Consumer complaint received 2025-08-02 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Escrow, taxes, or insurance
Company: TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: MA

Complaint narrative:
FORMAL COMPLAINT XX/XX/XXXX Re : Truist Bank Mortgage Loan # XXXX Property Address : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX From : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX To : The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau : I am a current mortgage client of Truist Bank ( Truist ) for a condominium property at XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. My last / current mortgage on this property was last refinanced and effectuated in approximately XX/XX/XXXX with a previous unrelated mortgage lender and has a current remaining to-date balance of approximately {$55000.00} USD. Truist acquired the current mortgage approximately five ( 5 ) years prior to todays date after the loan note was bought/ sold numerous times throughout the years to approximately six ( 6 ) previous loan servicers. 

BACKGROUND In early XX/XX/XXXX I transferred via contract, the property insurance coverage ( then XXXX XXXX ) for the subject property to XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX  ) ; new per annum insurance policy supposed to effectuate late XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX. As during the verbal / on-line insurance sign-up and transfer process with Assurant, they advised they were to effectuate the needed insurance transfer and coverage on the aforementioned date of commencement and then bill me for such by hard copy at the end of the next billing cycles closing ; e.g. end of XX/XX/XXXX via XXXX mail. 

However, regrettably in late XX/XX/XXXX, I was forced to contact XXXX, as at that time I curiously received a large and incorrect unexpected increased cost per annum summary bill with an expectation of the first payment installation for my new insurance coverage. After repeated phone calls by me and internal investigation by XXXX, in early XX/XX/XXXX they ultimately determined and advised that they had mistakenly removed an existing mortgage credit from my account; i.e. the higher billed per annum amount. Moreover, they advised that as they never recorded in their system ( s ) that a current mortgage existed on the property they thus also never notified Truist of my change to my new insurance carrier. Most importantly, they lastly advised me further that they never advised Truist of insurance coverage on the property from late XX/XX/XXXX until XXXX XXXX, although the property was covered for XXXX purposes during that time as the first payment towards such was only needed to be made by me upon receiving the first billing statement at the end of XX/XX/XXXX. 
Upon final and ultimate causal determination by XXXX re aforementioned detailed mistakes, they apologized for their errors ( as described above ) and to head off any future additional mistakes by this new insurer and out of an abundance of caution, I decided to pay XXXX my XXXX property insurance coverage policy in toto at that time. 

After this contact with XXXX I then immediately telephoned Truist to advise of my new insurers mistake, as well as provide property insurance documentation and the clearly stated no-fault reasons for such delay. Upon initially speaking with a Truist representative on XX/XX/XXXX I explained the aforementioned in detail and was advised that Truist had indeed recently received my existing insurance documentation coverage ( Assurant ) via upload to Truists online portal sent by me and thus verifying said coverage was paid in full for the calendar year going forward. 
The Truist representative was patient and understood the situation described it as a common occurrence and further advised that in the interim starting several days prior in early XX/XX/XXXX Truist had purchased a force-placed insurance policy ( unbeknownst to me ) approximately XXXX ( XXXX ) days before this call, as they never had received any documentation or notice from XXXX of the new policy term and effectuated property coverage. Additionally, upon acknowledgment of the recent online upload receipt of my paid in full policy ( Assurant ) for the forward calendar year the force-placed policy purchased recently by Truist was summarily terminated by the company and I was to be charged a prorated amount for said coverage, but for only the back dated days the force-placed was in effect, which I understood and was more than willing to pay in an ex-parte manner of Truists choosing. I was advised I was to be billed separately for the force-placed insurance coverage time via separate email correspondence. 

Note : Upon receiving the e-bill for the limited duration force placed insurance coverage purchased by Truist I immediately paid the {$170.00} additional cost for the time the force place insurance was temporarily in place. 

However, in XX/XX/XXXX I was subsequently reviewing my online Truist mortgage account that now displayed my original monthly mortgage payment was to increase from {$1500.00} to {$1600.00} ; i.e. a 7 % monthly increase of {$110.00}. I immediately recontacted Truist by telephone to inquire re such and was advised that I was now being required to escrow my insurance payments henceforth for the remainder of the mortgage loan term despite my previously provided and accepted proof of the existing per annum policy as being paid in full for the forward calendar year. Additionally, the force-placed insurer carrier that Truist had selected instituted a drastically more costly coverage policy : i.e. approximately {$100000.00} more per annum than I had already in full by securing my own appropriate policy in XXXX XXXX. I again explained to the Truist representative all of the aforementioned causal factors ad nauseum and asked the representative to review my account notes. 

During this telephone call I advised Truist that I could recall no prior knowledge nor communication ; e.g. no telephone calls, no emails, no letters ( standard U.S. mail / certified signature / restricted delivery / return receipt, etc. ) from Truist advising nor notifying me that Truist was in the process of purchasing or had purchased any forced-placed insurance for my current mortgage at my expense nor requesting that I personally purchase any property insurance coverage. I further advised that I received no such communication sent to either the property address nor the listed mailing address for my mortgage loan ; e.g. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. Lastly, I asked the Truist representative for proof of any service and receipt by me of any communication to me that Truist was in the process of and / or notification that Truist had indeed purchased any forced-placed insurance at my expense for my current mortgage. The Truist representative advised that no actual proof of any service existed except that their process is to normally a non-certified letter via general U.S. mail delivery to the registered mailing address on file.

I again reiterated that I received no such previous communication sent to either the property address nor the listed mailing address for my mortgage loan detailing an impending force-placed policy was to commence. I again requested proof of any service of any communication to me that Truist was in the process of and / or notification that Truist had indeed purchased any forced-placed insurance for my current mortgage, to which the representative again advised that no actual proof of any service existed. Ultimately in response to the proof of notification and receipt of such by me, the Truist representative referred me to file a complaint with Truists/ XXXX  / XXXX XXXX XXXX Department re any increase to my monthly payment via a mandate of escrowing my insurance coverage which I subsequently did via sending a certified return receipt letter received by Truist on XX/XX/XXXX. 

XX/XX/XXXX & XX/XX/XXXX LETTERS On XX/XX/XXXX Truist responded in writing to my XX/XX/XXXX dated letter and confirmed that they could produce no actual proof / evidence / record of any service and / or receipt existed to verify any communication to me that Truist was in the process of and / or notification that Truist had indeed purchased any forced-placed insurance at my expense for my current mortgage. 

Specifically, in my XX/XX/XXXX letter I specifically requested from Truist collectively .. that Truist please provide me [ any and all ] evidence of any verifiably received communication, correspondence, letter ( s ) via certified signature / restricted delivery / return receipt of the U.S. mail or other nongovernmental courier service from Truist XXXX me in XXXX or XXXX notifying me that it planned, prior to, on purchasing any forced-placed insurance for my current mortgage and / or notifying me of lack of active property insurance. Truist replied that the only evidence of proof of service was the reiteration that Truists their normal process is to send a letter re such to the registered mailing address. 

Furthermore, in XXXX response letter dated XX/XX/XXXX the company confirmed only in the most general terms, in response to the aforementioned requested verifiable proof of evidenced actual delivery notification, that merely and allegedly all required notifications were sent to you in writing regarding the lender-placed insurance ..., but had no evidence of actual delivery and receipt of such. They again stated only as their best evidence that Truists typical practice is to normally send hard copy notices to the registered mailing address via general delivery of the XXXX mail. 

In my XX/XX/XXXX letter I also stated that if no verifiable communication evidence or proof of record ( s ) of actual correspondence of any kind made by Truist to me as described above can be produced I moved, per relevant sections of 12 Code of Federal Regulations ( CFR ) 1024.37 ( e ) ( 1 ) and 12 CFR 1024.79 ( e ) ( 2 ), as well various Commonwealth of Massachusetts banking and consumer protection regulations, that any proposed forced-placed escrow insurance mandate be forthwith cancelled and my mortgage loan note summarily revert to its original non-escrowed account status and amount for the duration as was previously. In Truists response letter dated XX/XX/XXXX they denied this specific request. 

XX/XX/XXXX LETTER In early XX/XX/XXXX I verifiably provided via email, facsimile and hand delivery service several separate Truist divisions ; Legal Department, Mortgage Customer Service, Escrow Department and Legal Fulfillment Department, a letter dated XX/XX/XXXX. In this letter I again requested for a second time that Truist : 1 ) provide me any actual evidence that these allegedly provided force-placed insurance notifications letters were verifiably received via certified signature / restricted delivery / return receipt of the U.S. mail or other nongovernmental courier service from Truist verifying delivery and notification to me that it planned, prior to, on purchasing any forced-placed insurance for my current mortgage and / or notifying me of lack of active property insurance.

2 ) if so described as above in # 1 is not possible, please affirmatively confirm in writing that no verifiable communication evidence record ( s ) exists that these subject notifications letters were verifiably received to me via certified signature / restricted delivery / return receipt of the U.S. mail or other nongovernmental courier service.

3 ) as described in # 1 and # 2 above, if no evidence can be produced of actual service or notification of mandated prior notification can be produced, that any proposed forced-placed escrow insurance mandated and claimed to be in place currently on my mortgage loan note be forthwith cancelled and my mortgage loan note summarily revert to a non-escrowed account for the duration as it was previously ; i.e. account reversion from the current and continually disputed {$1600.00} monthly claimed amount that includes an usurious outside escrow policy amount, back to my original monthly mortgage payment from {$1500.00}.

4 ) reiteration that as described in # 1 and # 2 above, if no evidence can be produced of service or notification receipt of mandated prior notification can be produced ; i.e. the lack of Truists ability to prove that any proposed forced-placed escrow insurance notifications were received by me, that any proposed forced-placed escrow insurance mandated and claimed to be in place currently on my mortgage loan note be forthwith cancelled and my mortgage loan note summarily revert to a non-escrowed account for the duration as it was previously and that Truists mandate of such against me would violate the prior notification provisions required by and violate relevant sections of 12 Code of Federal Regulations ( CFR ) 1024.37 ( e ) ( 1 ) and 12 CFR 1024.79 ( e ) ( 2 ), as well various Commonwealth of Massachusetts banking a consumer protection regulations. 

XX/XX/XXXX LETTER On XX/XX/XXXX Truist responded to my letter dated XX/XX/XXXX. In said letter Truist the company again claimed only in the most general terms, in response to the aforementioned request of verifiable proof of evidenced actual delivery notification, that merely and allegedly all required notifications were sent to you in writing regarding the lender-placed insurance.... However, Truist could provide no evidence nor proof of actual delivery and receipt of such. They again alleged only as their best evidence that Truists typical practice is to normally send a letter to the registered mailing address via general delivery of the U.S. mail. Lastly, they again denied my request that the proposed forced-placed escrow insurance mandated and in place currently on my mortgage loan note by Truist be forthwith cancelled and denied my that mortgage loan note summarily revert to a non-escrowed account for the duration as it was previously ; i.e. account reversion from the current and continually disputed {$1600.00} monthly claimed amount that includes an additional escrow policy amount, back to my original monthly mortgage payment from {$1500.00}. 

FORMAL COMPLAINT I am filing a formal complaint that the lack of Truists ability to prove that any proposed forced-placed escrow insurance notifications were sent to nor received by me, that any proposed forced-placed escrow insurance mandated and in place currently on my mortgage loan note violate the prior notification provisions required by and violate relevant sections of 12 Code of Federal Regulations ( CFR ) 1024.37 ( e ) ( 1 ) and 12 CFR 1024.79 ( e ) ( 2 ), as well various Commonwealth of Massachusetts banking a consumer protection regulations. 

Respectfully, XXXX XXXX XXXX

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