Consumer complaint received 2026-06-09 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Managing the loan or lease — Billing problem
Company: TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: WA

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this follow-up complaint because Regional Acceptance Corporation continues to claim that the balance being reported and collected is accurate while failing to provide the documentation and calculations necessary to independently verify that claim. Regional has now provided some records, including a retail installment contract, transaction history, extension agreements, total loss correspondence, GAP claim determination documents, and account statements. However, the production of documents has created additional questions that Regional has not answered. The primary issue is that Regional continues to provide conclusions without providing the calculations supporting those conclusions. RED FLAG # XXXX NO DEFICIENCY BALANCE CALCULATION Regional repeatedly claims that a principal balance of {$9700.00} remained after the vehicle was declared a total loss, insurance proceeds were applied, warranty-related credits were applied, and the GAP claim was reviewed. However, Regional has never provided a deficiency balance worksheet showing step-by-step how it arrived at the {$9700.00} figure. Instead, Regional has simply provided the ending number and instructed me to accept it as accurate. I am requesting the actual calculation. RED FLAG # XXXX INSURANCE PAYMENT EXCEEDED THE PAYOFF FIGURE SHOWN ON THE GAP DETERMINATION Regionals own GAP determination documents state : Payoff as of date of loss : {$11000.00} Insurance settlement : {$14000.00} Warranty-related credits applied GAP benefit : {$0.00} Regional simultaneously claims that a principal deficiency of {$9700.00} remained after these events. This is precisely why a deficiency calculation is required. I am not claiming the balance is impossible. I am stating that Regional has not explained how these figures reconcile. Regional has produced documents showing the beginning and ending figures while omitting the calculations connecting them. RED FLAG # XXXX NO COMPLETE EXPLANATION OF THE GAP DETERMINATION Regional provided a GAP determination letter but did not provide : The GAP addendum or GAP contract relied upon. The complete XXXX claim file. The supporting calculations used during the XXXX review. The basis for concluding that no XXXX benefit was payable. Regional has therefore provided the result of the review without providing the information necessary to independently evaluate the accuracy of that result. RED FLAG # XXXX XXXX PAYMENT EXTENSIONS WITH NO EXPLANATION OF THEIR FINANCIAL IMPACT Regionals records show : A XXXX extension. XXXX separate XXXX extensions. An additional XXXX extension. Despite relying upon those extensions as part of the explanation for the remaining balance, Regional has never provided a calculation showing : How much additional interest accrued because of each extension. How each extension affected the maturity date. How each extension affected the final deficiency balance. Whether those amounts were excluded from XXXX coverage and, if so, why. Regionals position appears to be that extensions contributed significantly to the remaining balance, yet Regional has never quantified that impact. RED FLAG # XXXX THE BALANCE REMAINED SURPRISINGLY HIGH DESPITE YEARS OF PAYMENTS The transaction history reflects years of payments. However, the principal balance remained substantially higher than one would expect without a detailed explanation regarding the impact of interest accrual, extensions, fees, reversals, and other account activity. Regional has not provided a narrative accounting explaining how payments were applied over time and how those applications ultimately resulted in the claimed deficiency balance. RED FLAG # XXXX NO DIRECT CONTACT INFORMATION Regionals response is signed by XXXX XXXX, Senior Vice President and Process Management Lead. However, no direct email address, extension, department contact information, or other means of documented communication was provided. I am requesting clarification regarding whether XXXX XXXX personally reviewed the dispute, supporting documents, account history, and CFPB materials before issuing the response. If she personally reviewed the matter, then she should be able to address these questions directly. If she did not personally review the matter, then Regional should identify the individual who conducted the investigation and the records reviewed. I am also requesting a valid email address for the department responsible for handling this dispute so that communications can be documented and preserved for my protection and for the accuracy of the record. RED FLAG # XXXX REGIONAL CONTINUES TO REPORT THE BALANCE WITHOUT PROVIDING THE SUPPORTING CALCULATION Regional continues to maintain that the balance is accurate. However, Regional has not provided the actual calculation supporting the amount claimed. The issue is no longer whether documents exist. The issue is whether Regional can clearly explain and substantiate the balance it continues to report and claim is owed. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, furnishers have obligations regarding the accuracy and completeness of information reported to consumer reporting agencies and must conduct reasonable investigations of disputed information. Repeating that the balance is accurate is not the same as demonstrating that the balance is accurate. I am requesting documentation sufficient to independently verify the claimed balance, including a complete deficiency calculation, payoff calculation, XXXX documentation, extension impact calculations, credit reporting information, and an explanation reconciling the figures contained within Regionals own records. Until Regional provides that information, the accuracy and completeness of the reported balance remain disputed.

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