Consumer complaint received 2025-10-15 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed
Company: PNC Bank N.A.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Formal Complaint Unlawful Post-Verification Retention of Verified U.S. Treasury Funds by PNC Bank Urgent Request for Enforcement Review and Potential Liquidity Misuse Institution : PNC Bank, N.A.

The Tower at PNC Plaza XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX Account type : Consumer checking Treasury deposit Complainant : XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX | XXXX Summary of Complaint This complaint alleges that PNC Bank, N.A. engaged in knowing post-verification retention of a verified U.S. Treasury check and misrepresented the legal basis for continued restriction. 
On XXXX XXXX XXXX a U.S. Treasury check for XXXX XXXXXXXX  was deposited to account ending XXXX and subsequently confirmed Paid by the U.S. Treasury Check Verification System ( TCVS ). Despite confirmation and the absence of any OFAC, levy, or fraud indicator, PNC refused to release the verified funds and reclassified the transaction from a Regulation CC hold to an indefinite account-level review.

Key Facts and transcribed Admissions 1. Verification confirmed : The U.S. Treasury Check Verification System verified the instrument as Paid ; no OFAC block, levy, or fraud flag exists. ( TCVS confirmation ) 2. Reclassification by PNC officer : On XXXX XXXX XXXX Assistant Vice President XXXX XXXX ( Executive Client Relations Specialist, XXXX ) stated : This isnt an EFAA hold ; this is now an account hold. 
She further described it as an account issue, confirming that the check had cleared and the restriction was unrelated to deposit risk. 
3. Indefinite retention admission : When asked about the holds duration, XXXX XXXX stated : It could last 30, 45, 60, even 90 days theres no specific date I can give. 
When asked if that meant an indefinite freeze, she replied, You could say that. 
This admission, constitutes prima facie evidence that PNC knowingly retained verified federal funds outside Regulation CC timelines.

4. Void contractual justification : When asked for legal authority, XXXX XXXX cited the account agreement as PNCs basis for continuing the restriction. 
Under 12 U.S.C. 4007 ( b ), no agreement or policy may alter or limit consumer rights under the EFAA.

Therefore, any reliance on the account agreement to extend availability timelines is void ab initio and without legal force.

5. Failure to escalate or resolve : XXXX XXXX acknowledged active OCC and CFPB complaints but refused escalation, ended the call abruptly, and issued no written notice stating legal authority or duration as required by 12 C.F.R. 229.13 ( g ) and OCC Bulletin 2013-33.

Prima Facie Evidence of Willful Noncompliance XXXX XXXX statements show deliberate evasion of Regulation CC. Her acknowledgment that this isnt an EFAA hold and her admission that the hold could last indefinitely ( You could say that ) constitute knowing and willful disregard of statutory funds-availability rules. 
Combined with the absence of any new lawful notice, this demonstrates that PNCs post-verification restriction was neither administrative nor accidental, but a policy-level circumvention of federal law. 



Legal and Regulatory Grounds Expedited Funds Availability Act / Regulation CC ( 12 U.S.C. 4001 et seq. ; 12 C.F.R. Part 229 ) : Treasury checks must be available next business day ( 229.10 ( c ) ( 1 ) ( i ) ) ; large-deposit exceptions may not exceed seven business days ( 229.13 ( b ) ). 
No authority exists for indefinite account-review holds after verification. 
Federal Preemption 12 U.S.C.

4007 ( b ) : No contract or agreement shall affect the rights of any consumer or the responsibilities of any depository institution under this chapter.

Thus, PNCs reliance on its account agreement is void and unenforceable.

UDAAP ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ) : Misrepresenting post-verification retention as account review is deceptive, unfair, and abusive.

Notice Requirement 12 C.F.R.

229.13 ( g ) : A valid hold notice must clearly state reason and duration at the time of imposition. PNC issued none after verification.

OCC Bulletin 2013-33 / CFPB Bulletin 2020-01 : Both agencies prohibit rebranding of Reg CC holds as account reviews to avoid statutory availability rules. 



Invalidation of Original Hold Notice and Void Contractual Defense PNCs only written hold notice stated : We believe a check you deposited may not be paid.

That was a Regulation CC reasonable cause to doubt collectability notice, but it expired the moment TCVS confirmed the Treasury check as Paid.

Under 12 C.F.R. 229.13 ( g ), the original notice could not lawfully support further restriction once its reason lapsed.

Any subsequent justification such as account issue, review, or fraud screen is legally null and void because the first hold was extinguished and no new lawful notice was ever issued.

Because the original hold notice became void upon verification, PNC can not lawfully substitute new explanations or create a subsequent restriction. Once the initial notice expired, the funds were deemed available under Regulation CC 229.10 ( c ) ( 1 ) ( i ). 

Furthermore, XXXX XXXX reliance on the account agreement as the banks authority is expressly barred by 12 U.S.C. 4007 ( b ). 

PNCs continued restriction therefore lacked lawful notice, lawful basis, and lawful authority, rendering the conduct an intentional evasion of federal regulation. 



Consumer Harm and Supervisory Risks Direct consumer harm : Denial of access to verified federal funds has caused substantial financial hardship, transactional disruption, and loss of use. 

Beyond direct consumer harm, the circumstances reveal broader operational and supervisory concerns that merit immediate review. 

Systemic Concerns and Supervisory Red Flags The circumstances presented in this case raise serious supervisory concerns that extend beyond the individual consumer harm. 
The verified Treasury proceedsconfirmed Paid through the U.S. Treasury Check Verification Systemremain restricted to the depositor but appear to remain fully booked within PNCs internal balance sheet systems. 
This condition presents a potential liquidity-management incentive inconsistent with the intent of the Expedited Funds Availability Act ( EFAA ).

When a depository institution retains control over verified customer funds while denying the customer access, those balances can, even temporarily, augment the institutions short-term liquidity ratios, reserve positions, and collateral availability for interbank operations. 
In a fractional-reserve environment, the ability to hold verified deposits without disbursement can generate internal yield or balance-sheet advantage, particularly when such deposits are high-value Treasury instruments backed by the full faith and credit of the United States.

Although this filing does not allege deliberate misuse, the structural incentives created by PNCs account-level review framework warrant immediate examination by CFPB and OCC supervisory staff. 
The concern is not hypothetical : prolonged retention of verified federal disbursements under non-statutory account holds creates the appearance that such funds are being used to support internal liquidity, float income, or short-term lending capacity while the depositor is unlawfully deprived of access. 
If confirmed, such a practice would constitute a materially unsafe and unsound banking activity and a potential UDAAP violation, reflecting a conflict between institutional profit motives and statutory consumer-protection obligations. 

Regulators should evaluate whether : 1. Verified Treasury deposits classified under account-level reviews are temporarily included in internal liquidity, collateral, or reserve computations ; 2. Any float or interest income is generated from those restricted balances ; and 3. PNCs Enterprise Fraud and Treasury Operations Divisions maintain internal policies permitting such treatment of verified deposits. 

Given the nature and amount of the deposit, and the recorded admission that the restriction could last indefinitely, this matter presents a high-priority supervisory concern requiring coordinated CFPB and OCC enforcement review. 
The continued conversion of verified Treasury disbursements into retained internal balances undermines depositor confidence, distorts liquidity reporting, and threatens the integrity of the federal payments system. 


Prior written correspondence from Assistant Vice President XXXX XXXX Emailed Twice dated XXXX XXXX XXXX  From previous OCC And CFPB complaints she received and that the scheduled call was to ensure a full understanding and resolution. However, when the call occurred on XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  disclaimed familiarity with the matter, stating she was not aware this was a resolution call. That contradiction between her written commitment and subsequent disavowal demonstrates a serious breakdown in PNCs internal case-management and consumer-resolution controls. It also evidences bad-faith handling under OCC Bulletin 2013-33, which requires transparency and escalation when a complaint is under active supervisory review. 


XXXX XXXX terminated the call abruptly without providing written follow-up or clarification, contrary to both PNCs own Executive Client Relations procedures and OCC expectations for fair complaint resolution. Such conduct obstructed the complainants ability to obtain information or redress and reflects a willful disregard for mandated escalation standards. 



By misrepresenting the nature of the call, refusing escalation, and ending communication prematurely, XXXX XXXX acted in a manner inconsistent with PNCs duties of accuracy, fairness, and good-faith cooperation with regulators. Her actions converted what should have been a resolution dialogue into an adversarial encounter and delayed lawful access to verified federal funds. In regulatory context, this behavior demonstrates procedural bad faith and supports a finding that PNCs Executive Client Relations Division failed to maintain the internal controls and accountability required of a nationally chartered institution under 12 U.S.C. 1818 ( b ) and 5531 ( UDAAP ).

Requested CFPB Action ( Relief Sought ) 1. Initiate an immediate investigative inquiry into PNCs post-verification hold practices.

2. Coordinate with the OCC to compel release of funds and written certification of Reg CC compliance.

3. Issue subpoenas for all internal communications, policies, logs, and directives that reclassified Reg CC holds into account-level reviews.

4. Order full restitution of the funds with interest and compensation for loss of use.

5. Impose civil money penalties and individual accountability on XXXX XXXX XXXX and relevant Enterprise Fraud officers.

6. Mandate policy revisions and compliance training prohibiting Post-Verification Retention, verified through independent audit within 30 days.

7. Conduct a liquidity and float audit to determine whether PNC gained financial benefit from retaining verified deposits ( e.g., using balances for liquidity ratios, earning interest, or funding internal operations ).

8. Provide a written determination to the complainant and notify CFPB enforcement and supervisory divisions of actions taken. 



Conclusion The attached evidence including a recorded admission that this isnt an EFAA hold ; this is now an account hold, and confirmation that the review could last indefinitely establishes knowing and willful noncompliance with the EFAA and Regulation CC.

PNCs reliance on its account agreement is void under 4007 ( b ), and its only written hold notice became legally null once the check was verified.

The banks conduct represents Post-Verification Retention, a prohibited practice that denies consumers access to verified funds while allowing the institution to treat those funds as temporary liquidity instruments, undermining both depositor rights and the integrity of the federal payment system. 

Public-Interest and Reputational Concerns As the authorized representative for the depositor, I must emphasize that this issue now extends far beyond an isolated consumer dispute. My client is a well-known public figure with a verified national following, including thousands of fans, peers, and professional associates who closely observe his dealings and reputation. While he is not financially dependent on the withheld funds, the decision by PNC Bank to continue holding a verified U.S. Treasury disbursement raises serious questions that, if left unresolved, could attract widespread public attention and scrutiny. 

PNCs conduct does not merely inconvenience a single account holderit risks undermining confidence in the entire regulatory framework meant to safeguard consumer deposits and government payments. When a federally chartered institution knowingly retains verified Treasury funds without legal basis, it sends a message of indifference toward both federal law and public accountability. The optics of such behaviorespecially when the affected consumer is a high-profile individual known for charitable and community involvementcould significantly erode trust among the public and within professional circles that rely on PNCs integrity as a national financial institution. 

This office has intentionally refrained from public disclosure and has sought resolution through formal regulatory channels to preserve decorum and institutional respect. However, continued inaction or perceived stonewalling would make it increasingly difficult to prevent public inquiry or broader media interest. The publics right to transparency and fairness in the handling of Treasury-issued instruments can not be overstated.

For these reasons, this matter should be treated as both a consumer-protection emergency and a reputational risk event for PNC Bank . The Bureaus prompt intervention will not only secure justice for the affected consumer but also help preserve public confidence in the integrity of the U.S. banking and payments system.

The CFPB should act immediately, compel release, order restitution, and coordinate enforcement with the OCC to prevent recurrence.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation