Consumer complaint received 2026-05-19 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Advertising and marketing, including promotional offers — Confusing or misleading advertising about the credit card
Company: TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
To whom this might concern, I am writing to file a formal complaint regarding the handling of a promotional statement credit that remains unresolved due to repeated misinformation, inconsistent explanations, and a fundamental misunderstanding of basic banking terminology by multiple representatives. The core issue is that the bank has refused to apply the promotional statement credit, claiming that the offer " applies to the account ending in the last 4 digits referenced in this offer '' and that this excludes spending by authorized users. Representatives further stated that this phrase should be interpreted as referring to the last four digits of the card used which is the primary cardholder. This interpretation is both ambiguous and incorrect. In standard banking practice, an " account ending in '' refers to the credit account numbernot the card number. Authorized users do not have separate accounts. The explanation provided contradicts basic credit account structure and lacks proper disclosure in the promotional terms. Below is the timeline of my attempts to resolve this matter : After the second cycle in XX/XX/year>, I was told to wait until XX/XX/XXXX for the final date of the statement credit. XX/XX/year> : Followed up. The case appeared completely new, and everything had to be restarted. A manager submitted a complaint and research request. XX/XX/year> : Spoke with another manager who had no knowledge of the promotion. I was told to escalate and call back, then transferred back to the original handler. XX/XX/year> : No updates. Another manager advised submitting yet another complaint and research request. XX/XX/year> : Followed up again. No one could provide information or assistance. A representative suggested writing to the executive board. XX/XX/year> : A research team member concluded that the promotion does not apply because " the account ending in the last 4 digits '' supposedly refers to the last four digits of the card used. When I pointed out that " account ending in '' and " card ending in '' are not interchangeable terms in banking, and that authorized users do not have separate accounts, I was told, " this is how it should be interpreted. '' This explanation is unreasonable and inconsistent with industry standards. The promotions language is ambiguous, the interpretation provided is incorrect, and the lack of disclosure has resulted in significant inconvenience and wasted time across multiple months and multiple departments. I am requesting a formal review by someone with proper banking knowledge who can address : 1. Why the promotional terms were interpreted contrary to standard account definitions. 2. Why the bank repeatedly restarted the case with no continuity. 3.Why managers and research staff were unfamiliar with the promotion. 4.Why the burden has been placed entirely on the customer despite clear evidence that all spending occurred under the single eligible account. I expect a written explanation and a resolution consistent with the original promotional terms. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

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 monetary relief