Consumer complaint received 2024-01-06 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — VA mortgage
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem — Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Company: TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: MD

Complaint narrative:
We were planning to apply for an equity line of credit on our primary residence to do some repairs and renovations. Our CPA had recommended this funding vehicle. Just as we were planning to do so, I received an email from XXXX that my credit score had taken a ding. I logged in to find out that this mortgage was reported 30+ days late. 

Looking into the account, it appeared that the taxes on the property went up, resulting in an increase in the monthly payment amount. We did not receive any notice from the bank. Our payments are auto-paid from our personal  checking account, and the payment in XXXX was made within the allotted window. However, because of the change in amount due, the payment was short {$76.00}. That's it, {$76.00} ... of the {$3400.00} due ( up to that point the monthly payment was less than {$3400.00}, but we paid an even {$3400.00} each month ). The way we read the account statement online, the {$3400.00} we had auto-paid was placed in an " aside '' status instead of being applied to the amount due, in effect making it appear we hadn't paid anything. The bank filed with the credit reporting agencies that we were past due the full amount, even though they had received {$3400.00}, which more than covered their interest for the month. We had no clue this was happening until XXXX when we got the notice from XXXX. 

We contacted our mortgage banker for assistance, and she forwarded our issue to Truist managers at their headquarters. One of the managers replied with the following : " There is a delinquency reporting for XX/XX/XXXX. 

Per ANA1/LAST the customer XXXX  did adjust for the XX/XX/XXXX payment. Customer submitted the payment for XX/XX/XXXX payment but was short due to increase in XXXX. Per notes do see where a task was sent to reach out to customer in regards to the payment however the number we had on file was disconnected. 

Per MAS1/USR3 the customer is on paper statements. I dont see any return mail from the statements nor XXXX  statement. 

Per MAS1/DFT1 the customer is not on Auto Draft with Truist. Customer may be using a XXXX XXXX service and did not update. 

From what I am reviewing we ( Truist ) did try to reach out to the customer once we got the short payment but did not have the correct telephone number. However no return mail from statements nor XXXX  statements. I would say no error however please advise if you have other thoughts. 

Also, do I need to put this in XXXX as a dispute? 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  PLEASE ADVISE CLIENT OF PMT CHANGE EFF XX/XX/XXXX. CLIE CLCURT NT SENDING IN OLD PMT AMT. '' Another manager replied to the first : " Per a review of the clients loan history it does appear that they continued sending in the previous payment amount of {$3400.00} which was more than enough to satisfy the previous payment amount. Since the amount paid did not satisfy the XX/XX/XXXX payment the funds were credited to suspense on XXXX. They were then debited from suspense and credited as the XX/XX/XXXX payment on XXXX shorting XXXX. The same thing scenario occurred w/the XX/XX/XXXX payment. '' The third and final manager replied : " Agree with all no bank error. 1st shortage applied within shortage policy, subsequent funds greater than the {$50.00} tolerance unable to apply/short. Client was attempted to be contacted, phone is incorrect, delinquency letters, statements XXXX  statements, all agree no return mail. 

Client did already update their bill pay ( 3rd party bill pay clients must do this manually ) and we received correct amount for XXXX. '' Two very important issues : 1. The bank was sending their paper notices to the wrong address. They were sending them to our rental property and not to our primary residence ( which also happens to be the residence with the mortgage in dispute ). We never received those notices because for some reason they changed the default billing address to this incorrect address. Yes it is our property, but it is not where we receive mail. Tenants live there. 

2. They were calling the wrong telephone number, despite the fact the correct number is the only number showing on our online account pages. 

We note that the bank was capable, of identifying whether the paper mail they had sent was returned or not, but they were not able to find out correct phone number and instead only tried calling a number that had been disconnected over 8 years prior. IIt should have been a simple task to pull up our account to identify a current telephone number, but based on the responses we received they did not attempt to do so. 

In their responses, these managers even acknowledge that we were still making payments at the rate we had been making up to the point the amount increased. They acknowledged they had the wrong telephone number, yet continued trying to call it instead of finding the correct one ... which was in their systems.

And not for nothing, but the ding on our credit report states that we had a payment 30+ days late, which implies we paid $ XXXX. In fact, we were not at all late in making a payment. We made our payments on time, as acknowledged by these managers, and they held that payment in suspense. In order to be 30+ days late, we feel an entire payment must be missed/late, not a shortfall of {$76.00}. 

We find it aggravating that, with over a XXXX in mortgages with Truist, and an active XXXX  account pulling in over {$1.00} XXXX per year to our Truist XXXX  checking, we would be allowed to be placed in this situation without so much as a phone call from someone at Truist wanting to ensure we were aware of the problem. This is not what we would call adequate customer service. And now we have a hit on our credit report, despite almost 2 decades and multiple mortgages, credit cards, etc without a single late payment, because of {$76.00}.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation