** dir="auto" style="color: rgb(34, 34, 34); font-size: small; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
  

         [3.]  On 03-MAR-2023 / FRI An ****** Payment of $50.00 was made for 28-MAR-2023 and I was current.  [The Website Amount was $29.00 per Ms. ************************* dir="auto" style="color: rgb(34, 34, 34); font-size: small; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
  

         [4.]  On 03-APR-2023 / MON An ****** Payment of $35.00 was made for 28-APR-2023 and I was current.  [The Minimum ****** Payment was $29.00 & the Website Amount was $48.00 per Ms. ************************* dir="auto" style="color: rgb(34, 34, 34); font-size: small; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
  

        [5.]  On 06-MAY-2023 / FRI A Payment of $108.00 was called in and made for 28-MAY-2023 and I was current.  [I stopped using the ****** Account for any Payments or Account information and only call in for Payments.] 

  
  

        [6.]  On 12-JUN-2023 / MON @ +/- 3:05 P  A Payment of $35.00 was called in and made with Ms. ****** for 28-JUN-2023 and I was current.  [She stated the Minimum Payment was $29.00.]

  
  

       [7.]  On 22-JUL-2023 / SAT @ +/- 3:25 P  A Payment of $40.00 was called in and made with Ms. ******* for 28-JUL-2023 and I was current.  [She stated the Minimum Payment was $29.00.] 

  
  

       [8.]  On 05-AUG-2023 / SAT @ +/- 6:40 P  A Payment of $35.00 was called in and made with Ms. ******* for 28-AUG-2023 and I was current.  [She stated the Minimum Payment was $29.00.] 

  
  

  
  

  [3.]  ** S. ************* "... the Bank sent an e-mail advising that fees were unable to be rebated on May 11, 2023."  *My Response is:  The stated E-Mail sent by ** S. was never received.  It is interesting that all other Financial Institutions can easily reimburse their Customers for issues that have occurred due to their own errors.  RE: 1. Above.  ** S. chooses NOT to Reimburse their Customers for errors they created.

  
  

  [4.]  ** S. ************* "******** determined that no technical issue occurred."  *My Response is:  RE: 1.A. & 1.B.  Above.  Two (2) of ** S.'s Supervisors acknowledged that errors existed and therefore did in fact occur.  Therefore this statement is "Incorrect".  Not only did they occur for myself,  but they probably occurred for thousands of other Customers.

  
  

  [5.]  ** S. ************* "******** contacted the Customer on July 12, 2023 and July 14, 2023.  ******** failed to provide accurate billing explanations during these interactions to explain the info displayed in the online account and on monthly billing statements."   *My Response is:  RE:  2.A. Above.  Regarding first Billing Statement received.  Yes, ** S. has failed their Customers in numerous ways.

  
  

       [A.]   On 12-JUN-2023 / MON @ 2:44 P  [CST]  Ms. ****** called me on my Reimbursement Claim and basically wanted me to take Screen Shots of the ** S. ****** and ** S. Website Accounts and send it to them.  I basically stated that I don't work for ** S. and are not responsible or capable of fixing their errors and I would not do it. Then she basically said I would not get reimbursed.  I told her I was done with ** S. and at this point ** S. had 48 Hours to correct this problem, [since 07-MAY-2023], or I was going to File a Claim with the Better Business Bureau, [BBB], and other Agencies.   Then she basically said I could do whatever I wanted. 

  
  

      [B.]   On 14-JUN-2023 / MON @ 2:44 P  [CST]  Ms. ****** again called me and basically wanted me to take Screen Shots of the two ************** and send it to them.   I again reiterated what I said before that I was not my responsibly to correct ** S.'s errors and I would not do it.  She then basically said ** S. would not pay the Reimbursement.  I basically said that was **S.'s choice and I would be filing a Claim with the BBB in the future.  [I followed through on that.]

  
  

  [6.]  ** S. ************* "The statement generated March 3, 2023 reflected a minimum payment amount of $29.00 due March 28, 2023.  A payment was not received by the due date of March 28, 2023."  *My Response is:  The 03-MAR-2023 Statement was never received in the mail.   The Payment Portion of ** S.'s Statement is "Incorrect".  RE:  2.B.3.  Which shows an ****** Payment of $50.00 made on 03-MAR-2023 for 28-MAR-2023.

  
  

      [A.]  I was not aware that ** S. had charged me "Multiple Late Fees" all due to errors created by them, until I received their Response. 

  
  

      [B.]   ** S. needs to Remove the $29.00 Late Fee and  Reimburse my Account for the $29.00 Late Fee charged in error. 

  
  

  [7.]   ** S. ************* "[A] On April 3, 2023 the Customer made a payment of $35.00 via the online account.  [B]  The late fee charged is not included into the minimum due amount ... which took place at end of day on April 3, 2023.  [C]  As a result, the minimum payment displayed online when the payment was completed on April 3, 2023 was $29.00.  [D]  The statement generated on April 3, 2023 reflected a minimum payment amount of $48.00 due by April 28, 2023.   [E]  The minimum payment amount included the late fee of $29.00 applied on March 31, 2023.  [F]  A payment was not received by the due date of April 28, 2023.  [G]  As a result, the Bank charged a late fee of $40.00 on May 1, 2023.

  
  

       [A.]  *My Response is included in [A.] through [I.] below.  RE: 2.B.4. Above.  Which shows an ****** Payment of $35.00 was made on 03-APR-2023 for 28-APR-2023.

  
  

       [B.]  The Late Fee was originally from 31-MAR-2023 of which ** S. was in Error.  RE:  6., 6.A. & 6.B. Above.

  
  

       [C.]  RE:  7.A. Above.  The Minimum Payment shown in the ****** Account at the time of Payment was $29.00 and I paid $35.00 on 03-APR-2023 for 28-APR-2023.

  
  

       [D ]  The 03-APR-2023 Statement was never received in the mail. 

  
  

      [E.]  ** S. is applying Late Fees again that are in Error, "After" the ****** Payment was already made for "more than the Minimum Amount displayed at the time paid."

  
  

      [F.]  RE:  7.A. Above.  An exceeding Amount Paid was received on 03-APR-2023 which is before 28-APR-2023.

  
  

      [**]  Again ** S. is applying Late Fees on top of Late Fees thar are "ALL in Error".

  
  

      [H.]  It is apparent that the Systems and Methods that ** S. uses on the ****** Accounts "actually create Errors" for all Customers using the ****** Accounts.

  
  

      [I.]  RE:  6.B. Above.  ** S. needs to Remove the Late Fees and Reimburse my Account for the $29.00 and $40.00 Late Fees which were both charged in Error.

  
  

  [8.]  ** S. Stated.  "[A]  The statement generated on May 3, 2023 reflected a minimum payment amount of $108.00 due by May 28, 2023, which included a past due amount of $48.00.   [B]  A payment of $108.00 was received on May 6, 2023."

  
  

      [A.]  *My Response is included in [A.] & [B.] below.  RE:  2 A. Above.  The very first printed hard copy Statement was received on 13-MAY-2023.  No where on that Statement does it state what is contained in the "$48.00 Past Due Amount".  Since all Payments from 02-JAN-2023 to Date have been consistently been made at the beginning of the Month, which is well in advance of the 28 th of each Month.  Therefore the $48.00 Past Due Fee charged is in Error.  Provide details of exactly what is included in this Fee, Remove and Reimburse same. 

  
  

      [B.]  RE:  2.B.5. Above.  $108.00 Payment was made on 06-MAY-2023.

  
  

  [9.]  ** S. *************  "The Customer has been reported to the Credit Bureaus as current with no past due balance on related furnishing dates of April 10, 2023, May  8, 2023 and June 5, 2023."  *My Response is:  Provide a Printout from all Reported Credit Bureaus from 01-JAN-2023 through current Date in AUG-2023 that shows NO Late Fees and/or Past Due Amounts were charged by ** S. on my Account and reported to the respective Credit Bureaus. 

  
  

      [A ]  Should there be any Late Fees and/ or Past Due Amounts that were reported in Error, since all Payments were made ahead of Due Dates, with at least a minimum or greater amount than were shown in the "****** Account at the time of Payment" or as provided by the ** S. ************ If so, then have the corresponding Credit Report corrected to reflect actual Financial Data.

  
  

  [10.]  ** S. *************  "******** ... is unable to update the Customers credit reporting."  *My Response is:  *************** Institutions update and correct errors that they have made on Credit Reports.  Therefore ** S. stating that they are "unable to update" Errors on Credit Reports is "Incorrect".

  
  

  [11.]  ** S. *************  "As a courtesy, the Bank mailed a reimbursement check of $40.00 to the Customer on July 25, 2023."  *My Response is:  I have received $40.00 Courtesy Check and it is being held until this Claim is completely resolved.  Plus since it is a "Courtesy Check" it has no bearing on the Late Fees and / or  Past Due Amounts previously charged.

  
  

      [A.]  ** S. can always "VOID" the Courtesy Check if they so desire.

  
  

  [12.]  *My Response in Closing is:

  
  

        [A.]  ** S. needs to remove the $29.00 & $40.00 Late Fees and Reimburse both accordingly, which were charged to my Account due to Errors they made on their ****** Account which originally generated the "Late Fees".  Additionally address the details of the "$48.00 Past Due Amount" that was also charged in Error & then remove it and Reimburse it accordingly. 

