Consumer complaint received 2025-10-17 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem accessing account
Company: HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK, THE
State: MN

Complaint narrative:
Formal Regulatory Complaint and Request for Enforcement Action Filed : XX/XX/year> Complainant : [ XXXX XXXX XXXX ] Respondent : The Huntington National Bank ( Huntington ) Regulatory Jurisdictions : Office of the Comptroller of the Currency ( OCC ) ; Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) I. Background and Jurisdiction On XX/XX/year>, I filed a formal complaint with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency ( OCC ) regarding prior misconduct by Huntington National Bank involving unauthorized account activity, improper communication practices, and systemic disregard for consumer directives. Said complaint was duly acknowledged by the OCCs online submission system and remains pending assignment of a case number.

On the same date, and as a direct corollary to that regulatory filing, I transmitted a formal cease-and-desist notice to Huntingtons Legal & Compliance Department , explicitly prohibiting all further direct contacttelephonic, electronic, or physicalunder 15 U.S.C. 1692c ( c ) ( Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, FDCPA ) and Minn. Stat. 332.37 ( 12 ). Multiple fax transmissions directed to Huntingtons listed compliance fax number ( XXXX ) were deliberately blocked or rejected by the banks systems, constituting obstruction of lawful notice delivery. Consequently, I transmitted the identical cease-and-desist text via Huntingtons official AI chat interface at Huntington.com, which confirmed successful message transmission at XX/XX/year> ( timestamped record attached ). 



II. Post-Notice Violations Despite Huntingtons receipt of said written notice, the bank willfully and knowingly initiated prohibited contact on XX/XX/year> via the following means : 1. Unlawful Telephone Contact : Date/Time : XX/XX/year>, XXXXXXXX XXXX  XXXX Originating Number : XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX Caller Identification : Huntington Bank Nature : Unsolicited inbound communication following explicit revocation of consent.

2. Unlawful Electronic Communication ( Marketing Email ) : Date/Time : XX/XX/year>, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Subject : Introducing Caregiver Banking Content : Promotional material, not transactional or legally required.

Each contact constitutes a knowing and willful violation of the FDCPA and corresponding Minnesota consumer protection statutes. Furthermore, these communications occurred within twenty-four ( 24 ) hours of a valid cease-and-desist order, strongly suggesting retaliatory conduct in direct response to my OCC complaint.

III. Anticipated Defenses and Rebuttals To preempt Huntingtons anticipated responses : 1. System or timing overlap defense : Huntington may allege these contacts were automatically queued prior to receipt of the cease-and-desist.

Rebuttal : The AI chat submission was confirmed as successfully transmitted on XX/XX/year>, via Huntingtons own digital infrastructure, which provides instantaneous internal delivery. Accordingly, Huntingtons systems were in receipt of the restriction before any subsequent outreach. Under 12 C.F.R. 1006.6 ( c ) ( 1 ), system automation is not a valid exemption from liability once notice is received through an official channel. 
2. Marketing exemption defense : Huntington may attempt to classify post-notice contact as marketing rather than collection.

Rebuttal : Both 15 U.S.C. 1692c ( c ) and Minn. Stat. 332.37 ( 12 ) prohibit any communication after written notice, regardless of intent or content type. The statutes prohibition encompasses further communication with the consumer, without limitation to debt-related correspondence. 
3. No material harm defense : Huntington may argue that no tangible harm resulted from the contact.

Rebuttal : Emotional distress, regulatory interference, and retaliatory conduct following protected complaint activity each constitute cognizable injury under the Consumer Financial Protection Act ( 12 U.S.C. 5536 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ) ), as well as the OCCs unfair practices authority.

IV. Supporting Documentation Attached file ( HUNTINGTON.pdf ) contains : Timestamped fax transmission attempts and delivery failure logs ; Screenshots of the cease-and-desist message submitted via Huntingtons AI chat interface ; Timestamped records of the XX/XX/XXXX phone call and marketing email ; Corroborating evidence of prior high-frequency physical mailings, demonstrating a pattern of excessive and harassing contact.

V. Requested Agency Action I respectfully request that the OCC and CFPB : 1. Initiate a joint enforcement inquiry into Huntingtons post-notice communications and potential retaliatory conduct ; 2. Determine whether Huntington engaged in systemic obstruction of consumer notice mechanisms ( i.e., blocking compliance fax lines ) ; 3. Evaluate whether Huntingtons AI communication platform has been used to circumvent or suppress statutory consumer rights ; 4. Impose appropriate civil penalties, corrective directives, and monitoring requirements for ongoing compliance.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation