Consumer complaint received 2026-03-10 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed
Company: Glacier Bancorp Inc.
State: ID

Complaint narrative:
Describe what happened I am filing this second complaint because my previous CFPB case was closed before I was given the opportunity to respond to XXXX XXXX Banks statements. The banks response contained several inaccuracies, and I am providing the specific details they claimed were missing. XXXX XXXX Bank has already been provided with the relevant court orders and documentation. If the bank believes additional information is needed, they should request it rather than treating the matter as resolved. XXXX. Removal of funds and denial of access to business accounts The account in question is the XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX account held at XXXX XXXX Bank. I was a legally authorized signer on this account. My access was removed and funds were restricted based on a ceaseanddesist order issued by my business partners. The court has since ruled that this ceaseanddesist order was illegal, and that I am entitled to the same access to the business accounts as the other partners. XXXX XXXX Bank has already been given a copy of this order and has acknowledged receiving it. Despite this, the bank continues to deny me access while allowing the other partners to retain theirs. This is unequal treatment and contradicts the courts ruling. XXXX. Court order confirming my rights The courts ruling was issued in XXXX XXXX, Idaho. XXXX XXXX Bank has been provided with the order and has been informed multiple times of its contents. The banks claim that they can not locate any information is inaccurate. XXXX. Unauthorized disclosure of my personal financial information My personal XXXX XXXX Bank account information appeared in court filings served to me by my former business partners. This included specific transaction details from my personal XXXX account. I did not authorize anyone to access, view, or disclose this information. The banks response stated that they could not identify the source, but the information in the filing matches my personal XXXX account activity and could only have originated from the bank. The bank has been provided with the document showing the disclosure. This raises serious concerns under the GrammLeachBliley Act ( GLBA ) regarding the safeguarding of customer financial information. XXXX. Banks refusal to investigate or explain I have repeatedly asked XXXX XXXX Bank to explain how my personal account information was accessed and disclosed. The bank has not provided any explanation, has not acknowledged the breach, and has not taken corrective action. Closing the CFPB complaint without addressing these issues does not resolve the matter. XXXX. False allegation of aggressive behavior and resulting harm When I attempted to resolve these issues in person, a bank representative ordered me to leave the branch based on the same illegal ceaseanddesist order. She later reported that I was aggressive, which is untrue. This allegation resulted in : - My accounts being closed - A trespass order being issued - My inability to service my business loan - Continued denial of access to accounts I am legally entitled to These actions raise concerns under UDAAP ( Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ), as they appear retaliatory and not based on accurate information. XXXX. Failure to provide or review video evidence XXXX XXXX Bank has security cameras covering the area where the alleged aggressive behavior occurred. I have requested that the bank provide or review the video footage, as it would clearly show that I was calm, cooperative, and not aggressive. The bank has not provided the footage, has not acknowledged my request, and has not explained why the video has not been reviewed. If the bank is relying on this allegation to justify adverse actions against me, they should be required to produce the evidence supporting it. The refusal to provide or review the video raises concerns about the accuracy of the banks statements and suggests potential retaliation or discriminatory treatment.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation