Legal Proceedings	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2014
Legal Proceedings [Abstract]
Legal Proceedings	Note 16 Legal Proceedings We establish accruals for legal proceedings, including litigation and regulatory and governmental investigations and inquiries, when information related to the loss contingencies represented by those matters indicates both that a loss is probable and that the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. Any such accruals are adjusted thereafter as appropriate to reflect changed circumstances. When we are able to do so, we also determine estimates of possible losses or ranges of possible losses, whether in excess of any related accrued liability or where there is no accrued liability, for disclosed legal proceedings (“Disclosed Matters,” which are those matters disclosed in this Note 16 as well as those matters disclosed in Note 23 Legal Proceedings in Part II, Item 8 of our 2013 Form 10-K and Note 16 Legal Proceedings in Part I, Item 1 of our Forms 10-Q for the quarters ended March 31 and June 30, 2014 (such prior disclosure referred to as “Prior Disclosure”)). For Disclosed Matters where we are able to estimate such possible losses or ranges of possible losses, as of September 30, 2014, we estimate that it is reasonably possible that we could incur losses in an aggregate amount of up to approximately $750 million. The estimates included in this amount are based on our analysis of currently available information and are subject to significant judgment and a variety of assumptions and uncertainties. As new information is obtained we may change our estimates. Due to the inherent subjectivity of the assessments and unpredictability of outcomes of legal proceedings, any amounts accrued or included in this aggregate amount may not represent the ultimate loss to us from the legal proceedings in question. Thus, our exposure and ultimate losses may be higher, and possibly significantly so, than the amounts accrued or this aggregate amount. In our experience, legal proceedings are inherently unpredictable. One or more of the following factors frequently contribute to this inherent unpredictability: the proceeding is in its early stages; the damages sought are unspecified, unsupported or uncertain; it is unclear whether a case brought as a class action will be allowed to proceed on that basis or, if permitted to proceed as a class action, how the class will be defined; the other party is seeking relief other than or in addition to compensatory damages (including, in the case of regulatory and governmental investigations and inquiries, the possibility of fines and penalties); the matter presents meaningful legal uncertainties, including novel issues of law; we have not engaged in meaningful settlement discussions; discovery has not started or is not complete; there are significant facts in dispute; the possible outcomes may not be amenable to the use of statistical or quantitative analytical tools; predicting possible outcomes depends on making assumptions about future decisions of courts or regulatory bodies or the behavior of other parties; and there are a large number of parties named as defendants (including where it is uncertain how damages or liability, if any, will be shared among multiple defendants). Generally, the less progress that has been made in the proceedings or the broader the range of potential results, the harder it is for us to estimate losses or ranges of losses that it is reasonably possible we could incur. As a result of these types of factors, we are unable, at this time, to estimate the losses that it is reasonably possible that we could incur or ranges of such losses with respect to some of the matters disclosed, and the aggregate estimated amount provided above does not include an estimate for every Disclosed Matter. Therefore, as the estimated aggregate amount disclosed above does not include all of the Disclosed Matters, the amount disclosed above does not represent our maximum reasonably possible loss exposure for all of the Disclosed Matters. The estimated aggregate amount also does not reflect any of our exposure to matters not so disclosed, as discussed below under “Other.” We include in some of the descriptions of individual Disclosed Matters certain quantitative information related to the plaintiff’s claim against us as alleged in the plaintiff’s pleadings or other public filings or otherwise publicly available information. While information of this type may provide insight into the potential magnitude of a matter, it does not necessarily represent our estimate of reasonably possible loss or our judgment as to any currently appropriate accrual. Some of our exposure in Disclosed Matters may be offset by applicable insurance coverage. We do not consider the possible availability of insurance coverage in determining the amounts of any accruals (although we record the amount of related insurance recoveries that are deemed probable up to the amount of the accrual) or in determining any estimates of possible losses or ranges of possible losses. The following updates our disclosure of legal proceedings from that provided in Prior Disclosure. Overdraft Litigation In October 2014, in Dasher v. RBC Bank (10-cv-22190-JLK), currently pending for pre-trial proceedings in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida under the caption In re Checking Account Overdraft Litigation (MDL No. 2036, Case No. 1:09-MD-02036-JLK ), the United States Supreme Court denied our petition for a writ of certiorari seeking review of the ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Accordingly, the stay of the court of appeals’ ruling is no longer in effect. Captive Mortgage Reinsurance Litigation In August 2014, in White, et al. v. The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc., et al. (Civil Action No. 11-7928), the court denied our motion to dismiss. We then filed an uncontested motion to stay all proceedings pending the outcome of another matter currently on appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit that involves overlapping issues. In September 2014, the district court granted the stay. In October 2014, the court of appeals decided the other matter. Proceedings have not yet resumed in the district court in our matter. Lender Placed Insurance Litigation In August 2014, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida granted in part and denied in part PNC's motion to dismiss in Montoya, et al. v. PNC Bank, N.A., et al. (Case No. 1:14-cv-20474-JEM). Specifically, the court dismissed the breach of contract, Florida deceptive and unfair trade practices, and federal TILA and RICO claims, although it allowed the RICO claims to be re-pled. The remaining claims are state claims for breach of the covenant of good faith, unjust enrichment, the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, and breach of fiduciary duty. Thereafter, in September 2014, on plaintiffs' uncontested motions, the plaintiff in Lauren vs. PNC Bank, N.A., et al. (Case No. 2:14-cv-00230), pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, voluntarily dismissed the lawsuit and a third amended complaint in Montoya was filed adding Lauren as a plaintiff there. In October 2014, PNC moved to partially dismiss the third amended complaint. The motion to dismiss seeks dismissal of the re-pleaded RICO claims and plaintiff Lauren's state law claims for breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing and breach of fiduciary duty. At the same time, PNC also moved to strike the plaintiffs’ nationwide class allegations with respect to the state law claims. Shortly thereafter, the plaintiffs stipulated to this relief, as a result of which the plaintiffs’ state law claims are now being brought solely as statewide class action claims in the three states in which the plaintiffs reside. Patent Infringement Litigation In Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. PNC Bank Financial Services Group, Inc., PNC Bank NA, and PNC Merchant Services Company, LP (Case No. 2:14-cv-00832-AKS), the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania has stayed the case pending the PTO’s consideration of various review petitions of the patents at issue in this case, as well as the review of the patents at issue in the other lawsuit pending in the same court (Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC vs. PNC Financial Services Group, Inc., and PNC Bank, NA, (Case No. 2:13-cv-00740-AJS)) and the appeals from any PTO decisions. Mortgage Repurchase Litigation In October 2014, the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota granted our motion to dismiss with prejudice the breach of contract claims in the amended complaint in Residential Funding Company, LLC v. PNC Bank, N.A., et al. (Civil No. 13-3498-JRT-JSM) with respect to loans sold before May 14, 2006 and otherwise denied our motion to dismiss. Pre-need Funeral Arrangements In September 2014, the plaintiffs in Jo Ann Howard, P.C., et al. v. Cassity, et al. (No. 4:09-CV-1252-ERW) (currently pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri) filed a motion seeking leave to amend their complaint to reassert aiding and abetting claims previously dismissed by the court in 2012. Other Regulatory and Governmental Inquiries PNC is the subject of investigations, audits and other forms of regulatory and governmental inquiry covering a broad range of issues in our banking, securities and other financial services businesses, in some cases as part of reviews of specified activities at multiple industry participants. Over the last few years, we have experienced increases in regulatory and governmental investigations, audits and other inquiries. Areas of current regulatory or governmental inquiry with respect to PNC include consumer protection, fair lending, mortgage origination and servicing, mortgage and non mortgage-related insurance and reinsurance, municipal finance activities, conduct by broker-dealers, automobile lending practices, and participation in government insurance or guarantee programs, some of which are described in Prior Disclosure. These inquiries, including those described in Prior Disclosure, may lead to administrative, civil or criminal proceedings, and possibly result in remedies including fines, penalties, restitution, or alterations in our business practices, and in additional expenses and collateral costs. Our practice is to cooperate fully with regulatory and governmental investigations, audits and other inquiries, including those described in Prior Disclosure. Other In addition to the proceedings or other matters described above and in Prior Disclosure, PNC and persons to whom we may have indemnification obligations, in the normal course of business, are subject to various other pending and threatened legal proceedings in which claims for monetary damages and other relief are asserted. We do not anticipate, at the present time, that the ultimate aggregate liability, if any, arising out of such other legal proceedings will have a material adverse effect on our financial position. However, we cannot now determine whether or not any claims asserted against us or others to whom we may have indemnification obligations, whether in the proceedings or other matters described above or otherwise, will have a material adverse effect on our results of operations in any future reporting period, which will depend on, among other things, the amount of the loss resulting from the claim and the amount of income otherwise reported for the reporting period. See Note 17 Commitments and Guarantees for additional information regarding the Visa indemnification and our other obligations to provide indemnification, including to current and former officers, directors, employees and agents of PNC and companies we have acquired.

Note 16 Legal Proceedings

We establish accruals for legal proceedings, including litigation and regulatory and governmental investigations and inquiries, when information related to the loss contingencies represented by those matters indicates both that a loss is probable and that the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. Any such accruals are adjusted thereafter as appropriate to reflect changed circumstances. When we are able to do so, we also determine estimates of possible losses or ranges of possible losses, whether in excess of any related accrued liability or where there is no accrued liability, for disclosed legal proceedings (“Disclosed Matters,” which are those matters disclosed in this Note 16 as well as those matters disclosed in Note 23 Legal Proceedings in Part II, Item 8 of our 2013 Form 10-K and Note 16 Legal Proceedings in Part I, Item 1 of our Forms 10-Q for the quarters ended March 31 and June 30, 2014 (such prior disclosure referred to as “Prior Disclosure”)). For Disclosed Matters where we are able to estimate such possible losses or ranges of possible losses, as of September 30, 2014, we estimate that it is reasonably possible that we could incur losses in an aggregate amount of up to approximately $750 million. The estimates included in this amount are based on our analysis of currently available information and are subject to significant judgment and a variety of assumptions and uncertainties. As new information is obtained we may change our estimates. Due to the inherent subjectivity of the assessments and unpredictability of outcomes of legal proceedings, any amounts accrued or included in this aggregate amount may not represent the ultimate loss to us from the legal proceedings in question. Thus, our exposure and ultimate losses may be higher, and possibly significantly so, than the amounts accrued or this aggregate amount.

In our experience, legal proceedings are inherently unpredictable. One or more of the following factors frequently contribute to this inherent unpredictability: the proceeding is in its early stages; the damages sought are unspecified, unsupported or uncertain; it is unclear whether a case brought as a class action will be allowed to proceed on that basis or, if permitted to proceed as a class action, how the class will be defined; the other party is seeking relief other than or in addition to compensatory damages (including, in the case of regulatory and governmental investigations and inquiries, the possibility of fines and penalties); the matter presents meaningful legal uncertainties, including novel issues of law; we have not engaged in meaningful settlement discussions; discovery has not started or is not complete; there are significant facts in dispute; the possible outcomes may not be amenable to the use of statistical or quantitative analytical tools; predicting possible outcomes depends on making assumptions about future decisions of courts or regulatory bodies or the behavior of other parties; and there are a large number of parties named as defendants (including where it is uncertain how damages or liability, if any, will be shared among multiple defendants). Generally, the less progress that has been made in the proceedings or the broader the range of potential results, the harder it is for us to estimate losses or ranges of losses that it is reasonably possible we could incur.

As a result of these types of factors, we are unable, at this time, to estimate the losses that it is reasonably possible that we could incur or ranges of such losses with respect to some of the matters disclosed, and the aggregate estimated amount provided above does not include an estimate for every Disclosed Matter. Therefore, as the estimated aggregate amount disclosed above does not include all of the Disclosed Matters, the amount disclosed above does not represent our maximum reasonably possible loss exposure for all of the Disclosed Matters. The estimated aggregate amount also does not reflect any of our exposure to matters not so disclosed, as discussed below under “Other.”

We include in some of the descriptions of individual Disclosed Matters certain quantitative information related to the plaintiff’s claim against us as alleged in the plaintiff’s pleadings or other public filings or otherwise publicly available information. While information of this type may provide insight into the potential magnitude of a matter, it does not necessarily represent our estimate of reasonably possible loss or our judgment as to any currently appropriate accrual.

Some of our exposure in Disclosed Matters may be offset by applicable insurance coverage. We do not consider the possible availability of insurance coverage in determining the amounts of any accruals (although we record the amount of related insurance recoveries that are deemed probable up to the amount of the accrual) or in determining any estimates of possible losses or ranges of possible losses.

The following updates our disclosure of legal proceedings from that provided in Prior Disclosure.

Overdraft Litigation

In October 2014, in Dasher v. RBC Bank (10-cv-22190-JLK), currently pending for pre-trial proceedings in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida under the caption In re Checking Account Overdraft Litigation (MDL No. 2036, Case No. 1:09-MD-02036-JLK ), the United States Supreme Court denied our petition for a writ of certiorari seeking review of the ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Accordingly, the stay of the court of appeals’ ruling is no longer in effect.

Captive Mortgage Reinsurance Litigation

In August 2014, in White, et al. v. The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc., et al. (Civil Action No. 11-7928), the court denied our motion to dismiss. We then filed an uncontested motion to stay all proceedings pending the outcome of another matter currently on appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit that involves overlapping issues. In September 2014, the district court granted the stay. In October 2014, the court of appeals decided the other matter. Proceedings have not yet resumed in the district court in our matter.

Lender Placed Insurance Litigation

In August 2014, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida granted in part and denied in part PNC's motion to dismiss in Montoya, et al. v. PNC Bank, N.A., et al. (Case No. 1:14-cv-20474-JEM). Specifically, the court dismissed the breach of contract, Florida deceptive and unfair trade practices, and federal TILA and RICO claims, although it allowed the RICO claims to be re-pled. The remaining claims are state claims for breach of the covenant of good faith, unjust enrichment, the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, and breach of fiduciary duty. Thereafter, in September 2014, on plaintiffs' uncontested motions, the plaintiff in Lauren vs. PNC Bank, N.A., et al. (Case No. 2:14-cv-00230), pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, voluntarily dismissed the lawsuit and a third amended complaint in Montoya was filed adding Lauren as a plaintiff there. In October 2014, PNC moved to partially dismiss the third amended complaint. The motion to dismiss seeks dismissal of the re-pleaded RICO claims and plaintiff Lauren's state law claims for breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing and breach of fiduciary duty. At the same time, PNC also moved to strike the plaintiffs’ nationwide class allegations with respect to the state law claims. Shortly thereafter, the plaintiffs stipulated to this relief, as a result of which the plaintiffs’ state law claims are now being brought solely as statewide class action claims in the three states in which the plaintiffs reside.

Patent Infringement Litigation

In Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. PNC Bank Financial Services Group, Inc., PNC Bank NA, and PNC Merchant Services Company, LP (Case No. 2:14-cv-00832-AKS), the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania has stayed the case pending the PTO’s consideration of various review petitions of the patents at issue in this case, as well as the review of the patents at issue in the other lawsuit pending in the same court (Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC vs. PNC Financial Services Group, Inc., and PNC Bank, NA, (Case No. 2:13-cv-00740-AJS)) and the appeals from any PTO decisions.

Mortgage Repurchase Litigation

In October 2014, the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota granted our motion to dismiss with prejudice the breach of contract claims in the amended complaint in Residential Funding Company, LLC v. PNC Bank, N.A., et al. (Civil No. 13-3498-JRT-JSM) with respect to loans sold before May 14, 2006 and otherwise denied our motion to dismiss.

Pre-need Funeral Arrangements

In September 2014, the plaintiffs in Jo Ann Howard, P.C., et al. v. Cassity, et al. (No. 4:09-CV-1252-ERW) (currently pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri) filed a motion seeking leave to amend their complaint to reassert aiding and abetting claims previously dismissed by the court in 2012.

Other Regulatory and Governmental Inquiries

PNC is the subject of investigations, audits and other forms of regulatory and governmental inquiry covering a broad range of issues in our banking, securities and other financial services businesses, in some cases as part of reviews of specified activities at multiple industry participants. Over the last few years, we have experienced increases in regulatory and governmental investigations, audits and other inquiries. Areas of current regulatory or governmental inquiry with respect to PNC include consumer protection, fair lending, mortgage origination and servicing, mortgage and non mortgage-related insurance and reinsurance, municipal finance activities, conduct by broker-dealers, automobile lending practices, and participation in government insurance or guarantee programs, some of which are described in Prior Disclosure. These inquiries, including those described in Prior Disclosure, may lead to administrative, civil or criminal proceedings, and possibly result in remedies including fines, penalties, restitution, or alterations in our business practices, and in additional expenses and collateral costs.

Our practice is to cooperate fully with regulatory and governmental investigations, audits and other inquiries, including those described in Prior Disclosure.

Other

In addition to the proceedings or other matters described above and in Prior Disclosure, PNC and persons to whom we may have indemnification obligations, in the normal course of business, are subject to various other pending and threatened legal proceedings in which claims for monetary damages and other relief are asserted. We do not anticipate, at the present time, that the ultimate aggregate liability, if any, arising out of such other legal proceedings will have a material adverse effect on our financial position. However, we cannot now determine whether or not any claims asserted against us or others to whom we may have indemnification obligations, whether in the proceedings or other matters described above or otherwise, will have a material adverse effect on our results of operations in any future reporting period, which will depend on, among other things, the amount of the loss resulting from the claim and the amount of income otherwise reported for the reporting period.

See Note 17 Commitments and Guarantees for additional information regarding the Visa indemnification and our other obligations to provide indemnification, including to current and former officers, directors, employees and agents of PNC and companies we have acquired.