Product: Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports

As per the conclusion of my investigation thus far, it has been determined that XXXX along with other financial institutions previously mentioned in my initial complaint ; have failed to provide any adequate answer as to why they deemed me ineligible to become a member of their financial institution. Ultimately denying me any deposit account services. XXXX, BB & T, SUNTRUST, XXXX XXXX, and others has responded to me, vehemently denying supporting or endorsing any form of discrimination ; but making no effort to resolve my issue. Merely going through the motions by following their process and standard company protocol. Where as I would have to assume based on the fact that each financial institution 's letters, although written or prepared all independently of each other ; all share some of the very same unique characteristics. Essentially, they all begin and end with the same generic and standardized apologetic statement. Also, all in which say the same thing. Which is, that it is not their culture to embrace any form of discrimination. As stated, this response is not adequate, in as any Company, Financial institution, Organization, or individual, could easily provide a letter to their customer, client, or account holder stating that it is not their culture to embrace, or tolerate discrimination ; to any degree. A Company simply following procedure, and referring to it's bylaws on how to provide a standardized, and scripted response to a customer or client takes almost little to no effort at all. Especially for Companies and Financial institutions like those named in my complaint, who are held to a much higher standard [ ] and that are endowed with tremendous influence. Such said Financial institutions as these, rededly provide these types of standardized responses on a daily basis ; to more than several of their customers. To me, merely submitting a scripted, and generic response to a claim to the extent of mines, with such detail ; in my opinion suggest that XXXX, and these other financial institutions genuinely have no interest in truly understanding the root of my concern. Which in part is to help me better understand why it is that I was denied the liberties of being a member of their financial institution. It would not be fair to say that while although there may be 1, or 2 financial institutions that have made a more comprehensive effort. Other 's have put forth little to no effort at all. To me, simply offering a text book, or scripted response, or no response at all ; in my opinion is not only a insult ; but also a very generic attempt to avoid confronting a deeply rooted issue. My issue is the unfair treatment of individuals that are considered different from what today 's society may consider to be outside the norm. Unfortunately this is a stigma that is practiced by a number of banks, and other corporations. XXXX has reported to me that the reason for denying me deposit account services was based solely on information provided to them by XXXX XXXX XXXX. It is my argument that the facts clearly show that a great deal of the information XXXX XXXX XXXX has collected on me was provided to them by BB & T SUNTRUST, now TRUIST. The facts also show that the information provided by BB & T-SUNTRUST , now TRUIST was not accurate. It is also my argument that not only was the information provided not accurate, but BB & T now TRUIST knowingly provided this inaccurate, and untrue information to it's privately owned third-party credit reporting agency . It is also my argument that BB & T-SUNTRUST now TRUIST has violated the FCRA rules by knowingly providing such said inaccurate information concerning me. It is also my argument, as in regards to XXXX XXXX and other 's ; that it was this inaccurate, and false information that was used in their determining of me being not eligible to become a member of their financial institution. At this time, I should ask XXXXXXXX XXXX  exactly what it's definition of " Information '' is. I ask this question based on the fact, that according to XXXX XXXX, and other 's, it is the " information '' provided to them by XXXX XXXX XXXX that was used in their determining me ineligible to become a deposit account member. Thus denying me any account services. It is my argument, that the facts show that within the broad spectrum of " Information '' that is collected and used by XXXX XXXX XXXX and provided to a number of financial institutions such as XXXX, BB & T-SUNTRUST ; and other 's, is a detail compilation of my public information. Such as, military discharge status, political affiliation, background, and gender preference. It is my argument that the financial institutions named, used public information, along with the false information provided by BB & T in determining my eligibility. It is my argument, that considering the fact that I have never been charged or convicted of any of the activities that BB & T has reported to it's own third-party credit reporting agency , furthermore ; the comments and remarks that BB & T has reported concerning me have not been substantiated or proven. Yet these financial institutions have considered this inaccurate information regarding me. Inaccurate information that according to the Federal Government, it is unlawful to critic a person based on. BB & T-SUNTRUST has decided that instead of accepting the fact that their investigation into my claims and disputes were conducted with extreme pre-bias and discrimination. BB & T- SUNTRUST would rather be bias against me. Defaming both my name, and credibility. Essentially deeming me to be a unsavory customer, and individual. Instead of comprehensively analyzing the details surrounding my claims submitted to them, they have scorned me continiesly ; and mocked me. Suggesting that I caused my own identity theft, by in their words ; " Failure to Safeguard my financial documents ''. Furthermore, TRUIST has stated that not only was I the cause of my own identity theft ; but that I also benefited from it. This assertion made by TRUIST alone is discriminating, bias, and prejudice. Suggesting that I should in no way be considered the victim, but should instead be considered the instigator. TRUIST has also suggested that if a client as myself has had any previous history with a merchant, then that client can in no way become a victim of any unauthorized transaction completed to that merchant. TRUIST has stated that it conducted a thorough investigation, with absolutely no bias. If this were true then there would have been a number of different factors that TRUIST would have unpacked and took into consideration. Not to mention that I have personal first hand knowledge of a close constituent who is of the XXXX XXXX  decent, who had strikingly similar issues as me ; but who's claims had a opposite outcome than mines did. I should also note, that this same invidual is currently still a member of TRUIST ; and has already provided a notarized statement on my behalf. This individual has also agreed to the releasing of his name and political status, in the event that court proceedings should occur. If it were in fact true that BB & T-SUNTRUST now TRUIST moved with zero bias in their investigation then at bare minimum they would have considered the fact that in today 's sophisticated society, hackers have advanced in their technology of criminal identity theft methods. Me, a XXXX yr. XXXX American, Registered Republican in the great District of Columbia , with only a highchool diploma, and a Other Than Honorable discharge from the XXXX XXXX after serving 4 yrs as a Journalist ; and has absolutely zero computer savvy knows that today 's hackers are advanced. If in fact, there was no bias, prejudice, discrimination, and pre judgement concerning me in your investigation then TRUIST would have very well considered, and knew that in today 's society many Applications such as XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, etc. Become targets for hackers, and unlawful information access ; which in turn alot of times leads to identity theft experienced by victims like me. Hackers today, have developed and designed sophisticated ways in performing unauthorized transactions with a individuals account. Again, even I realize this much. Had TRUIST not moved with bias, stigma, and prejudice then in it's investigation ; they would have discovered that it was, and has been determined that according to District of Columbia XXXX XXXX I was the victim of a Phishing scam. A internal phishing scam orchestrated by one of their own Federal Government employees. ( This information to, can be verified by the DC XXXX XXXX Department ). That both my personal and banking information was severely compromised. Furthermore, it has also been determined by XXXX that during the course of a major Cyber Security breach, that my personal, private, and financial information was accessed ; and compromised. I should also note that TRUIST was aware of the identity theft I experienced as a result of being a XXXX XXXX survivor, and fleeing from Washington DC. I physically visited BB & T branch location in XXXX Georgia on several occasions providing documentation supporting the facts just provided. In which during one visit I literally cried in the office of your authorized banker, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for over a hour. Whom although I feel was genuinely concerned about my situation, and wanted to help me better resolve the issue ; after making a phone call to TRUIST corporate office was told that he could not provide any service as in regards to my dispute and claims. It would be during this same visit that I expressed to XXXX XXXX, my feelings concerning the discriminating suggestion made by TRUIST that I influenced or provoked my own cause of personal violation, and identity theft. I explained to XXXX XXXX TRUIST suggestion should be compared to, and looked at no differently than if a woman who experienced XXXX. Who was no doubt the victim of having her personal identity violated, and after making her traumatic experience known to police. Instead of being helped and her devastating experience took seriously, she is instead scorned, and mocked. Being told that she somehow played a role in her own violation. That maybe had she not worn the beautiful red dress her husband bought her, then just maybe the criminal who XXXX her wouldn't have thought that she was not only a easy target ; but also her wearing the red dress suggested to the criminal she wanted to be assulted and violated. Essentially, this is likewise the suggestion that TRUIST has made. I should add that after careful consideration of my comprehensive investigation, that it comes to no surprise that TRUIST moved with such bias. After confirming with one of it's former employees whom resigned her position after being faced with the undeniable fact that as part of TRUIST culture, employees were actually trained on how to enforce certain prejudice towards a particular set of clients. How during the phase of the TRUIST orientation process, it is emphasized to it's employees the importance of implementing certain pre judge bias. This same employee has provided a notarized written statement, as well as agreed to the releasing of her name in the event that court proceedings should occur. In conclusion, after careful consideration of the facts that have been gathered. I have no interest in becoming a member of BB & T -SUNTRUST now TRUIST, or any of the other financial institutions named in my complaint. Save XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. Whom when considering their genuinely positive attitude towards wishing to resolve my issues, and complaints. Has led me to believe that they sincerely regret a person as myself having such a experience concerning themselves, or any financial institution affiliated with their name. Instead of just saying it, XXXX XXXX ; XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX has truly made efforts in showing that their institution does not embrace any form of discrimination as part of it's culture. Which in my opinion, should be the attitude of others in today 's diverse world. Unlike others named in my complaint, XXXX XXXX offered a more warming response letter regarding my issues. Eagerly expressing it's willingness to understand and resolve my issues, and my concern of being discrimated against. Providing a response letter that was written and customized to fit my experience. Not as other 's, who's responses were cookie cutter, one size fit all, and generic. I remain hopeful, and optimistic that I will resolve my issues with XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. Seeing that we continue to move forward in that direction. I would encourage them to reach out to me, via the email addresses provided. As in regards to XXXX, BB & T now TRUIST, XXXX XXXX, and others I am afraid that no option for resolution can be made available. Other than justifiable relief provided through the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Seeing that I have for several months, even before the submitting of my claim I attempted to resolve my issues, obviously to no prevail ; or fair treatment. Furthermore considering the fact that BB & T showed no reservation in it's boldness to provide grossly negligent information concerning me to it's own third-party credit reporting agency , XXXX XXXX XXXX Thus violating the FCRA. I have evidence that TRUIST provided this inaccurate information after the conclusion of it's bias investigation. There is also evidence supporting the fact that BB & T was also made aware of my political affiliation, background, gender preference, and race during a first time account holders class conducted by 1 it's employees. Who was a banker at their BB & T District of Columbia branch location. During this class, we were told by our class program director XXXX XXXX XXXX, that in order to graduate the program, 1 of the requirements was that a profile must be created and a checking account must be opened at a financial institution of our choosing. The only stipulation would be that the financial institution had to be one of which conducted new account holder classes at the facility. In this case, that financial institution was BB & T. Although I am not at liberty to say the name of the Non-profit organization.BB & T now TRUIST records should indicate which organization this was, in correspondence to it's District of Columbia branch location where I opened my account. It is my argument that it is this same personal Information provided, that TRUIST has on several occasions used against me in denying me equal opportunities, and fair treatment. In it's denying of my claims or disputes. In the event that you are unable to locate the name of this Non-profit organization, then if I am notified by you ; then I will gladly provide that information. In closing, at this time I have nothing further to add, considering that it is still information that must be gathered. However, I have already begun to make preparation to obtain professional counsel and begin XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX.