Consumer complaint received 2025-12-26 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Savings account
Issue: Managing an account — Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed
Company: PNC Bank N.A.
State: AL

Complaint narrative:
THIS IS NOT A DUPLICATE FORMAL COMPLAINT DENIAL OF ASSISTANCE AND UNLAWFUL VERIFICATION PRACTICES To Whom It May Concern, I am submitting this complaint to document the handling of a telephone call I received from a XXXX claiming to be from PNC Executive Clients Office in reference to my CFPB complaint. This is a separate and distinct issue from prior complaints.

During this call, the following occurred : 1. The XXXX claimed that my address or the details of my complaint were required for verification over the phone because they had not previously spoken to me. 
2. I asked the XXXX under what law or statute they were operating that specifically required my address or complaint details for verification. They denied the existence of any law or statute requiring this. 
3. I asked if they would accept my CFPB complaint ID number as verification, since the complaint ID is provided by CFPB as proof and a receipt of my complaint. They refused, stating they could not accept it and only accepted address or details of the complaint for verification purposes.

4. I explained that logically, if CFPB provides a complaint ID as verification of the complaint, it should be accepted as proof for verification purposes. They did not provide a substantive answer. 
5. I reminded the XXXX that they initiated the call regarding my CFPB complaint and asked why they could not access or use my complaint ID to verify me. They again did not provide an explanation. 
6. I asked multiple times whose rules or laws prevented the acceptance of a complaint ID, and they repeatedly avoided the question.

7. During this process, the XXXX repeatedly cut me off and attempted to hang up the phone without my consent, claiming they were ending the call because I had not provided verification via address or complaint details. 
8. They explicitly stated there is no law governing verification of a customer over the phone.

9. The XXXX claimed they would provide a written response but ended the call abruptly before resolving my inquiry or providing clarification. 

Summary of Concerns : Denial of assistance for a complaint they initiated. 
Refusal to accept legally recognized verification ( CFPB complaint ID ). 
Contradictory and arbitrary verification standards without legal authority. 
Obstruction of lawful access and inquiry by hanging up mid-conversation. 
Failure to respond to clear legal questions regarding verification standards. 

Legal Basis for Complaint : Federal law : CFPB statutes ( 12 U.S.C. 5531, 5536 ), Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ), Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( GLBA ), Regulation E Alabama law : Ala. Code 13A-8-192 et seq., Ala. Code 5-19-1 et seq.

Bill of Rights protections : 1st, 4th, 5th, 14th Amendments ( privacy, property, due process ) Requested Resolutions : 1. Written acknowledgment of this complaint and inclusion in the administrative record. 
2. Clarification of verification requirements and the legal basis for verification over the phone.

3. Confirmation that my CFPB complaint ID must be accepted as verification of the complaint.

4. Assurance that no PNC employee may deny assistance or terminate calls without valid legal basis.

5. Explanation and corrective action regarding the mishandling and refusal of verification during this call. 
6. Written documentation confirming any policy or procedure changes to prevent recurrence of this type of obstruction.

This correspondence is submitted for inclusion in the administrative record, and I await an appropriate response consistent with applicable law.

Formal Notice of Unlawful Account Designation, Contradictory Representations, and Demand for Nullification of Agreement To Whom It May Concern, I submit this correspondence to formally document unlawful account designation, material nondisclosure, and contradictory representations made by bank personnel regarding my alleged joint account status, and to demand that any agreement obtained under these circumstances be deemed null and void.

1. Unlawful Addition as a Joint Owner While a Minor I was allegedly added as a joint account owner at approximately age XXXX, without my knowledge, consent, or executed signature. Despite the absence of lawful authorization, my name was included on bank statements and mailed account correspondence for years thereafter. 

At no point during my minority was I informed of this designation, nor was lawful consent obtained in compliance with applicable banking, contract, and consumer protection laws governing minors. 



2. PostHoc Signature Demand at Age XXXX Without Disclosure of Prior Violations At approximately age XXXX, I was later approached by the bank and requested to sign documentation related to the account. Critically, this request was made without disclosure of the prior unlawful designation, the absence of a valid signature at the time of account creation, or the potential legal implications of the banks earlier actions. 

I was not informed that the bank had previously added me as a joint owner without authorization while I was a minor. This material nondisclosure deprived me of the ability to provide informed consent and renders any subsequently obtained signature legally defective. 



3. Contradictory Representations Regarding Signature Requirements After obtaining my signature and granting online account access, bank employees later stated that my signature was not required to be added as a joint owner. 

This position directly contradicts : The banks prior request for my signature, The banks own conduct in seeking to correct the account years later, and Fundamental principles of lawful account formation. 

If my signature was never required, there would have been no lawful basis to demand it years later. This contradiction undermines the validity of the account designation and any agreement associated with it. 



4. Indicators of Account Misclassification Employee responses and account handling behaviors align more closely with custodial account principles than a lawful joint account, raising substantial concerns of misclassification. These inconsistencies include delayed correction efforts, contradictory explanations, and procedural handling incompatible with joint ownership standards. 

Such discrepancies raise red flags regarding improper internal coding, recordkeeping failures, and unlawful account designation. 



5. Pattern of Procedural Failure and Withheld Information After I raised concerns regarding suspicious activityactivity that bank employees failed to report as requiredI was granted account access, which was later restricted following my complaints. The relevant violations were not disclosed to me ; instead, I was forced to independently discover them through limited access the bank later attempted to block. 

This reflects a continuing pattern of procedural mishandling, not an isolated error. 



6. Legal Violations and Applicable Law These actions and failures violate, including but not limited to, the following federal and state laws, as well as constitutional protections : Federal Law Consumer Financial Protection Act ( 12 U.S.C. 5531, 5536 ) Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ) Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( 15 U.S.C. 68016809 ) Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( Regulation E, 15 U.S.C. 1693 et seq. ) Alabama Law Alabama Identity Theft Statutes ( Ala. Code 13A-8-192 et seq. ) Alabama Uniform Consumer Credit Code ( Ala. Code 5-19-1 et seq. ) Bill of Rights Protections 1st Amendment ( freedom of information/communication ) 4th Amendment ( privacy ) 5th and 14th Amendments ( due process, property rights ) 7. Demand for Nullification Because my alleged joint ownership : Originated while I was a minor, Lacked lawful authorization or informed consent, Was later corrected without disclosure of prior violations, and Was accompanied by materially contradictory representations, any agreement or acknowledgment obtained under these circumstances is voidable and hereby disputed. 

I formally demand that the agreement be treated as null and void, and that the administrative and account records be corrected accordingly. 



8. Preservation of Rights Nothing in this correspondence shall be construed as a waiver of any rights or remedies. I expressly reserve all rights under federal and state law. This notice is submitted to ensure the record accurately reflects the facts and legal defects described above.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation