Consumer complaint received 2026-03-12 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account — Transaction was not authorized
Company: TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: DC

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint against Truist Bank for improperly complying with an out-of-state garnishment notice that sought to attach funds in my bank account. As a XXXX, XXXX resident, my account funds were protected from Virginia garnishment orders under XXXX law. Truist Bank processed the garnishment without applying DC 's applicable consumer exemptions, resulting in the wrongful seizure of {$1500.00} from my account, an improper fee of {$120.00} charged to my account, and significant financial harm spanning over one month. Detailed Timeline of Events XX/XX/year> Account Garnished My bank account was garnished by a creditor seeking to collect on an old debt. No prior notice reflecting my XXXX residency or applicable XXXX exemptions was applied before my funds were frozen and subsequently seized. XX/XX/year> XXXX Acknowledges Error I contacted the creditor and provided my current XXXX, XXXX address. The creditor acknowledged that the garnishment was improper given my XXXX residency and their XXXXbased operations. They confirmed the garnishment would need to be stopped and advised me to follow up in two weeks while their attorneys initiated the dismissal process. XX/XX/year> Dismissal Initiated by Creditors Attorney The creditors attorney signed a Garnishment Disposition form stating that the judgment creditor desires its actions against the garnishee to be dismissed. The garnishment was formally set for dismissal as of this date. XX/XX/year> Bank Sends Check Despite Pending Dismissal Despite the dismissal having been initiated four days earlier, Truist Bank sent a check for {$1500.00} to the XXXX, Virginia courthouse as documented in their Garnishee Answer form. This payment was made after the creditors attorney had already signed the disposition for dismissal. XX/XX/year> Disposition Form Reviewed by Clerk The Garnishment Disposition form was reviewed by a courthouse clerk. XX/XX/year> Dismissal Signed by Judge The garnishment dismissal was formally signed by a judge at the XXXX, Virginia courthouse. XX/XX/year> Hearing Confirms Dismissal ; Check Returned At the scheduled garnishment hearing, the garnishment was confirmed as dismissed. Courthouse staff informed me that the check Truist had previously sent was mailed back to the bank on this date. XX/XX/year> Account Still Not Restored ( Filing Date ) As of today, my account has not been restored. It has now been over one month since my funds were seized. Truist Bank has not provided a provisional credit, has not confirmed receipt of the returned check, and has not waived the {$120.00} garnishment fee charged to my account. Legal Basis for Complaint XXXX Residency Protections : As a XXXX, XXXX resident, my account funds are protected from out-of-state garnishments under XXXX law. XXXX law also provides separate protections for bank account funds based on their source and the account holders residency. Banks Obligation to Apply Correct State Exemptions : The CFPB has established that banks bear the burden of determining whether a state restricts out-of-state garnishments and of applying the correct state-specific garnishment exemptions based on where the consumer resides not where the court issued the order. Truist Bank does not appear to have conducted this analysis before processing the Virginia garnishment order against my XXXX-based account. CFPB Enforcement Precedent : The CFPB has previously taken enforcement action against financial institutions for improperly processing out-of-state garnishment orders, including freezing accounts, charging garnishment fees, and sending payments to creditors without applying the consumer protections of the state where the account holder actually lives. This complaint reflects that same pattern of conduct. Improper Fee : The {$120.00} garnishment processing fee charged to my account is improper. Because the garnishment itself should never have been processed given my XXXX residency, I should not bear the cost of the bank processing an unlawful action. The CFPB has previously required banks to refund garnishment fees in similar circumstances. Financial Harm Incurred {$1500.00} wrongfully seized and not yet returned as of XX/XX/year> {$120.00} improper garnishment processing fee charged by Truist Bank Late payment penalties and fees on other bills caused by the prolonged unavailability of funds Over one month of financial disruption and hardship

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