Consumer complaint received 2025-03-31 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem — Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Company: KEYCORP
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am appalled at the lack of response and investigation by the CFPB. Just reading the response thoroughly from Key Bank, it is obvious that they have not answered the questions supported in the initial claim. In addition, no bank records were provcided to substantiate anything that the response concluded. In fact, the response did not include any answers, other than general statements about how they could not substantiate the claims made in the complaint. It is also obvious that there are many conflicting statements in the response itself. 
XXXX XXXX -- The letter they included of XX/XX/XXXX is incorrectly addressed which would answer why we did not receive it. It is simply addressed to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX,. 
That address format has XXXX sub addresses by apartment number. Why is it the only mail piece missing the apartment number. Was it hastily prepared for the response to the complaint? Within the letter, the reasons given for the cancellation of autopay do not apply here.EXCEPT for the last reason that admits that a payoff was attempted, although denied in the bottom of the letter page XXXX. The bank admits that a payoff was initiated, if the response is even official since it has no signature in full. Then, they claim that a payoff request was not needed in XXXX since the loan was coming to close. 
They go on to say that the loan came to maturity on XX/XX/XXXX. Why then, as first asked, was there the full payoff transaction in XXXX? The incorrectly addressed letter of XX/XX/XXXX says there was. It clearly affirms that the amount generated in the ACH exceeded the regular payment. She states that the autopayment of XX/XX/XXXX was not received, this being our understanding that the normal payment was still in process. As soon as we received notice that XXXX had not been paid, I called the Bank. and the XX/XX/XXXX payment was paid on XX/XX/XXXX. No mention of the discussion with the supervisor XXXX is referenced but it was XXXX who took the payment telling me that the payment brought the loan up to date. My bank records show a payment every month from my checking account from XX/XX/XXXX through XXXX of XXXX. XXXX, provided me with the payment amount due which she took over the phone. It should be noted that thwe bank advises that the call is being recorded. Since permission is given, I too, have a recording of my conversations with the bank.Although they deny the {$1600.00} transaction in XXXX, XXXX XXXX has a record of receiving it. It was in this call that XXXX reviewed the XXXX remaining payments and requested that I make the payment from my end, which I did. Not only were the XXXX and XXXX payments of {$470.00} accepted by the bank, they reported it to the CRA 's that the loan was being paid as agreed.No letter that there was a past due balance. 
If you had looked at the loan agreement sent with their little documentation it states that payments would begin on XX/XX/XXXX. How and where did we get rolled back to the XXXX of the month? In addition to the inconsistencies, they seem to have a payment missing on the credit reporting since a XXXX payment was made. The XX/XX/XXXX payoff could not be 30 days past due as the payment date is less than 30 days past whatever they claim. All these inconsistencies are not substantiated by a single bank record except for a hand prepared spreadsheet. Also not mentioned specifically are the calls with XXXX, XXXX and the calls with others in the XXXX XXXX with XXXX and XXXX. I am not including the phone recordings as they contain secure information but have them should they be needed in court. I simply did as instructed by XXXX. No consideration is even contemplated that just maybe, XXXX had made a mistake!

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation