Product: Checking or savings account

I am a Truist employee who signed up for the Truist XXXX program, which offers a financial incentive to those employees who undergo certain requirements and open a Truist bank account. 

I opened a Truist XXXX account in XX/XX/XXXX and transferred {$10.00} into the account. Truist deposited the XXXX financial incentives into my account in XXXX installments : {$390.00} on XX/XX/XXXX, and {$320.00} on XX/XX/XXXX for a total balance of {$730.00} ( inclusive of interest ) as of XX/XX/XXXX. 

On or around XX/XX/XXXX, I ordered a debit card from Truist as my aim was to withdraw the funds and close the account. I received confirmation from Truist that the debit card was sent ; however, I never received the debit card. Instead, in the early hours of XX/XX/XXXX, I received both text and email notifications from Truist that there was suspicious activity flagged on the debit card I never received. I confirmed the activity as fraudulent and logged into my account the next morning to see that there were fraudulent transactions starting a few days before the notifications : XX/XX/XXXX : - {$480.00} withdrawal from an ATM XX/XX/XXXX : - {$3.00} ATM fee XX/XX/XXXX : - {$3.00} ATM fee XX/XX/XXXX : - {$200.00} withdrawal XX/XX/XXXX : + {$3900.00} deposit XX/XX/XXXX : - {$140.00} withdrawal from ATM On XX/XX/XXXX, I called Truist 's customer service number to report that I never received the debit card and to flag these unauthorized transactions, including the deposit of {$3900.00} that I did not make. The Truist representative froze the debit card and recommended I go into a Truist branch to explain the issue and file a fraud claim. On XX/XX/XXXX, I went in-person to speak with a Truist XXXX XXXX XXXX, explain the timeline, and file a fraud claim. The banker made the claim on my behalf for the charges listed above, which were approved and resulted in the reversal of the withdrawals as well as the {$3900.00} deposit. I was also authorized by the banker to make a cash withdrawal of {$730.00}, which reflects the amount that I legitimately earned through the Truist Momentum program and is the only authorized transaction that I personally made in the XXXX account since XX/XX/XXXX. 

At this point in time, there were still XXXX fraudulent transactions that were pending. I was told by the banker that these transactions could not be included in the claim above because they had not yet posted : XX/XX/XXXX : - {$2.00} XXXX 's charge XX/XX/XXXX : - {$3.00} ATM fee XX/XX/XXXX : - {$480.00} ATM withdrawal XX/XX/XXXX : - {$8.00} XXXX XXXX charge Total : {$490.00} I was instructed to wait until these XXXX transactions posted to file a second, separate claim, which I did so by phone to Truist 's fraud department on XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received email notification that the second claim was denied, which I did not notice until a couple days later. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, I called back and requested another review of the second claim, explaining to yet another Truist representative that this second claim was directly related to the first claim that had already been approved -- the only reason they were even filed under separate claims is because I was expressly instructed to wait until the second batch of fraudulent transactions had posted before I could file a claim for those. Truist took note of this and agreed to conduct a second review and issue a determination in the next couple days. I did not hear or receive any decision back, so I called back in on XX/XX/XXXX when I was told that the transactions were deemed authorized and the claim was declined. I spoke to a supervisor who concluded that there was nothing else I could do at this point and was left with no recourse to escalate any further. 

I reiterate that I never received my debit card that was used in these fraudulent transactions for which Truist agreed was fraud under the first batch/claim. I struggle to understand why they would then deny the second batch of transactions, which were directly related to the first. I asked for information on how Truist reached the decision to deny the second claim but they indicated they could not provide this information.