Date Received: 2016-06-09
Issue: Making/receiving payments, sending money
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: From XXXX/XXXX/XXXX - XXXX/XXXX/XXXX we received letters from Suntrust stating that we have unusual activities on our debit cards " XXXX '' and " XXXX ending, therefore they placed a " temporary '' block status. SINCE I had past disputes related to unauthorized charged XXXX which were approved and resolved with Suntrust during XXXX ; I noticed that again, from XXXX to XXXX XXXX, while I was on " XXXX '' leave, at home, in bed, NOT USING MY CARD WHICH HAS THE XXXX STICKER ON, XXXX was charging my checking account as they please causing multiples overdraft fees ( XXXX x {$36.00} aprox. ), ignoring the fact that my account was set up as " cash only ''. on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX I collected all evidences and sent it via fax to Suntrust to investigate. Suntrust representatives explained that it will take up to 60 days to get the issue resolved ( Previous disputes against XXXX only took XXXX hours to get a final resolution on my favor based on evidences presented ). On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX I received a letter from Suntrust granting me a temporary credit for the claimed charges and removal of all overdraft fees, while my account was undergoing investigation. Unfortunate to say, Suntrust sent me a letter on XXXX XXXX stating that the investigation was fruitless, that they could n't resolve the isue and asked me to deal with XXXX. On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX I received a letter from Suntrust Notifying me that the referenced account was closed, the negative balance of - {$1600.00} ( multiples charges of overdraft fees of {$36.00} plus XXXX unauthorized charges ) was charge-off since the account was overdrawn for several weeks regardless of being investigated and they even add {$30.00} to charge off the account and I was refered to collections.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: PR
Zip: 33068
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-06-13
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with monetary relief
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-06-08
Issue: Deposits and withdrawals
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I opened a SunTrust Checking and Savings account on XX/XX/XXXX. During the application process they require you to fund your new accounts. I provided a routing and account number and authorized a transfer of {$15000.00} To confirm the external account SunTrust makes XXXX small deposits and a withdraw and those amounts are verified by the customer which I did. It 's now XX/XX/XXXX and the transfer has not taken place but the issue is I 've spoken to multiple employees and all of them say " they do not have access to transfer information provided during the application process ''. No one can confirm if this transfer is going to take place or not. Obviously my concern for initiating a second transfer is the potential to overdraft my external account. I was also provided a confirmation page listing the transfer information but again the employees ca n't see that either. I 've also asked that my issue be escalated to management but still have not received any contact from anyone with authority. Secondary Complaint : My savings account immediately showed as " Pending Closure '' causing immediate confusion. I was informed all savings accounts do that until money is deposited. This is very confusing for a new customer.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: GA
Zip: 30157
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-06-08
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-06-07
Issue: Deposits and withdrawals
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I made a deposit of XXXX funds on XXXX/XXXX/16. When the initial hold was placed it was until XXXX/XXXX/16. Then it changed to XXXX/XXXX/16, making it 31 business days instead of 30 but I considered the holiday and did not complain. It has now been extended to XXXX/XXXX/16. This is ridiculous! The funds were withdrawn from my XXXX account weeks ago and the supporting documentation was faxed to their XXXX office and instead of releasing the funds they extended the hold.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: FL
Zip: 33404
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-06-07
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-06-07
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: During a period of hardship where my husband was out of work for 11 months, we contacted our lender Suntrust to help with our current loan. At that time, their suggestion was since we were current on our loan, we would have to be behind 3 months before they could help us .... So we filled out the Loan Modification and per their suggestion, did not make payments for three months. The loan modification went through and then we promptly made 3 monthly payments at once to make up for the three unpaid months. ( see XXXX XXXX ). In this time period, our rate was only 1 %, so our minimum payment was only around XXXX per month. As you can see XX/XX/XXXX, we overpaid to try and get ahead, while our rate was reduced ( see XXXX XXXX ). Every month we paid on time and more than what was due, reducing our principle to only XXXX owed. At the end of the promotional period, we continued to make payments up until XX/XX/XXXX, when we applied for another rate reduction. At this time, we were told again, that we would need to NOT PAY for 3 months to be considered for the rate reduction. But the reduction went back to the normal rate of 3.5 % on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX and unbeknownst to us, the bank started accruing a deficiency for unpaid allowances, and never informed us of any delinquency or unpaid amount owed. We were not mailed any notices, no correspondence what so ever. So we continued to pay the amount shown on our online payment portal, {$320.00}, and paid each month until they served us with Pre-foreclosure notice in XX/XX/XXXX. ( see Jpg XXXX ) This notice, some 6 months after the first deficiency was our first notice of any past due amount. At this point, we were also contacted by letter, by the NC Foreclosure Prevention Fund. And in XX/XX/XXXX, we began working with them to prevent Foreclosure on our home. We have tried to refinance the Suntrust loan, but due to the fact that they told us NOT to pay for 3 months in XXXX, we do not have a 12 months on time payment history, so we can not refinance. We are stuck. Our Representative at the NC Housing Finance Agency has been working to assist us in resolving the deficiency, but on XXXX XXXX, we received a letter that our account has been turned over from Suntrust to Trustee, XXXX XXXX, for foreclosure. Our intent is to stay in our home and work toward an amicable solution. Our previous balance was XXXX, and now the balance owed is reported to be over XXXX ; the first time we were even aware that there was a deficiency on the account was when we were sent this Pre-foreclosure notice. It is ironic that Suntrust could not send us any correspondence regarding the deficiency, yet they were able to send us a notice of pre-foreclosure and now foreclosure. Had we been aware of the deficiency, through any correspondence, communication, or notification, we could have taken steps to remedy this before the amount owed had reached " foreclosure '' status. Our previous payment history of consistent monthly payments and additional pre-payments should have at least earned us the common courtesy of notification. We would like for someone to look into these spurious actions by Suntrust to " help '' consumers, but then sabotage customer accounts by not providing them any notice of delinquency, by heaping on unreported penalties and fees such that the amount owed is much greater than the original amount owed, ( and greater than the amount our first mortgage, which makes refinance harder ) and for the general practice of misfeasance. Misfeasance is the willful inappropriate action or intentional incorrect action or advice. By not informing us of the growing deficiency, we had no way to correct it. And when were finally made aware of the deficiency with the notice of pre-foreclosure, and we informed them of our intention to correct it, they continued to proceed with foreclosure, with no regard or remedy for our situation
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: NC
Zip: 27597
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-06-07
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-06-06
Issue: Account opening, closing, or management
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I requested that my checking and savings accounts at a previous bank ( Suntrust ) be closed. At the time of the request, they were both in good standing with XXXX balance. My savings account was closed, but my checking account was not. Additional charges were posted to the account a week after the account should have been closed. Because of this, the account is now delinquent, and I can not close the account.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: CO
Zip: 803XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-06-06
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with monetary relief
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-06-06
Issue: Taking/threatening an illegal action
Subissue: Seized/Attempted to seize property
Consumer Complaint: I have a VA loan with Suntrust and have made continual efforts to set up automatic payments. Every time I do it does n't work and I am late on a payment. They report that to my credit report immediately then start calling at all hours of the day even on Sundays. This month it happened again and though I was only a month behind they sent me a letter stating that they were going to foreclose on me in a month if I did n't have it paid by then. I of course immediately paid it, but I do n't feel as if these tactics are ethical or lawful. I am trying to refinance with a company who does n't pull such shady tactics but my credit has been affected by the " missed payments ''. I also feel like they purposefully and continually have " problems '' setting up autopay just to encourage a default on my property, especially as it is now worth double what I owe on it.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: DC
Zip: 20002
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-06-06
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-06-05
Issue: Managing the loan or lease
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I have recently paid this account off yet i still see late payments on this account. initial issue was in XX/XX/XXXX, when making my payment a suntrust representative asked if i wanted to skip a payment and put to end of term. I agreed because i trusted was as innocent as he portrayed. i went on vocation and came back to realize that not only did this guy not push payment to end of term but my car got repossessed. XXXX assured me and apologized for inconvenience and allowed me to get car back with payment all fees. Advised that they will be able to push payment out to end of term and be able to reduce payments to XXXX at no time was this explained that this would be considered a " Modified loan ''. I was tricked into believing i was refinancing. few years later when i was declined for many banks to get a new car loan after my son was born i realized that this account had XXXX late and a repo that was not suppose to show. I called suntrust to also find out that the so called modification they had was for a different vehicle. when i mentioned this to legal they immediately tried to coerce me into signing another modification with 07 nissan 350z because in exchange to remove all late fees on the account. keeping from me important information like GAP coverage may be forfeited, higher overall paid for loan and potential negative aspect on credit report. My vehicle was later involved in a accident and vehicle was paid off. At this time no Late payment were suppose to show on this account and loan modification was suppose to be taken off since they had wrong loan modification paperwork signed on my account and i was not aware i even had a loan modification. I was even told that if i refused to sign new loan modification that they would make me pay the account current by retro modifications back at its so called inception. i called yesterday XXXX and spoke with a lovely representative whom could n't even pull up my information yet suntrust continues to verify this account with credit reporting companies as " Valid ''. When i asked her if she could send information pertaining to account and modification that was on wrong vehicle she said they had nothing. So how can they continue to report information that they ca n't even verify?
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: FL
Zip: 33619
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-08-02
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-06-04
Issue: Account opening, closing, or management
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I responded to a promotional offer from Suntrust Bank, which promised a {$200.00} bonus for opening a select checking account and making a {$2000.00} direct deposit within 60 days. I met the requirements but did not receive the bonus. When I asked online customer service, they said I do not qualify for the promotion because I had closed my previous account at Suntrust within 180 days. This is completely different from what I was told on the phone in XX/XX/XXXX, just before I opened the current account. Back then the phone customer service told me that my previous account was closed over 6 months ago, and I would qualify for the promotion as long as I make the qualifying direct deposits within 60 days. I sent a detailed email to a member of the Suntrust Executive team ( copy attached ), asking them to stand by the information I was given on the phone. In response they claimed " Our investigation was unable to find documentation showing that you were informed you would qualify for the promotion. '' I reiterated my position that the proof is in the phone conversation in XX/XX/XXXX, and requested them to review that call and award the bonus if my claim is correct, or provide me a copy/transcript of the call showing that my claim is incorrect. This should be a simple task, considering that Suntrust claims all phone calls are recorded for quality assurance ( and as I provided all my identification info for the agent to locate my prior account, it should not be that hard to locate the call. ) All correspondence attached, and pleas note each pdf file has several pages. Suntrust responded with an identical form letter ( even with the same date ), claiming that " Our investigation was unable to find documentation showing that you were informed you would qualify for the promotion ''. This indicates they either made no effort to locate the phone call, or they had located the call earlier and found that it corroborates my claim. Please note that this is not the first time Suntrust agents have provided blatantly false information during the short time I had this account. My original email to the executive office describes another incident where Suntrsut lost my {$1000.00} deposit and gave me the runaround for over 10 days. It is deceptive that I was told one thing before I opened this account, and the opposite after I invested several thousands of dollars with Suntrust based on that information. Also unfair that the executive office brushed off my request with the claim " we were unable to find documentation ... '', a statement most likely false considering they claim to record all phone calls. All I ask is to receive the {$200.00} bonus I was promised in return for depositing my money with Suntrust. I am also attaching a sampling of reviews/complaints from other customers who were cheated out of the similar bonuses by Suntrust, demonstrating that Suntrust makes a habit of this deceptive practice.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: MO
Zip: 630XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-06-04
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-06-03
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: this account XXXX is paid in full the original date it was past due makes it told old to report on my credit I have asked before for a full payment history my contract and the letter of assignment
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: GA
Zip: 30296
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-06-03
Company Response to Consumer: Closed
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-06-02
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: First see CFBP Case number : XXXX and read my original letter to SunTrust Mortgage dated XXXX XXXX, XXXX. This issue is not fully resolved. Since I was unable to continue my dispute with the Case number : XXXX, I have to open a new complaint. On my original complaint, SunTrust has XXXX internal case numbers, XXXX and XXXX. I had 2 issues with SunTrust. First, SunTrust has notified me that my mortgage escrow is short by {$3000.00} and now I must pay an additional {$250.00} per month over a 12 month period. This additional 'unexpected ' payment will most likely cause a hardship on my family. After researching my closing document from XXXX XXXX, I believe SunTrust is in violation of RESPA 12 CFR 1024.34 - Timely Escrow Payments and Treatment of Escrow Account Balances and RESPA 12 CFR 1024.17 ( c ) ( 2 ) and ( 3 ) and 12 CFR 1024.17 ( k ) - Escrow Account Analysis ( see attached ). This issue is SunTrust 's case # XXXX. Second, while we disputed the escrow error with the bank, our mortgage payment is due, so we are trying to get the payment spread out over as many months as possible. I called on XXXX XXXX, spoke with XXXX to get payment extended over XXXX months. Said she would submit it for approval and for me to call back on Thursday XXXX XXXX. SunTrust called back and initial customer service rep said it could only be spread over 18 months. I explained our situation that we were told a minimum of XXXX months and I needed to speak to a Supervisor. Supervisor said we were denied for XXXX months but approved for XXXX months. I explained that our financial situation would not allow us to afford the payment over XXXX months and this could potentially cause us to be short every month. She said she would resubmit it, explaining our financial situation and to call back next week. This issue is SunTrust 's case # XXXX. On XXXX XXXX, I received notification from CFBP that SunTrust has responded to my dispute and asked if this resolved my issue. On XXXX XXXX I responded back that it only partially resolved my issue. Here is my response : SunTrust has only partially addressed my issue. They have provided me two case numbers for two different issues. Case # XXXX was for my issue with the monthly payment being spread out over a XXXX month period. This resolution I am satisfied with. However, I only pursued this course of action because the bank refused to suspend the additional escrow payment while I disputed the validity of my escrow account being short. " I am still pursuing my complaint/dispute with the SunTrust case # XXXX. See attached " SunTrust escrow letter and attchmnts '' for my original request/dispute submitted on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. This issue has not been addressed yet. I am still disputing the validity of the escrow shortage and believe the bank is at fault for this error. '' Therefore, since SunTrust has not addressed my original issue about the validity of the escrow shortage and I believe SunTrust is in violation of RESPA 12 CFR 1024.34 - Timely Escrow Payments and Treatment of Escrow Account Balances and RESPA 12 CFR 1024.17 ( c ) ( 2 ) and ( 3 ) and 12 CFR 1024.17 ( k ) - Escrow Account Analysis, I need to continue with my dispute until fully resolved.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: VA
Zip: 20120
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-06-02
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes