Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Debt or credit management — Debt settlement
Issue: Problem with customer service — 
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I represent my client, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( account ending in XXXX ), through XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. I have been attempting to establish XXXX of Attorney with Bank of America since XX/XX/XXXX, without success. A prior complaint was submitted ( attached ), yet I continue to encounter what I believe to be ongoing bad-faith practices by Bank of America following that complaint. In response to the original complaint, Bank of America mailed correspondence to my office ( attached ), directing me to contact a specific representative, XXXX XXXX ( ext. XXXX ). I have called this number 27 times and have not received a single response or return call. The letter stated that the Power of Attorney was denied due to lack of original ( wet ) signatures. In reliance on that representation, I had my client execute new documents with wet signaturesincurring additional expensewhich I mailed to Bank of America on XX/XX/XXXX. Certified mail confirms receipt by Bank of America on XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, I spoke with an account representative who advised that the XXXX of Attorney had still not been logged and that they were unable to speak with me regarding the account. A request was submitted for a managerial callback from XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX ; no such callback was received. On XX/XX/XXXX, I spoke with another representative, XXXX XXXX, who refused to transfer me to a manager due to lack of account verification and stated that, per Bank of America policy, a callback request was the only option. I subsequently received a return call from manager XXXX XXXX, who advised that the Power of Attorney was still not on file and that documents received on XX/XX/XXXX would not yet be under review, as they were currently processing submissions received on or after XX/XX/XXXX. When I pointed out that my submission was received earlier, I was told it must not be valid, without further explanation. Additionally, since submitting my prior complaint, I received a XXXX tax statement for my client at my office address. This clearly indicates that my authorization has either been accepted or applied within XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX system. However, the statement references a different account ( ending in XXXX ), rather than the account at issue ( ending in XXXX ). This raises serious concerns that my XXXX of Attorney was either improperly applied to the wrong account or inconsistently processed. At a minimum, this demonstrates that my office has already been recognized as an authorized contact and that this authorization should be properly applied to the correct account. Notably, during my call with XXXX XXXX, I was informed for the first time that verbal authorization with my client present could have been used to verify the accountan option that was never once presented to me over the course of several months of attempting to resolve this matter. For context, I have submitted Power of Attorney documentation for numerous clients in the same manner, all of which have been successfully processed. This appears to be an isolated issue with this account and has resulted in significant and unnecessary delay. Given the above, I am requesting the following remedies : A reliable and responsive point of contact ( not the previously provided representative who has failed to respond after 27 attempts ) ; Immediate review and acknowledgment of the Power of Attorney documents submitted and confirmed received on XX/XX/XXXX ; Correction of any internal misapplication of my authorization, including transfer of the Power of Attorney to the correct account ( ending in XXXX ) ; Alternatively, transfer of this account to a third-party agency capable of handling the matter in good faith ; or Acceptance of one of the multiple verification methods available ( including verbal authorization with the client present ), which should have been offered from the outset. The repeated failure to process valid documentation, provide consistent information, or offer reasonable avenues for verification has materially delayed resolution and placed an unnecessary burden on both counsel and client. I respectfully request prompt intervention and resolution.

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 monetary relief