Product: Debt collection

There is a simple story of a company applying for XXXX forgiveness, and simply not getting approved for forgiveness. This is not that story. 
This is the story of a company that was given a XXXX loan, made to wait more than a year to apply for forgiveness, rejected for forgiveness in the review process by 2 reviews, but never told, only to have a portal show that the application was approval pending with an application reduction of {$1100.00}, as funds where applied to the account and reversed, told not to worry about it based on statements that did not exist, had a letter sent stating the loan was forgiven, only to have the bank come back XXXX  days after the process began to say oops. Since that day, the bank has held that the loan was late XXXX days before they told the company that loan was forgiven and more than a full month before they said oops. They have engaged in aggressive collections, reporting the loan to the XXXX the same day as their first discussion of a problem, and long before any standard written documentation, that has still not been provided. Their XXXX portal still showed the application as approval pending up to XXXX, even after they removed the embedded link from XXXX as of yesterday. ( we googled the link ) and they seem to be removing key documents that show their mistakes. 

We, the company, XXXX XXXX are left with a lot of questions and believe the bank is actively engaged in criminal activity. After more than XXXX hours of calls, XXXX unaddressed lender complaints, we have done our due diligence to try and resolve this issue. Todays actions are being taken after Wells Fargo started removing documents from XXXX. 

XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX formally request an outside audit to investigate inappropriate reporting to the XXXX and others by the CFPB of Wells Fargo XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Number XXXX. The XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has decided to conduct business using nonstandard accounting practices, using due dates that where not shared with the customer for collections, not supplying standard written materials as outlined by the XXXX, misrepresenting federal statutes, all as a federal investigation takes place with the case via The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency ( case XXXX ). This is in addition to the misrepresentation of invoices on XXXX. 

Furthermore XXXX XXXX, Executive Office Case Specialist has named herself as the only expert on the manor on account that was stated by Wells Fargo that it was forgiven ( the nature of the case with the Comptrollers office ) Calls to every single team that she referred me to take next steps, still directly dispute her findings. She has aggressively used offers to fix reporting to the XXXX but only if I take her compromises as a way to shut down that case. 

We have included a timeline of events in the attached XXXX documents, and supporting documents to help demonstrate the teams odd practices that continue with this preferred XXXX. 

Questions we are asking Would it be appropriate to immediately demand payment based on the date of initial denial, not communicated to the customer for XXXX days? 
Would it be appropriate to report the loan as Delinquent and Disbursed to the XXXX 3 days after notifying the customer via a call. 
Would aggressive collections actions be appropriate in with regards to the known situation less than a month after clear written declaration of forgiveness was pulled via a phone call? If not, what are the penalties? 
Would it be appropriate to threaten to send the loan to a third-party collections firm? If not, what are the penalties? 
Would it be understandable the that customer would view aggressive collections and reporting as an act of intimidation to shut down an open investigation by the treasury? 
Why are standard reporting practices not followed in this case? 
Why does their portal still show the application as approval pending? 
What should be done if XXXX waited XXXX days after a loan forgiveness has been denied to inform the customer? 
What additional penalties would apply to XXXX if the customer was told not to worry in a call XXXX days after the rejection and that the invoices, banker was looking at did not show payment until XXXX? ( And those documents were not produced after an internal investigation ) What additional penalties would apply if they also informed the customer that loan was forgiven, XXXX days after the bank internally understood denial? 
Why was the loan forgiveness request reduced by {$1100.00}, even though it was rejected, and then sent to the XXXX? 
Why where the funds retained by Wells Fargo for at least XXXX days? 

What did XXXX stand to benefit from their delay? 
What damages have been done to XXXX XXXX  and XXXX XXXX XXXX? 
We took on a {$150000.00} XXXX loan increase when we should have declared bankruptcy, if we had accurate information. 
How do these actions fit into a larger pattern of behavior for this customer? Does that increase penalties? 
We have had XXXX customer advocacy requests internally at Wells Fargo, due to a range of issues. They have out wrong account numbers, that resulted in XXXX XXXX nearly not getting XXXX via a third party bank, they refused to update addresses and played odd games with not explaining rejections for XXXX applications. 
How does this behavior fit into a larger pattern of behavior with regards to the XXXX XXXX program? 
How many transactions, documents and statements does Wells Fargo need the court to kindly ignore to make their case? XXXX - The call on XXXX that outlined that the re-review showed that no forgiveness was appropriate and how that statement demonstrates that reduction was an act of fraud - The submission of the request for approval to the XXXX - The reversal of funds on XXXX that were not returned to the XXXX until XXXX - The screengrab of funds that paid off the loan into the account of the customer that appeared no later than XXXX and stayed there for a month. 
- The call on XXXX that outlined an alternative timeline of when statements called for payment. Statements that led to an internal investigation and no alternative statements being produced- The letter on XXXX that clearly stated forgiveness was granted - The XXXX XXXX portal that still shows that the loan is currently Approval Pending ( hidden on wellsfargo.com as of XX/XX/XXXX, but still active ) - The statements by bankers that there is a cultural problem with the XXXX team XXXX The discussion of XXXX profits when discussing the case on- The fact that the proper standard XXXX rejection XXXX paperwork has not been received by the client. Replaced by calls and letters that reference calls. 
How many documents or statements does XXXX XXXX need the court to ignore? XXXX