  
  

      [B.]  ** S. needs to provide a Printout from the Reporting Credit Bureaus from 01-JAN-2023 through to a current date in AUG-2023, that shows there were NO Late Fees Charged and NO Past Due Amounts Charged.  Correct any Credit Reporting Errors which may occur before the Final Printout.

  
  

     [C.]  I request that this Complaint I. D.  ******** be kept open until resolved.

  
  

          [1.]  I believe this Claim will be fully Resolved.  BUT should this Claim not be resolved,  then at such time, I will File an Official Complaint with the *************************************** [CFPB] and the **************.

  
  

  WG

  
  

  
  

  
  

  
  

  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***********************

  Business Response

  Date: 08/14/2023

  Goldman Sachs Bank *** (the Bank) received the above-referenced complaint related to the ** Card via the Better Business Bureau (BBB) Complaint Portal on August 7, 2023. The Bank appreciates the opportunity to address the concerns raised by *********************** (the Customer)related to late fees, payments, customer service, and technical issues.
  
  The Bank conducted an investigation and confirmed inadvertent communication errors occurred. The Customer contacted the Bank on May 7, 2023 and June 1, 2023 to discuss concerns regarding minimum payment amounts and late fees. The Bank failed to provide an accurate explanation of monthly billing statements and how minimum payments are displayed within the online account. The Bank regrets any miscommunication that furthered the notion that a technical issue was present.
  
  In response to the request for fee waivers on May 7, 2023 an email was sent to the Customer on May 11, 2023 advising fees could not be rebated. The Bank mailed a copy of this correspondence to the Customer on August 11, 2023.
  A review of the Customers account and interactions was conducted. The Bank determined that no technical issue occurred. The Customer reviewed the account online on April 3, 2023 to schedule a payment. The minimum payment amount due by March 28, 2023 was $29.00. This amount stands as the minimum due until the next account cycle takes place and does not include late fees charged during the billing period. The Account cycle took place at end of day on April 3, 2023. The statement generated on April 3, 2023 included a minimum payment due of $48.00 by April 28, 2023. The minimum due was calculated using the method outlined in the ** Card Customer agreement and included the late fee of $29.00 charged on March 31, 2023.
  
  Bank records indicate the Customer agreed to receive statements electronically on April 23, 2022 upon consent to the Banks ****** consent agreement. This consent took place at the time of online account creation via Marcus.com. At the Customers request on May 7, 2023 the bank mailed a copy of the statement generated on May 3, 2023. The Customers statement preference was updated at this time and the Bank began mailing regular monthly billing statements starting with the statement generated on June 3, 2023.
  
  The Customer made the following payments: $25.00 on January 2, 2023. The account status at the time of payment was current, as a payment sufficient to cover the minimum due by December 28, 2022 was previously received on December 7, 2022.
  
  Payment of $35.00 was received on February 3, 2023. The account status at the time of payment was past-due as a payment was not received by the due date on January 28, 2023. As a result, a late fee of $29.00 was charged on January 31, 2023.
  
  Payment of $50.00 was received on March 3, 2023. The account status at the time of payment was past-due as a payment was not received by the due date on February 28, 2023. The Bank did not apply a late fee at this time.
  
  Payment of $35.00 was received on April 3, 2023. The account status at the time of payment was past-due as a payment was not received by the due date on March 28, 2023. As a result, a late fee of $29.00 was charged on March 31, 2023.
  
  Payment of $108.00 was received on May 6, 2023. The account status at the time of payment was past-due as a payment was not received by the due date on April 28, 2023. As a result, a late fee of $40.00 was charged on May 1, 2023. Payments made on June 12, 2023, July 22, 2023 and August 5, 2023 were received on time for their respective due dates of June 28, 2023, July 28,2023, and August 28, 2023. No further late fees were applied. The Bank confirmed that the above-mentioned late fees were accurately charged in accordance with the ** Card Customer agreement. As a courtesy, the Bank mailed a reimbursement check of $40.00 to the Customer on July 25, 2023. The Bank is unable to provide further compensation.
  
  The Bank furnishes to the Credit Bureaus on a monthly basis.Account balances as of the date of furnishing and the status of the account are reported. Late fees charged are reflected in the reported balance as applicable. The Customer has been reported to the Credit Bureaus as current with no past due balance on all monthly furnishings that have taken place in 2023. The Bank confirmed the credit reporting is correct and accurate. The Bank is unable to provide the requested printout of credit reporting records. The Customer is encouraged to contact the credit reporting agencies to obtain copies of the full credit report that will contain information reported by the Bank.
  
  Based on the above details, the Bank kindly requests for this complaint to be closed.