Consumer complaint received 2026-05-25 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — FHA mortgage
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem — Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Company: M&T BANK CORPORATION
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
Summary of Complaint I am filing this complaint against M & T Bank for inaccurate credit reporting and an ongoing, unresolved autopay system defect related to my mortgage account. M & T Bank 's platform migration caused an autopay failure beginning in XX/XX/XXXX, resulting in late payment notations on my credit reports with all three major bureaus ( XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX ) for XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. Despite evidence that this delinquency was caused by the bank 's systems and not by any negligence on my part, M & T Bank has refused to correct the reporting. Furthermore, as of XX/XX/XXXX, the exact same autopay failure has recurredthe system displays autopay as active while failing to draft the paymentdemonstrating that this is an ongoing, systemic defect that M & T Bank has failed to resolve. Detailed Timeline of Events XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX ( XXXX consecutive months ) : M & T Bank successfully debited my mortgage payment every month from my XXXX XXXX Checking account ending in XXXX via autopay. Bank statements confirm XXXX consecutive on-time payments during this period, with no missed or late payments. The last successful autopay from this account was XX/XX/XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX : M & T Bank confirmed my enrollment in automatic mortgage payments via their online banking portal ( onlinebanking.mtb.com ). The confirmation letter, signed by XXXX XXXX XXXX, Senior Vice President of Retail Loan Servicing, specified that my monthly payment of {$5000.00} would be automatically withdrawn from my deposit account effective XX/XX/XXXX. Notably, this new autopay enrollment was configured to pull from a different accountXXXX XXXX Checking ending in XXXXrather than the Personal Checking account ending in XXXX that had been used successfully for the prior 20 months. This change in payment source account occurred during M & T Bank 's migration of loan servicing to the XXXX XXXX XXXX platform. Early XX/XX/XXXX : I proactively contacted M & T Bank via email to flag concerns about the autopay setup following the bank 's migration of loan servicing from M & T Bank 's portal to XXXX XXXX XXXX 's website. M & T representative XXXX XXXX responded, confirming that no late fees had been applied and providing instructions for re-enrollment. XX/XX/XXXX : I funded the XXXX checking account ending in XXXXthe same account linked to the M & T autopaywith a {$23000.00} transfer, bringing the balance to {$23000.00}. This was two days before the XX/XX/XXXX autopay attempt, and more than four times the {$5000.00} monthly payment amount. XX/XX/XXXX : According to M & T Bank 's own investigation letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, the payment intended for the XX/XX/XXXX installment was returned on XX/XX/XXXX due to a " Non-Transaction Account. '' This designation means the autopay was linked to an account type that does not permit outgoing transactionsa configuration error that is the bank 's responsibility, not mine. XX/XX/XXXX : M & T Bank claims a notice of returned payment was mailed to me on this date. However, the bank had incorrect contact information on file, so I never received this notice. XX/XX/XXXX : M & T Bank claims a payment reminder notice was mailed. Again, due to incorrect contact information on file with the bank, this notice was never received. XX/XX/XXXX : M & T Bank successfully debited {$5000.00} from the exact same Chase checking account ending in XXXX ( transaction description : " M & T MORTGAGE MTG PYT XXXX '' ). This successful debit from the same account that M & T previously claimed was a " Non-Transaction Account '' directly contradicts the bank 's stated reason for the XXXX payment return. If the account were truly a non-transaction account, this XXXX payment could not have been processed. XX/XX/XXXX : No payment was received by M & T Bank. Because I believed the autopay was functioningbased on the XX/XX/XXXX confirmation letter and the absence of any received noticesI was unaware of any issue. XX/XX/XXXX : Payment was made satisfying the XXXX, XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX installments. XX/XX/XXXX : I filed a credit bureau dispute with M & T Bank. XX/XX/XXXX : M & T Bank responded to my dispute, stating that the delinquency reporting was accurate and that " courtesy removal of a delinquent mark is not a policy of M & T Bank. '' Recurring Autopay Failure XX/XX/XXXX On XX/XX/XXXX, I logged into the XXXX XXXX XXXX portal ( subserviced by M & T Bank ) and discovered that the exact same autopay failure had occurred again. The dashboard displayed autopay as " On '' with the correct payment details ( Checking Account ending in XXXX, {$5000.00} monthly, next draft date XX/XX/XXXX ). However, the XX/XX/XXXX payment had not been drafted. The portal showed the payment as 7 days past due. I was forced to manually submit a payment of {$5000.00} on XX/XX/XXXX. The portal also displayed a late fee of {$460.00} that had been assesseddespite the autopay system showing as active and enrolled the entire time. This is the exact same pattern as the XX/XX/XXXX failure : the autopay system displays as active and enrolled, but silently fails to draft the payment. The recurrence of this identical failure months laterafter I had already re-enrolled in autopay and after M & T Bank was made aware of the issue through my disputeproves conclusively that this is a systemic platform defect, not consumer error. Screenshots taken on XX/XX/XXXX document the autopay showing as " On, '' the past-due status, the late fee assessment, and the manual payment submission. Why the Reporting Is Inaccurate or Unfair 1. The autopay failure was caused by M & T Bank 's system, not by the consumer. The payment was returned due to a " Non-Transaction Account '' meaning the bank 's own autopay system linked my payment to an account type that allegedly does not permit outgoing transaction s. However, my XXXX XXXX statement proves this characterization is false : on XX/XX/XXXX, M & T Bank successfully debited {$5000.00} from the exact same account ( XXXX checking ... XXXX ). If the account were truly a " Non-Transaction Account, '' that XXXX debit could not have been processed. The account was funded with {$23000.00} on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXXtwo days before the failed autopay attemptand maintained balances well above the payment amount throughout the entire period. The return was not caused by insufficient funds or an invalid account ; it was caused by a defect in M & T Bank 's autopay platform. 2. M & T Bank confirmed the autopay enrollment. The XX/XX/XXXX letter explicitly confirmed automatic payments would begin in XX/XX/XXXX. A consumer who receives written confirmation of autopay enrollment has every reason to believe payments are being processed. 3. I proactively contacted M & T Bank about the migration issue. My XX/XX/XXXX email to M & T Bank demonstrates that I was aware of potential issues with the platform transition and took affirmative steps to address them. This is the opposite of negligence. 4. M & T Bank 's own representative confirmed no late fees were applied. XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX email response acknowledged the situation and did not assess late feessuggesting the bank recognized the issue was systemic rather than consumer-caused. 5. Notices were sent to incorrect contact information. M & T Bank claims it mailed a returned payment notice and a payment reminder, but these were sent to incorrect contact information on file with the bank. As a result, I had no way of knowing the autopay had failed until the delinquency appeared on my credit reports. 6. Twenty consecutive months of on-time payment history demonstrate good faith. Bank statements from my XXXX Personal Checking account ending in XXXX show that M & T Bank successfully debited my mortgage payment every month from XX/XX/XXXX through XXXX XXXX consecutive on-time payments. The payment failures began only after the platform migration changed the autopay configuration, further proving that the delinquency was caused by the bank 's system change, not by any change in my payment behavior. 7. The identical autopay failure recurred on XX/XX/XXXX. On this date, I discovered that the autopay had again failed to draft my monthly payment, despite the portal displaying autopay as " On '' with correct account details. I was forced to make a manual payment and was assessed a {$460.00} late fee. This recurrencemonths after the original failure, after re-enrollment, and after M & T Bank was notified through my disputeis definitive proof of a systemic platform defect. A consumer can not be held responsible for a bank 's autopay system that displays as active but silently fails to process payments. Relief Requested

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