Product: Debt collection

FDCPA Complaint Regarding Lack of Communication and Notice Post-Merger by Truist Bank and XXXX XXXX XXXX I am submitting a complaint against Truist Bank and XXXX XXXX XXXX for their failure to provide any form of communication before, at, or after, or notice post-merger regarding the existence of Truist Bank or the status of my alleged debt from Lighstream. This failure has directly impacted my ability to knowingly manage or address the debt in question, constituting a clear violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). There are many similar complaints online regarding XXXX XXXX XXXX and this violation of the FDCPA. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, I was served with a debt collection lawsuit in XXXX XXXX, XXXX. It was served on XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, I filed Preliminary Objections to the Complaint under Pa.R.C.P. 1028 against TRUIST BANK. On XX/XX/XXXX, TRUIST BANK, instead of responding, filed an amended complaint. On XX/XX/XXXX, I filed Preliminary Objections to the amended complaint under Pa.R.C.P. 1028 against TRUIST BANK. The statute of limitations bars TRUIST BANK 's claim. In XXXX, per XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, actions upon a contract must be commenced within four years. However, TRUIST BANK, in what's tantamount to legal bullying, filed a lawsuit anyhow in violation of the FDCPA. 

The last payment to Lightstream, per TRUIST BANK 's own Lighstream Ledger, was on XX/XX/XXXX. No subsequent payments are recorded on TRUIST 's Lightstream ledger, and the account statement dated XX/XX/XXXX, demonstrates a delinquency of 73 days at that time. TRUIST BANK did not file its lawsuit until XX/XX/XXXX and it wasn't served until mid XX/XX/XXXX ; this timeline exceeds the four-year limitation period by a substantial margin. TRUIST BANK alleged in their lawsuit that I entered a new agreement with XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, which required $ 300 monthly payments due by the XXXX of each month to be made out to XXXX XXXX XXXX, and TRUIST alleged to their complaint that I made payments until XX/XX/XXXX, which is NOT TRUE. By XX/XX/XXXX, the alleged debt was in breach for failure to make a payment by XX/XX/XXXX, and only XXXX {$300.00} payments were ever made to XXXX XXXX XXXX or Lightstream ; it was never clear or communicated to me who I allegedly owed or who allegedly owned the alleged debt or why I had to make anything to XXXX, not Lightstream because neither Lighstream, Suntrust, Truist, or XXXX ever communicated to me EVER. 

Other than a superseding new agreement in XX/XX/XXXX, I never received a writing from XXXX XXXX XXXX. There was only ever one conversation with a collection representative from XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX or early XX/XX/XXXX where I was told not to worry about anything. Then, there was complete radio silence for the next, at least, XXXX days until the complaint was served. 

With no notice, with zero communication but one conversation at least XXXX days ago, and then radio silence for XXXX days until a complaint is suddenly unfairly and surprisingly served, no reasonable person would think they still owe something, and no reasonable person would spontaneously think, " I wonder if a new financial behemoth has entered the market and acquired my alleged debt without any notice to me. '' Especially when the financial behemoth in question has yet to emerge from the shadows of a complex merger, it defies logic to expect an individual to navigate through the silence and corporate obfuscation, piecing together the existence of a debt obligation to an entity that has made no effort to introduce itself, let alone give notice of its claim. 

Lack of Communication/Notice Post-Merger : Violation of FDCPA for Failure to Communicate : Truist Bank and XXXX XXXX XXXX have violated the FDCPA by failing to notify me of the merger between SunTrust ( Lighstream ) and BB & T, which resulted in the formation of Truist Bank XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, and then filed a lawsuit after the statute of limitations on XX/XX/XXXX, which wasn't served until mid XXXX XXXX. This lack of notification deprived me of the opportunity to understand to whom my alleged debt was allegedly owed, effectively obscuring my ability to respond or engage with the correct entity regarding my financial obligations. They continue to ignore and refuse to communicate. 
Impact on Consumer Rights : The absence of communication regarding the merger and the subsequent rights to collect the debt under the new entity Truist Bank is misleading and obstructs my rights as a consumer to be informed of my alleged debts status. This conduct falls within the purview of deceptive practices prohibited by the FDCPA, as it misleads debtors about the nature and status of their debts. 
Misrepresentation of Creditor Identity : By initiating legal action without previously establishing or communicating their standing as the new creditor, Truist Bank and XXXX XXXX XXXX have misrepresented the identity of the creditor, which is a direct violation of the FDCPA. Consumers are entitled to clear information about who owns their debt, and any changes to this ownership must be communicated promptly to prevent confusion and ensure transparency. 
Request for Remedial Action : In light of these violations, I request a thorough investigation into the failure of Truist Bank and XXXX XXXX XXXX to provide necessary communication and notice post-merger. This investigation should also examine the broader implications of such practices on consumer rights and the integrity of debt collection processes under the FDCPA. 

The lack of communication from Truist Bank and XXXX XXXX XXXX regarding their merger and the implications for my alleged debt has not only hindered my ability to make informed decisions but also constitutes a significant breach of the FDCPAs requirements for fair and transparent debt collection practices. I seek immediate rectification of these issues, including the dismissal of any legal actions taken against me based on these violations. 

I have since reached out to XXXX XXXX of XXXX XXXX XXXX and he continues to ignore me.