Consumer complaint received 2025-08-16 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account — Transaction was not authorized
Company: TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted Truist Bank regarding 2 unauthorized deductions from my checking account in the amount of {$2100.00}. During this contact, Truist informed me that they would be sending me documentation that I would need to fill out and return to them in order for Truist to consider my fraud claim. This included a questionnaire and a request for a written statement regarding the unauthorized deductions/transactions regarding my account. On XX/XX/XXXX, Truist denied my fraud claim. NOTE : This denial occurred before I even had an opportunity to provide them a written statement or to complete and return the paperwork they were to send to me. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received Truist 's information/questionnaire packet. On XX/XX/XXXX, I submitted the completed questionnaire and a written statement to Truist. Note : Also, on XX/XX/XXXX, I received a letter from Truist, dated, XX/XX/XXXX, denying my claim. The letter stated I had a " history of undisputed transactions with the merchant or a reversal of a previously received payment/credit from a bank/merchant ''. The letter also also stated that if I " had any questions regarding this matter or would like to request documents for this case, to please contact them at their Fraud Communications Department ... '' On XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted Truist 's Fraud Communications Department in an attempt to ask questions regarding the vague and unclear language of their denial. I sought more context. Unfortunately, their representative could not answer any questions, other than repeating " verbatim '' the language of the denial letter I was calling about. Furthermore, I also mentioned, toward the end of this conversation, my suspicion regarding Truist 's practices regarding my fraud complaint. Therefore, I asked for the address of someone in Truist 's headquarters ( specifically a company legal department ), where I could send a complaint and legal correspondence, as I believed Truist potentially could be engaging in deceptive and unfair acts and practices regarding how they were handling my fraud claim. I also sought someone I might be able to converse with " face-to-face '' regarding my claim, rather than someone limited to canned answers or letters. My requests could not be met by the representative, other than I was instructed that the next step in escalation was to stop by a local branch and speak with a manager regarding my questions, concerns and my request for an address to submit legal correspondence. On XX/XX/XXXX, I had an appointment/opportunity to speak with my local branch manager. She was very professional and pleasant. In that meeting, I began to relay my concern regarding Truist 's practices with my claim. It was suggested by the branch manager, that we resubmit my fraud claim instead, which was done. However, no corporate ( or legal department ) address was provided to me, nor were any documents for the case. Nothing regarding context for the denial was provided either. This was clearly an attempt to redirect the matter toward an easy resolution, and away from continuing escalation. Consequently, on XX/XX/XXXX, I did receive an email from Truist stating that my questions or concerns of XX/XX/XXXX were being researched. On XX/XX/XXXX, I acknowledged receipt and replied seeking an address to Truist counsel, in the event my claim were to remain denied. I also, reiterated that my primary reason for visiting their branch manager was to secure an address where I could submit correspondence regarding Truist 's practices that I believe were violative of Florida 's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practice Act. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received a letter from Truist, dated XX/XX/XXXX, denying my claim. This letter stated that my " card/device '' was present for transaction ( s ) not disputed in the same area before and/or after the last disputed transaction and included detailed client information. '' It also stated I had a right to request a copy of any documents that Truist relied on in making its determination. Consequently, I therefore engaged in my own search for an address for Truist in order to send a legal demand and a request for all documentation used in the case. On XX/XX/XXXX, I submitted this demand ( and an additional request to reconsider the claim ) to Truist via email. I mailed it on XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received a letter, dated XX/XX/XXXX, that stated their decision remains unchanged. Additionally, the letter referenced the disputed transaction as a " token '' transaction, and they attempted to define what a " token '' transaction was. Two perplexing sentences followed as well : " Same token/mobile device was used for disputed transactions, as well as, non-disputed. The mobile device was not reported lost or stolen. '' This is further perplexing, as the fraud stems from an unauthorized fraudulent transaction through an XXXX account I maintain, not from my mobile device. Why would I need to report my mobile device as lost or stolen when it never has been? Upon receiving the notice of the denial of my fraud claim with Truist, I merely sought an explanation for the denial, someone to speak with, plus documents regarding my claim, which they stated I had a right to receive. In response, I was met with delay, the vague and legally verbose language as stated above, no documents regarding the case, no real live person to converse with, and no explanation regarding the responses in their documents or sequence of lettering.

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