Consumer complaint received 2025-07-08 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Savings account
Issue: Managing an account — Deposits and withdrawals
Company: TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
Complaint Regarding Wrongful Withholding of Funds and Deceptive Practices by Truist Bank This complaint concerns the wrongful and indefinite withholding of {$47000.00} belonging to XXXX XXXX, a XXXX senior, by Truist Bank, along XXXX XXXX pattern of misleading communication and lack of transparency. 

Background of Funds : XXXX 's Truist account was opened on XX/XX/year>. On XX/XX/year>, a cashier 's check for {$47000.00}, issued from XXXX 's legitimate account at XXXX XXXX Bank, was deposited into his newly opened Truist account. These funds represent XXXX 's accumulated Social Security income ( a significant portion, which is federally protected from garnishment ) and his legitimate life savings. The sole purpose of transferring these funds was to establish a money market account at Truist to take advantage of a more favorable interest rate. These funds were held legitimately at XXXX XXXX for an extended period without issue, confirming their legitimate origin. 

Timeline of Events and Truist 's Misleading Conduct : Account Closure Letter & Initial Conflicting Information : Shortly after the deposit, Truist placed an indefinite hold on the funds. XXXX subsequently received a letter from Truist, dated XX/XX/year>, approximately one week after his account was opened. This letter explicitly stated that Truist had decided to close his account ( referencing account ending in XXXX ) due to " information provided by the consumer reporting agency listed below, '' identifying XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. The letter also stated that funds " may not be available for immediate withdrawal, '' " may be required ... to be returned to the Financial Institution originating the funding deposit and/or turn funds over to law enforcement or an appropriate government entity, '' and that any additional transactions presented against the account as of the date of the letter may be rejected by Truist. Despite this, a Truist representative then verbally informed XXXX that the funds had already been returned to XXXX XXXX, directly contradicting the letter 's nuanced wording. 

Repeated Misinformation from Branch Leader : Following the letter, XXXX made multiple calls to Truist Branch Leader XXXX XXXX, who consistently confirmed that the funds had been sent back to XXXX XXXX. On XX/XX/year>, XXXX visited the Truist branch in person at XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, TX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX again confirmed that the funds were returned to XXXX XXXX 

XXXX XXXX XXXX Confirmation & XXXX 's Follow-Up : Immediately after the in-person visit to Truist on XX/XX/year>, XXXX went to XXXX XXXXXXXX Bank and spoke with XXXX XXXX, who unequivocally confirmed that the {$47000.00} was never returned to them by Truist. This direct contradiction prompted XXXX to return to the Truist branch the next day, XX/XX/year>, where he again spoke with XXXX XXXX. At this point, she stated she would look into the discrepancy and get back to him. 

XXXX 's Evasive Call with Advocate Involvement : On XX/XX/year>, at approximately XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX finally called XXXX back. It was during this call that XXXX 's advocate became involved in the conversation. 

During this call, XXXX XXXX explicitly stated the hold was due to fraud and provided a number, claiming it was Truist 's fraud department. This number was later confirmed to be XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX a third-party consumer reporting agency. This was a direct misrepresentation designed to misdirect XXXX, especially given that the initial letter already identified XXXX 

XXXX XXXX then confirmed that Truist was indeed in possession of XXXX 's {$47000.00}, stating the money was " right here. '' However, she refused to release the funds or provide any clear explanation for the hold, stating she was " tongue-tied '' and could not elaborate due to an " investigation. '' During this same call, XXXX XXXX also inexplicably requested that XXXX go to XXXX XXXX and obtain a letter from them stating that they wanted the funds back, a request that made no logical sense given that Truist was holding the money. She also failed to provide any reference number for the interaction. 

XXXX XXXX repeatedly used vague language, claiming she was " trying to help, '' while simultaneously stonewalling and providing no actionable information or timeline for the release of funds. During this call, XXXX XXXX also promised that a supervisor would call XXXX back by Monday, XX/XX/year>. 

Failure of Supervisor Escalation : As of Tuesday, XX/XX/year>, no such call from a supervisor has been received, demonstrating a continued pattern of unresponsiveness and failure to follow through on commitments by Truist. 

Impact and Request for Resolution : Truist 's actions have caused significant financial distress and emotional anguish to XXXX, a senior citizen who relies on these savings. The indefinite withholding of his legitimate and federally protected funds, coupled with the bank 's deceptive and unhelpful communication, is unacceptable. 

We request that the CFPB/OCC immediately investigate Truist Bank 's practices in this matter and compel Truist to : Immediately release the full {$47000.00} to XXXX. 

Provide a clear, documented explanation for the wrongful hold and the misleading information provided. 

Take corrective action to ensure such practices do not recur. 

XXXX has documentation to support the legitimate origin of his funds and is prepared to provide it upon request.

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