A 24-year-old woman alleges that a major national bank failed to follow federal law when it refused to reimburse her for funds stolen through an unauthorized electronic transfer, leaving her without access to her savings and unable to return home for a family event. The complaint was filed by Isabelle Medrado in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York on May 18, 2026, naming Bank of America as the defendant.
According to the court filing, Ms. Medrado moved from Brazil to the United States in January 2025 to work as an au pair through the BridgeUSA Au Pair exchange program. She opened a checking account with Bank of America at the advice of other au pairs and used it primarily to save money from her work. By May 2025, she had saved over $2,100 with plans to use these funds for travel and gifts related to her brother’s wedding in Brazil.
The complaint states that on May 19, 2025, Ms. Medrado’s then-boyfriend allegedly drugged her during a visit and gained access to her phone while she was unconscious. He is accused of using this access to initiate a Zelle transfer from Ms. Medrado’s account to his own without her knowledge or permission. When Ms. Medrado later tried to access her account, she found it locked due to suspicious activity from an unfamiliar device—an iPhone 16 Pro—which did not match her own device type.
Ms. Medrado reported the incident multiple times by phone and in person at a local branch but was told by Bank of America representatives that only phone disputes were allowed for Zelle transactions. Despite providing details about the unauthorized transfer and identifying discrepancies such as use of a new device and unusual transaction patterns, Ms. Medrado received letters from Bank of America dated June 11 and June 16, 2025, denying her claim. One letter stated: “We’ve completed our evaluation and are unable to approve your claim. Our records indicate that we completed the transfer(s) according to the instructions you provided us, and therefore no error occurred.”
The complaint argues that under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (EFTA), consumers cannot be held liable for unauthorized electronic fund transfers if they report them promptly. The EFTA requires banks to provisionally credit disputed amounts during investigations and mandates timely responses with explanations if claims are denied. According to Ms. Medrado’s legal team, Bank of America failed both in conducting a reasonable investigation and in providing provisional credit while reviewing her dispute.
The filing also references broader concerns about Zelle-related fraud at Bank of America based on public reports cited within the document: “Between January 2021 and September 2022, Bank of America customers reported 81,797 cases of unauthorized transactions totaling $125 million in losses,” with less than half refunded according to data included in Senator Elizabeth Warren’s October 2022 report.
In addition to federal claims under EFTA, Ms. Medrado alleges violations of New York General Business Law §349 regarding deceptive business practices. The complaint states that Bank of America misrepresented Ms. Medrado’s liability for the transaction despite evidence suggesting otherwise: “Bank of America violated §349...by using deceptive acts...Specifically...misrepresented...that she was responsible for the transaction because it was executed according to her instructions.”
Ms. Medrado describes significant emotional distress resulting from both losing her savings and being unable to attend or participate fully in family events back home due to lack of funds: “She could not sleep, experienced loss of appetite, anxiety, and sadness.” She also reports ongoing difficulties trusting others or engaging with financial institutions following these events.
After relocating away from what she describes as an exploitative employment situation with assistance from friends and government agencies—including submitting reports about Mr. Ovalles’ conduct—Ms. Medrado sought legal help through CAMBA Legal Services in Brooklyn. A follow-up dispute letter sent by counsel on January 29, 2026 included supporting documentation but reportedly received no response or reimbursement from Bank of America as of this filing.
The lawsuit seeks actual damages including recovery of lost funds plus statutory damages up to $1,000 per violation under EFTA; treble damages where applicable; attorneys’ fees; costs; injunctive relief requiring compliance with consumer protection laws; training for bank employees; and any further relief deemed just by the court.
Attorneys representing Isabelle Medrado are Divya Subrahmanyam (Of Counsel), Naomi Young (Of Counsel), and Elizabeth Miller (General Counsel) at CAMBA Legal Services Inc., Brooklyn NY (Case No.: 1:26-cv-2951).
Source: 126cv02951_Medrado_v_Bank_of_America_NA_Complaint_Eastern_District_New_York.pdf