Consumer complaint received 2025-02-24 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:
COMPLAINT An unauthorized transaction in the amount of {$18000.00} was posted to the account. It was a check payable to US TREASURY. The check was altered and the payment made to an unknown XXXX XXXX. The bank failed to show in communication that this payment had not been made to the US TREASURY and claim the error was not reported on time. The error was only discovered after a letter was received from the IRS requesting the payment. That same day the letter was received the error was reported in person to the bank. The bank statement, the tool provided by the bank to review transactions included the CHECK NUMBER and AMOUNT for check transactions, but it did not include information as to the recipient of the payment which would have allow for the error to be discovered earlier. 

EVENTS THAT TOOK PLACE - XX/XX/XXXX, check # XXXX, was written on in the amount of {$18000.00} and Payable to the UNITED STATES TREASURY. 
- XX/XX/XXXX, the statement for the account for the period XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. On page XXXX, It shows the transaction for XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX. There is nothing on the statement showing the recipient of the payment. 
- XX/XX/XXXX, a letter from the IRS arrived indicating that they had not received a payment for the XXXX. 
- XX/XX/XXXX, at the bank 's branch, the error was discovered. An associate assisted me in filling a police incident report by phone and AFFIDAVIT OF ALTERED CHECK which is an internal document to begin a claim process for the unauthorized payment. A Cashier 's check was also requested for payment and interest on the amount owed to the US Treasury. The associate did not provide copies of the police incident report and affidavit. 
- XX/XX/XXXX, a balance on the account showed that another {$18000.00} had been debited from the account. The same check number with the same amount had been once again paid by the bank to a different unauthorized recipient. 
- XX/XX/XXXX, at the bank 's branch, under advice from the branch VP a freeze on the account was placed and an AFFIDAVIT for the second unauthorized transaction was completed. A police incident report for this transaction was filed. 
- XX/XX/XXXX, a letter from the bank arrived requesting additional supporting information for the second unauthorized transaction discovered on XX/XX/XXXX. 
- XX/XX/XXXX, at the bank 's branch, the requested information was notarized by a bank agent. Information about the police incident report and affidavit for the first incident was request but could not be located. The associated that assisted with that incident was no longer associated with the bank. At that time another police incident report was filed and another AFFIDAVIT was completed for the original incident reported on XX/XX/XXXX. 
XXXX XXXX, letters dated XX/XX/XXXX about the claims made for unauthorized transactions. The letters confirmed that the claim for second incident would be paid and the claim for XXXX XXXX was denied due to failed to discover and report the alleged unauthorized transaction within the applicable time period. 
XXXX XXXX, XXXX, and appeal was made including additional argument supporting that the decision as to not to approve the first claim was incorrect based on the information provided as basis for the decision as well as all the particulars regarding this transaction. 
- XX/XX/XXXX, after several calls to verify the status of the claim an oral denial of the claim was provided. No letter explaining the denial was provided. 
- XX/XX/XXXX, at the branch, the bank accepted to review a second appeal. 
- XX/XX/XXXX, USPS tracking show that the bank received that package with the appeal request and documentation supporting the case. The bank had already notified that they required up to 120 days to make a decision. 
- XX/XX/XXXX, an oral denial was received when called to verify status. No letter or phone called about the denial was received.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation