BEE-spoke-data/consumer-finance-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2019-10-11
Company: Ascendium Education Group
State: CA
Product: Student loan
Sub-product: Federal student loan servicing
Issue: Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem
Sub-issue: Their investigation did not fix an error on your report

Complaint:
This particular account situation that is lately filing on my own credit document has a seriously unfavorable relation to my personal ability to obtain a present loan application. I highly recommend you generate verification that ASCENDIUM EDUCATION has been reported completely in accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act regulations, it's really a serious problem to mis-report. Moreconfirmation of the aforesaid item too. My proper request mustover, I was never 30 days/60 days/120 days late in any of my payments and I'm not greatly tuned in to the date opened so I prefer to ask your be investigated as soon as possible and confirmed to be correct. Thanks!

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2018-05-31
Company: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL
State: AL
Product: Credit card or prepaid card
Sub-product: Store credit card
Issue: Getting a credit card
Sub-issue: Card opened as result of identity theft or fraud

Complaint:
During discovery in a divorce case, I found that my soon to be ex got a Credit Card from Belk 's department store, in my name and Social Security number. 
She had been hiding the account by paying Online using an account I had no access to. 
After the divorce started, she changed the account address to C/O ( her name ) and changed the address to that of her parents. 
The present balance is approx {$3600.00}, and I don't know how much was charged for several years.This account showed up on my credit report. 
I inquired with XXXX, and Belk/Synchrony Bank about the account in XX/XX/XXXX. Since I didn't know the account number, I filed a fraud investigation report with Belk/ Synchrony, and the local police department. After a couple of weeks, several statements arrived. 
I did request in writing, copies of the originating documents on the account. 
After 2 months, Synchrony sent a letter stating " We are unable to approve your claim of FRAUD ... Because " Account opened greater than 1 year with verifiable payment history ''. They did not sent the requested documents of the account being opened. 
Then, today, XX/XX/XXXX, I get a billing statement from Belk 's, ( for the first time ). 
The Account number was changed. I don't have a card under any account number.

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 explanation
Consumer complaint received 2021-08-18
Company: AmeriHome Mortgage Company, LLC
State: OK
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process

Complaint:
XX/XX/XXXX I tried to payoff my loan, but Amerihome Mortgage Co. system wouldn't let me payoff the complete amount, so I owe XXXX  XXXX. 

XX/XX/XXXX I received a payoff notice that said they owed me {$41.00} because I over paid interest on the loan. 

XX/XX/XXXX They sent a new payoff that I owe them {$.00} now with no explanation on why they changed what was owed. 

XX/XX/XXXX I called to get an explanation and their representative was going to email another dept. and get back to me. Should take 1 or 2 days. 

XX/XX/XXXX Still no answer on why the change. They have sent me a notice that state 's if I don't pay the {$.00} by XX/XX/XXXX they'll charge me {$56.00} in late fees.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2021-11-04
Company: Paypal Holdings, Inc
State: CA
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service
Sub-product: Mobile or digital wallet
Issue: Unauthorized transactions or other transaction problem

Complaint:
I had opened a dispute claim Case opened : XXXX. And it got denied basically over night. Within a few hours. I hardly think PayPal reviewed, investigated my claim in a matter of a few hours to deny my claim.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2019-03-29
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: NJ
Product: Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
Sub-product: Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report
Sub-issue: Information belongs to someone else

Complaint:
This is my second written request to verified accounts that appear on my credit report that I do not recognize, I believe I have been a victim of identity theft, therefor and requesting verification of this accounts on my credit or deleting of this accounts.This time an FTC complaint could be filed and is attached to this complaint. Thank you

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 explanation
Consumer complaint received 2018-01-24
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: MN
Product: Checking or savings account
Sub-product: Checking account
Issue: Opening an account
Sub-issue: Didn't receive terms that were advertised

Complaint:
I opened a Citi Priority checking account in XX/XX/XXXX because I received their advertisement stating I could get $XXXX bonus if I fulfill the following: Open the account by XX/XX/XXXX, fund the account $XXXX, and make 2 direct deposit. There were no mentioning of "existing account holder not qualified" on the ads, and I had a checking with Citi but I still received this ads, so my understanding is that I qualify. I fulfilled all the requirement by XX/XX/XXXX, and did not see the bonus of $XXXX. So I called Citi. The agent did some research, and told me to wait some time. So I waited till XXXX, and called again since the bonus is still not posted. Another agent said I need to wait 3 months after all the requirements are fulfilled. So I waited another month. Still nothing. This time, the agent told me they would research and send me a letter. I received the letter, which said I did not qualify because of my existing checking account. I believe it was very dishonest for Citi to do. First, they should not have sent me the ads if they know I did not qualify. Second, they knew I had an account and should have told me at my first contact. But instead, they told me to wait and held a large amount to them for zero interest for almost 6 months. This is textbook definition of Bait-and-Switch. I cannot believe a large corporation like Citi is doing such dishonest things to its loyal customers.

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
Consumer complaint received 2018-01-24
Company: CARRINGTON MORTGAGE SERVICES, LLC
State: TX
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process

Complaint:
In XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX sold my mortgage to Carrington. I was unaware this had happened until the end of XXXX and did not receive contact information from the new loan servicer, Carrington until the end of XX/XX/XXXX. They would not let me pay via online, by phone via automated pay, or set up a draft. I mailed in payments via check for XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, which cleared. The payment I mailed in for XX/XX/XXXX never cleared and yesterday they returned my XX/XX/XXXX check for payment with a generic letter refusing to accept it until I pay the full amount required but did not state in the letter what the amount is. My monthly mortgage payment is {$1300.00}. For XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, I paid {$1400.00} each month. For XX/XX/XXXX, I tried to pay {$1400.00}. I have tried to contact them via " online chat, '' via email and also via telephone. I tried to pay by phone and the automated system and they will not allow me to, nor does my online account allow me to pay online. I also attempted to set up auto-pay from my checking account and it will not go through.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2019-07-11
Company: TD BANK US HOLDING COMPANY
State: PA
Product: Checking or savings account
Sub-product: Checking account
Issue: Opening an account
Sub-issue: Didn't receive terms that were advertised

Complaint:
XXXX. On XX/XX/2019, I applied for and was subsequently approved for XXXX Premier Checking account ending in XXXX in response to a mail promotional offer of {$300.00} ( there was link on the letter as well as instructions how to get the bonus. Here is the link https : //www.td.com/us/en/personal-banking/checking-accounts/ ). The terms and conditions state that Earn {$300.00} when you receive direct deposits of {$2500.00} or more within 90 days of opening your account. 

2. By the end of XXXX, I met all requirements of the Offer ( I had direct deposits of more than {$4000.00} coming into my checking account ). 

3. By XX/XX/2019 when it has been more than 90 days since opening the account, the bonus did not post. I contacted customer service for assistance and was advised by the a male specialist that an internal message had been forward to the marketing team to investigate my case. After verifying my successful direct deposit, the male specialist asked me to call again in the next few days to follow up. 

4. On XX/XX/2019, no bonus posted, no reply yet. I contacted the customer service again and spoke to a female specialist, she first verified my eligibility to get the bonus, and suggested me to wait for some additional time. After hearing that I called the other day on XX/XX/XXXX, she looked up my account and found a response from the marketing team. The marketing team says that I used a wrong link to apply and therefore I am not eligible to receive the bonus. Unhappy with the reply, I asked to be transfer to a supervisor, the supervisor didn't do much investigations and just made up some policy saying I am not eligible. ( These policies were targeted at my special case, not mentioned in the terms and conditions ).

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2022-08-10
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: IA
Product: Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
Sub-product: Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report
Sub-issue: Account information incorrect

Complaint:
I declare under penalty of perjury ( under the laws of the United States, if executed outside of the United States ) that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Further, I certify that I am permitted by FEDERAL and STATE LAW to file this dispute. I also understand that knowing and willful misstatements or omissions of material facts constitutes a FEDERAL CRIMINAL VIOLATION punishable under 18 U.S.C. 1001. Additionally, these misstatements are punishable as perjury under 18 U.S.C. 1621. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX How is Trans Union reporting the account type as Open, while XXXX and XXXX is reporting the account type as collection? Which one is it? Is it open, a collection account or is it charged off? 
Why are there so many missing fields of information? Did XXXX XXXX XXXX not supply that information to you? 
Trans Union and XXXX are reporting the date last active as XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX is reporting it as XX/XX/XXXX. Which date is it? 

Attached you'll find a screenshot of the trade-line displaying the inaccurate reporting.

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 non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2018-01-24
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: TX
Product: Credit card or prepaid card
Sub-product: General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement
Sub-issue: Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card

Complaint:
Four fraudulent charges appeared on my Citibank credit card account between XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX in  amounts from {$80.00} to {$310.00}. I noticed the charges online within two or three days and contacted Citi via online chat immediately to inform them of the fraudulent charges. Citi credited the amount of three of the four fraudulent charges back to my account immediately. One fraudulent charge from XX/XX/XXXX in the amount of {$170.00} remained pending on my account. 

The statement for my account closed on XX/XX/XXXX. The {$170.00} fraudulent charge from XX/XX/XXXX was still shown as the balance due on my account. There were no other unpaid charges on this account. I contacted Citi several times via online chat over the next three weeks. The chat agents refused to provide any further information. 

On XX/XX/XXXX I mailed a certified letter informing Citi that I disputed the four fraudulent charges. Citi received the letter on XX/XX/XXXX. Citi acknowledged the disputed charge via electronic letter on XX/XX/XXXX, but did not remove or credit the charge. I did not pay the disputed amount. 

My next statement closed on XX/XX/XXXX and included a late fee of {$25.00} and interest charges on the {$170.00} outstanding balance of {$2.00}. Citi online is now showing that my payment is past due despite knowing that this fraudulent charge is disputed. 

Citi has violated 15 U.S.C. 1666 ( c ). Citi sent me a statement dated XX/XX/XXXX including finance charges on amounts in dispute following written notice from me. That statement does not include any indication that payment of the disputed amount is not required pending Citi 's compliance with section 1666, as required by section 1666 ( c ) ( 2 ). 

I have requested that Citi remove the fraudulent charge, the late fee, and all interest charges. Citi has yet to substantively respond.

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
Consumer complaint received 2019-07-11
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: AL
Product: Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
Sub-product: Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report
Sub-issue: Public record information inaccurate

Complaint:
Even after knowing all of the information of how institutions function in the United States to disempower certain communities and people of XXXX. It is still necessary to challenge the institutions to attain equitable treatment. The credit bureaus has an interconnection between financial institution, insurances companies, and credit unions, etc, who uses them for housing, redlining, and for devaluing an entire community by labeling all of its resident as " high risks ''. 

Equifax has attempted to devalue my credit health as the United States Government devalued XXXX Americans for homeownership in the XXXX. The Ponzi Schemes was used by the United States government to build projects for white privileged soldiers. Then the United States Government emerged with the G.I. Bill to allow white privileged soldiers to escape from the projects but kept XXXX Americans trapped in the inner-city by alleging the government did not have money to lend to XXXX Americans soldiers for the 235 homeownership program. 

The existence of economic and XXXX inequity continues to prevail with Equifax against my credit health. Equifax has developed a sense of superiority over my credit health on or about XX/XX/2019. Equifax distorted conditioning process was used to report to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and other creditors that there are derogatory on my credit health. Such as a derogatory public record, or collection, and proportion of loan amount is too high on my credit health that all are unfounded in fact. 

Equifax knows that access to excellent credit health, or quality education, and health care, is the road to empowerment. Equifax internalized XXXX oppression has attempted to disempower me with inaccurate  credit information to my creditor. Equifax has generated their wide disparities in my life by their biases, stereotypes, and behaviors that characterize they're " real '' XXXX. America ( Equifax ) institutionalized racism is supported by your white power structure that allows you to loot America of goods, or steal goods, or plunder people of XXXX credit health. 

According to Professor XXXX XXXX companies of the upper socioeconomic class engage in much more criminal behavior as Equifax has done than the lower socioeconomic offenders.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2018-01-24
Company: ERC
State: TX
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: Other debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed
Sub-issue: Debt is not yours

Complaint:
XXXX XXXX XXXX has placed a derogatory collection on my Credit Report, which is affecting my credit. I do not have said Debt of {$2800.00} with this company. The agency has not been able to VALIDATE the debt with the proof of the original contract with original signature, payment history etc. ). A bill is not proof of debt.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2019-07-15
Company: Ditech Financial LLC
State: VI
Product: Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
Sub-product: Credit reporting
Issue: Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem
Sub-issue: Their investigation did not fix an error on your report

Complaint:
In XX/XX/XXXX, I requested that XXXX conduct an investigation into the false reporting being Done by my mortgage holder, Ditech Financials. Ditech Financials had been falsely reporting to XXXX, that beginning in XX/XX/XXXX and ending on XX/XX/XXXX, I had been defaulting on my mortgage note. As a result of this false reporting, my credit report precipitously decreased from XXXX down to XXXX. If Ditech had done any sort of investigation, it would have learned that my mortgage was paid automatically by my bank before the XXXX of every month for the entirety of the loan period. It would have learned that Ditech had been misapplying the payments to another mortgage account I held. Ditech did not have a proper accounting and servicing system that would and should have prevented Ditech from misapplying funds from one mortgage account to another, particularly since the funds had been paid automatically by my bank for the duration of the time Ditech serviced both loans. 

Instead, XXXX simply changed my credit report to closed and transferred to XXXX which had assumed the mortgage from Ditech. I disputed the matter with XXXX which ceased the false reporting and conducted an investigation. It's investigation caused Ditech to repay the monies to me and I in turn paid the monies to XXXX which brought my loan current. XXXX was unable to fix the false reporting of Ditech, its predecessor. XXXX violated its investigatory responsibilities of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2022-08-09
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: TX
Product: Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
Sub-product: Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report
Sub-issue: Information belongs to someone else

Complaint:
INQUIRIES ( stolen identity ) WF CRD SVC made a Bank XXXX Credit Card Inquiry by checking your XXXX XXXX XXXX 
Impersonator fraudulently Requested credit on following dates : XX/XX/2022, XX/XX/2022 Contacted Wells Fargo on XX/XX/XXXX to dispute application and advise of fraudulent activity. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX  made a Bank XXXX Credit Card Inquiry by checking your XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX fraudulently Requested credit on following dates : XX/XX/2022, XX/XX/2022 XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX made a Bank XXXX Credit Card Inquiry by checking your XXXX XXXX XXXX 
Impersonator fraudulently Requested credit on following dates : XX/XX/2022, XX/XX/XXXX XXXX

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 explanation
Consumer complaint received 2019-07-11
Company: HW Holding, Inc
State: GA
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: Other debt
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action
Sub-issue: Threatened or suggested your credit would be damaged

Complaint:
The company called me the around XXXX threating me and was very rude refuse d to get me an manger stated my credit will be damage. I advice to do verification he refused and cussed me out ND HUNNGUP IN MY FACE THE LANGUAGE HE USED MADE WE FEEL UNEASY SINCE THEY IN FLORIDA TOO name of company is Hunter Warfield

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2018-01-24
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: SC
Product: Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
Sub-product: Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report
Sub-issue: Account information incorrect

Complaint:
On XX/XX/XXXX, I received a letter from XXXX XXXX XXXX referencing account XXXX. I originally reached out to them for debt verification. The form I received in return was what I will consider debt verification, but the date on the paperwork I received from the showed an open date of XX/XX/XXXX. On my credit report, however; the open date says XX/XX/XXXX.How is that possible?Once I contacted them, I was given a case manager that continuously told me, the open date was the date THEY got the account from another party, but even if the account was sold or transferred, how can the open date change? She even went as far as to say, the drop off date for the collection is XX/XX/XXXX, so why would the open date on my report say XX/XX/XXXX?This is the case for 4 different accounts I have on my credit report that belongs to this particular company.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2019-05-15
Company: BBVA FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: FL
Product: Credit card or prepaid card
Sub-product: General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement
Sub-issue: Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement

Complaint:
I had 6 fraudulent charges on my card on XX/XX/19. These happened during the day while I was at work and while I still had the card in my possession. BBVA reversed 4 of the charges but arbitrarily determined two of the charges to XXXX XXXX # XXXX in the amounts of {$100.00} and {$110.00} were legitimate. I was given no reason for this decision. I did not receive any proof of investigation. 

I believe this happened because I was honest in the initial interview and said I had shopped at a XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. However, I shopped at store # XXXX ( a different store ), I did not use the BBVA card, I used my XXXX XXXX card, and the amount was {$160.00}, which does not match the amount above. I have both the receipt and credit card statement to back up these claims. I also have 20+ co-workers who can tell you I never left my office on XX/XX/19 when the disputed charges occurred.

Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief