Date Received: 2016-12-17
Issue: Transaction issue
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: In XXXX and XXXX fraudulent charges were made on my credit card. The company was XXXX. First Niagra supposedly did an investigation. They said it was n't fraud. So they sent the claim to the disputes department. They said there investigation determined the claim was for unauthorized charges. So they turned the dispute to a different unit. I have a letter from the investigator called XXXX XXXX. They said it 's was a dispute because I got something from them, but they never said what. In the meantime Key Bank bought First Niagra. I asked them to perform a new investigation. XXXX XXXX from Key bank said she, did but they did n't. She said she had nonever of the First Niagra records. I asked to speak to a supervisor. After numerous calls I reached a supervisor. I told her that Key Bank did not do due diligence. She said she would contact XXXX. She said I purchased soccer equipment. I said I didnt. I am XXXX and have a XXXX XXXX XXXX granddaughter and did not make an such purchase. Then the supervisor told me to call XXXX and and she gave me their phone numbers ( XXXX and XXXX ) and told me to talk to their customer service. I said ok. Then I realized I did n't have the credit card and the bills only have the last XXXX digits. I called the supervisor XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) back again she said I should call XXXX and use my customer ID number. I said I did n't have a customer number because I 'm not a customer. That 's the point. Yesterday she said she 'd contact them again. I said Key Bank owes me me the XXXX because I already paid those amounts. I have the letters from First Niagra and Key bank as well as the bank statements.
Company Response:
State: MA
Zip: 02445
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-17
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with monetary relief
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-12-17
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: This complaint is an amended version of complaint # XXXX. I made this complaint without my notes, and I incorrectly represented that XXXX told me that HAMP did not apply because Key Bank did not accept TARP. That is what my housing counselor told me months ago ( and when I found out that Key Bank did accept TARP, drinking deeply of the TARP chalice and for a long period of time, I thought a complaint was therefore appropriate. ). What XXXX said in our XX/XX/2016 teleconference was that HAMP did not apply because the loan was a HELOC ( Home Equity Line of Credit ). As it turns out, this was also a misrepresentation that could be highly injurious to the estate, as I will explain. I have discovered other facts that indicate that Key Bank injuriously misrepresented the applicability of HAMP, a violation of New York State GBL 349, 350, and might be deemed " unfair, '' based on the three-part test used as a standard of law, for 15 U.S.C. 45 ( a ). I spoke with " XXXX '' in Key Bank 's Collections Department on XX/XX/2016. After consulting with someone ( putting me on hold ), she returned to the phone to tell me that the reason Key Bank did not accept HAMP was 1 ) the loan, a first-lien home equity loan, was not " government-backed '' and 2 ) the loan is a HELOC. After some questioning and explanation from me ( The loan is not, for example, an FHA or SBA loan, which is " government-backed '' or guaranteed, but I asked her to clarify if she meant that HAMP did not apply because the loan was not government or XXXX or XXXX-owned or that the loan was non-conforming. Once I explained the distinction, she was more precise and said that the loan was not government-owned. I then spoke to the Help Team at the U.S. Treasury 's Make Home Affordable program that sponsors HAMP for clarification. After putting me on hold ( probably talking to the supervisor, XXXX ), they clarified that banks that accepted TARP funds are not required to participate in the Make Home Affordable program ( and Key Bank does not participate ) and that a first-lien home equity loan, with principal repayments, as this originally HELOC loan is now and was at the time of default does qualify for HAMP. What this means is that, although Key Bank is not required to offer HAMP, XXXX erroneous reason that because the loan was originally a HELOC, it did not qualify for HAMP, is wrong. Two and a half months have been lost to me in which we could have had a participating HAMP lender refinance the loan or Key Bank could have sold the loan to XXXX or XXXX, who have comparable programs. Since Key Bank has sent an acceleration letter, their intent is to foreclose, and because of its misrepresentation, the borrower may not have time to take advantage of HAMP, which expires on XX/XX/2016.
Company Response:
State: NY
Zip: 120XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-20
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-12-15
Issue: Problems caused by my funds being low
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: On XX/XX/XXXX, I logged into my account around XXXX after making a couple purchases to transfer some money from my savings to my checking. My account showed a positive balance, so I scheduled the transfer for the next day. When I checked my account 5 days later, I discovered that an E-Check came thru on XX/XX/XXXX for more than I had in my account, this never showed up as pending when I logged in on XX/XX/XXXX. Then the bank processed XXXX Debit transactions on XX/XX/XXXX before it transferred my money from savings so it could charge me XXXX more overdraft fees. Then because it went 5 days ( including weekend ) with a negative balance they charged me another overdraft fee. - Now at this point on XX/XX/XXXX, had the bank not charged me any of the XXXX overdraft charges my account would still have a positive balance. The bank charged me a total of {$130.00} in overdraft fees. This is a rip-off. I just buried my father on XX/XX/XXXX, and from total exhaustion I then was sick in bed for 3 days. I do n't need this from my bank!!
Company Response:
State: CO
Zip: XXXXX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-15
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with monetary relief
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-12-15
Issue: Account opening, closing, or management
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: discriminate against any applicant, with respect to any aspect of a credit transaction, on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, or age ( provided the applicant has the capacity to contract ) ; [ XXXX ] to the fact that all or part of the applicant 's income derives from a public assistance program ; or to the fact that the applicant has in good faith exercised any right under the Consumer Credit Protection Act. The law applies to any person who, in the ordinary course of business, regularly participates in a credit decision, including banks, retailers, bankcard companies, finance companies, and credit unionsXXXX
Company Response:
State: NY
Zip: 14225
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-15
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-12-15
Issue: Account opening, closing, or management
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I HAVE BEEN GETTING XXXX CALLS XXXX DAYS A WEEK FOR OVER XXXX MONTHS FROM KEY BANK. I HAVE NEVER BEEN IN A KEY BANK IN MY LIFE. THEY SENT ME A LETTER OFFERING TO WAIVE MY LATE PAYMENT. I NEVER BORROWED ANYTHING FROM KEY BANK. THE NUMBER THEY CALL FROM XXXX.
Company Response:
State: SC
Zip: 29707
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-15
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-12-14
Issue: Using a debit or ATM card
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: You people at Key Bank are the most ignorant bunch I 've ever dealt with. Use some common sense. Once again, this is in regards to the unauthorized charges from XXXX. See my previous complaints.
Company Response:
State: OH
Zip: 43228
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-12-13
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I opened a second mortgage line of credit wth KeyBank in XXXX for {$130000.00}, which I use most of by XXXX. Owning my own business I was forced to shut down filing personal chapter 7 after loosing everything I had. Even though the mortgage payment was never late it was put into collections, I no longer had visual access to the balance but continued to pay it. In addition after I filed I was changed {$110.00} a year for lawyer fees which I complained about, no explanation just the overriding attitude of, ' we do what we want '. Fast forward its now XX/XX/XXXX, my house sold and pay-offs ordered. To my surprise the keybanks pay-off for the second is {$1900.00} higher then the original loan contract. For the last two days I 've been trying to get answers and no one has any, once its paid according to this department ( CFPB ) all I do is file a complaint. This is not the only problem I 've had with Keybank. When I filed I had two loans both, after I filed were changed off and sent to collections even though they were both paid as agreed and re-firmed. I now have two loans I 've been on for over 10years and even after requesting that I be allowed to see the balances the bank refused. Had I request the balance of the pay-off that was ordered by escrow I would have been at closing forced to pay it. All I can say with regard to KeyBank is watch your back.
Company Response:
State: WA
Zip: 98058
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-13
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with monetary relief
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-12-14
Issue: Credit card protection / Debt protection
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I closed my Key Bank account in XXXX. I had a credit card linked with the bank and asked to close that as well which they said they could and did. I told customer service at this time that I have not received a bill for the credit card either by email or by mail and they said it was just being sent out and I would receive it in the next few weeks. I am in the market to buy a house and found out that Key Bank put a nonpayment on my credit report. I called customer service again in XXXX several times, each time being disconnected or being passed around to the wrong department. My initial {$29.00} bill had become {$130.00}. I had still not received a billing statement and did not want to pay all the late fees etc and admit that I was at fault without a bill. After several more calls in XXXX, and being passed around to different bank departments I was still not able to talk with the right people regarding paying my bill and fixing my credit. I contacted the bank in XXXX and was told they would request all the fees dismissed and asked me to call back in a few days. I called back and was told all fees were dropped but they had no authority to fix my credit even though they stated they were at fault. I paid the {$29.00} that I owed and was told that I would have to submit a complaint to the cfpb to have my credit fixed. I am very angry that my credit can be destroyed without my knowledge when I am not at fault. It has cost me much time in phone calls, disconnects etc. I am waiting for it to be fixed so that I can get a mortgage without having to pay a higher interest rate. Key Bank customer service stated that this has been happening to other customers but it seems like they have done nothing to fix the problem of billing and causing hardship to customers.
Company Response:
State: OH
Zip: 80138
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with monetary relief
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-12-13
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Attached is a letter I wrote to Key Bank CEO XXXX XXXX. I ask the regulators reviewing this complaint to review the represented facts for statutory and regulatory violations of Key Bank 's representatives. Given the communication requirement of the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, I expect a response from XXXX XXXX to what appears to me to be multiple violations of the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and the prohibition against Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices, 15 U.S.C. 45 ( a ) and New York State XXXX XXXX of a number of Key Bank 's employees. I am hoping XXXX XXXX will step up and rectify this situation, so that we can mediate a workout agreement with an empowered Key Bank representative. This complaint is identical to XXXX ; I am including as the supporting document, " Later version of Word Letter to CEO XXXX XXXX, '' a later version of Word document of the letter. Because CFPB 's system does not allow the uploading of additional documents after the initial submission, I am making a new complaint.
Company Response:
State: NY
Zip: 120XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-12-13
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: In a teleconference on XX/XX/2016, XXXX the head of Key Bank 's Collections Department, stated that XXXX did not apply to Key Bank ( because Key Bank did not accept TARP money ). In a XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX about Key Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX : XXXX # XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ' XXXX 's question as follows : Key suffered some dark years during the recession and in XX/XX/XXXX became XXXX of the last banks to repay its {$2.00} XXXX in bailout funds. Is this still a turnaround mission? " The TARP money was not a bailout. It was originally given to banks that were deemed financially stable and viable. We were patient in deciding when to repay TARP because part of the requirement was that you needed to raise new equity -- you had to issue stock. By waiting until our financial performance was stronger, we diluted our shareholders less. We are proud to have that chapter behind us. We 've been profitable for XXXX quarters and are building momentum for the future. I truly believe Key is past the inflection point. '' If Key Bank accepted XXXX funds, than it is obligated to offer XXXX. XXXX XXXX 's misrepresentation that HAMP does not apply violates Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices provisions of XXXX U.S.C. XXXX ( a ) and New York XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. Since XXXX will expire on XX/XX/2016, XXXX misrepresentation could be very injurious.
Company Response:
State: NY
Zip: 120XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes