BEE-spoke-data/consumer-finance-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2016-08-05
Company: Ditech Financial LLC
State: GA
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: FHA mortgage
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Complaint:
Ditech, LLC is the mortgage company that services my mortgage account and collects the funds for the escrow on my home. XXXX XXXX, XXXX, I received an Annual Escrow Account Disclosure Statement indicating an increase in my mortgage starting XXXX XXXX, XXXX. My mortgage is to increase from {$600.00} to {$760.00}. I was told by a Ditech phone representative this increase was due to an escrow shortage of {$3100.00}, as she presented this amount indicated on the escrow statement sent to me. I was told by the Ditech representative, at the company 's call center, that this shortage was a result of my XXXX property taxes of {$1400.00} and XXXX home insurance payments : XXXX- {$850.00} and XXXX XXXX {$910.00}. However, when these XXXX explanations add up to {$3100.00} and I paid {$120.00} in escrow payments for twelve months in XXXX. Therefore, my escrow payments for XXXX totaled {$1500.00}. Deducting my XXXX escrow payments from {$3100.00} will leave only {$1600.00} in shortage in my escrow account. I will need an explanation on why my escrow account has a shortage of {$3100.00} instead. This is {$1400.00} over anything indicated on my XXXX XXXX, XXXX Annual Escrow Account Disclosure Statement. The Ditech representative I spoke to on the phone could not provide an answer for the unexplained expenses. Furthermore, the representative said a supervisor would call me to provide an answer. I received no further communications on the matter. I need to know where these extra expenses are coming from or they must be removed from my account immediately and my mortgage monthly payments adjusted accordingly.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2016-09-20
Company: Midwest Recovery Systems
State: CA
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: Payday loan
Issue: Taking/threatening an illegal action
Sub-issue: Threatened to sue on too old debt

Complaint:
At around XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, I received a call that was a recorded voice. At no time was a company named. The recorded voice offered no identity. The gist of the message was, " I received an order for you. I 'm calling from the processing division. It looks like XXXX charges pending against you. If I do n't hear from, you, I will actively pursue you at your place of employment and your residence. You have the right to contact the client directly to resolve this voluntarily. Understand that once you are located, you forfeit that right. If you have any questions call ( another recorded voice, a mechanical-sounding one, says the number : ) XXXX. '' I did n't call back. I have XXXX new entries by a company called Midwest Recovery Systems on my Transunion credit report, for $ {$980.00} each, all three of them are actually XXXX very old debt that is past the statute of limitations, with XXXX XXXX, a payday loan company from XX/XX/XXXX. I filed a dispute with Transunion. I called XXXX XXXX, they say they sold the debt in XX/XX/XXXX, and it was for {$98.00}. I am assuming that these recent messages are about the {$98.00} debt that is way past the statute of limitations. So, not only did this company ding my credit three times for XXXX debt, they dinged it about a debt that is past the statute of limitations, they jacked up the debt amount by XXXX %, they threatened to sue me about a debt that is way past the statute of limitations, they did not identify the company or the individual calling when they called my cellphone number unsolicited with an illegal collection that is on the Do Not Call Registry, and they made the message sound like I am going to be charged with a crime that I might be arrested for at my home or at my job, and they misinformed me that I have no rights once they locate me.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2015-12-14
Company: Ditech Financial LLC
State: FL
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Complaint:
Ditech, In response to Ditech back in XXXX they say they have n't received my modification information. I have proof we sent it with a return receipt. They also stated in XXXX they need 60 days to review my file. Its well passed the 60 days and I still have no answer. My attorney and I cant seem to get any cooperation from them. Can you please respond to me with some answers.

Company public response: Company believes complaint is the result of an isolated error
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2016-12-27
Company: Ditech Financial LLC
State: VA
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional fixed mortgage
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Complaint:
We refinanced our mortgage in XXXX of 2016, utilizing Ditech 's option of having payments automatically deducted on our checking account bi-weekly. In addition, we added an additional XXXX dollars over our minimum monthly payment. Ditech pulls out XXXX every two weeks. We have had nothing but trouble with ditech. We receive late notices every other month, along with late payment fees of XXXX for each month they determine our loan is " late ''. We call ditech each time to express our frustration, and they refund the late fee, but the problem still continues. Despite requesting ditech pay for our credit reports and send them to our house, this has not happened, as ditech simply tells us they can see our credit report and there are no late fees listed on it. Today, XXXX, a customer service supervisor acknowledged the issue is on ditech 's end, as she can clearly see every two weeks the money is pulled from our checking account. She further stated that some accounts have issues on the bi-monthly payment system. This is not our fault as a consumer. They offer bi-monthly payments as a service we take advantage of. There is a flaw in their billing system for bi-monthly payments, yet they continue to offer this service. XXXX informed us that while she wishes we would not have this problem anymore, it will probably continue to occur. We have NEVER been late on this loan and this is extremely frustrating. We desire a mortage company that can accommodate bi-monthly payments, and we were signed up to have this service, however ditech is unable to maintain this service on their end without charging us late fees, even though money is taken out every two weeks from out checking account.

Company public response: Company believes complaint is the result of an isolated error
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2017-02-10
Company: Innovis
State: TX
Product: Credit reporting
Issue: Credit reporting company's investigation
Sub-issue: No notice of investigation status/result

Complaint:
to whom it may concern i am having a issue with credit report agency innovis not complying with Fair credit Act Codes and Regulations bascliy violating my rights i requested a consumer report i received it i saw things out of place i disputed them online and with a dispute letter requesting the Documents they use to determine that the claim was verified. along with the name and number of the people they spoke to verify the account i have attach supporting documents for my complaint

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2016-08-03
Company: GMA Investments, LLC
State: OH
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: I do not know
Issue: Cont'd attempts collect debt not owed
Sub-issue: Debt is not mine

Complaint:
Twice I have received calls from Summit Receivables, XXXX. The latest was today, from " XXXX XXXX. '' My phone 's caller ID said the incoming number was XXXX, so the company is obviously spoofing phone numbers to prevent callers from knowing who is calling. 

I did not answer the call, so " XXXX '' left me a voice mail message. She did not identify what person she was calling for. She did not identify what company was owed the debt or how much was called. She said that " the client has extended an offer to you to close out the account for less than you owe. '' That 's pretty remarkable since I do not have any debts in collection and have received nothing in the mail from anyone. 

I looked up the company online, and it seems it simply calls old telephone numbers for people who owe debts without bothering to verify if the right person is being called, as well as doing reverse look ups to see what phone number is currently associated with the address of whoever it is trying to collect from. I believe one of these is what happened with me. Summit Receivables seems to be practicing in illegal collection methods and needs to be stopped.

Company response to consumer: Closed
Consumer complaint received 2016-12-05
Company: Innovis
State: TX
Product: Credit card
Issue: Closing/Cancelling account

Complaint:
I am disputing the findings of Innovis Consumer Reporting Agency because it failed to properly and adequately investigate my claims in the dispute against XXXX XXXX Bank, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, SD XXXX concerning my credit card account ending in XXXX with the bank, and did not delete the account, instead Innovis Consumer Reporting Agency supported the bank in propagating unfair business practices by holding the Bank 's submission as accurate without fully investigating my submission. In fact, I believe that I have been as specific as possible in all discussions with XXXX XXXX Bank, unlikely the Bank that continues to manipulate the dispute process ( Attachments B, C, and E ). 
1. I am disputing the claim of XXXX XXXX Bank against me to the tune of {$550.00} as inaccurate because its permutation is erroneous, and therefore inaccurate. The calculations were based on wrong assumptions including wrong account closing dates, multiple closing dates, membership fees on a closed account and accumulating surcharges on a closed account ( attachments G, H, J, K, and M ). 
2. XXXX XXXX Bank denied me insurance protection benefits on this account in spite of the fact that I was mandated and forced to opt into the policy, and paid the premiums. Even, after admitting to this fact, XXXX XXXX Bank made no effort to adjust the account, and continued to perpetrate the inaccuracy ( attachment G, H, J, and K ). 
3. XXXX XXXX Bank denied me the opportunity to negotiate a settlement. I made oral written attempts to negotiate the debt, but XXXX XXXX Bank officials deliberate used tactics that made them inaccessible and ignored my written requests ( attachment D, F and L ). 
4. Innovis Consumer Reporting Agency did not review any phone records or transcripts to confirm the claims of either party to the dispute but relied solely on the submission of XXXX XXXX Bank that its summary of statements were accurate, hence unfairly confirming the position of XXXX XXXX Bank against me based on inaccurate accounting ( attachment G, H ). 
5. Innovis Consumer Reporting Agency did not examine any detailed bank statements to judge the accuracy of the content or determine how and why the figures were changing in such a dramatic fashion during such a short period of time, including who made payments or why the payment was made ( attachment C and M )? 
6. Innovis Consumer Reporting Agency refused to respond to my request for the details of their investigation ( attachment N ). 

Therefore, my account ending XXXX with XXXX XXXX Bank should be removed from charge-off status, and deleted completely because of these inaccuracies, lapses in the investigation process, and wrong verdicts ( attachments A, C and E ). 
Note : The attachments are a compilation of documents obtained from the various credit reporting agencies approached during the dispute process.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2015-11-26
Company: CIT BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: CA
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Complaint:
I 've filed several complaints about my process working with Indymac/OneWest bank in attempts to modify my loan beginning XX/XX/XXXX. Indymac/OneWest finally offered a loan modification XXXX. After 3-months trial payments, I reviewed their contract and realized it would leave me with a mortgage of over {$900000.00} which my late husband left me with, so I chose to move on. The house was scheduled for auction on XX/XX/XXXX and I had friends interested in buying. My attorney called the Trustee Corporation phone number but a minimum bid amount was never available. On the day of the auction the auctioneer delayed in 15 minute increments so no minimum bid was ever announced, and there was no auction. After about an hour, my attorney called me to say the house was bank owned - XXXX is on record as bank owner, so by not announcing a minimum bid, it feels like this was a back door deal between the banks. Two days later, a Realtor - with XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX County - and her husband were on the property taking photographs. I was given 30 days to vacate which would have been XX/XX/XXXX, but I vacated on XX/XX/XXXX. 
I 'm filing this complaint because it 's been a horrible process to be left a widow with a XXXX dollar mortgage because the banks threw money at my late husband who was gambling on our equity. It 's been horrible to have been left with a mortgage over the {$720000.00} maximum amount the Obama administration deemed worthy for debt forgiveness so people could stay in their homes of many years. And it was heartbreaking to go through the humiliation of a foreclosure that turned out to be a back door agreement between IndyMac/OneWest and XXXX. And after all of that, the Realtor threatened me that the bank would sue me if there was vandalism at the house I vacated. My attorney explained the bank could not sue me after vacating, so I want anyone going through this to learn from my experience.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2016-07-25
Company: Gurstel Law Firm, P.C.
State: AZ
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: Other (i.e. phone, health club, etc.)
Issue: Cont'd attempts collect debt not owed
Sub-issue: Debt was paid

Complaint:
My husband received an affidavit of renewal of judgment few days ago. It so happened that I pulled our credit report because we are looking into buying a house, well on that credit report it shows that its been satisfied since XX/XX/XXXX. We 've paid this off. So now we are being sued.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2016-12-28
Company: Google Compare Credit Cards Inc.
State: CA
Product: Prepaid card
Sub-product: Government benefit payment card
Issue: Unauthorized transactions/trans. issues

Complaint:
I have learned in the last couple days, that the guest account on applications on XXXX phones, you do not need a password for and it links directly to your google account because it is your Google XXXX XXXX Account. My XXXX phone went back to XXXX ( per merchant guest account from prior phone. ) Not one rep through Google has stated the guest account was the play account, nor that the charges that play games billed were actual Google charges. Google cant provide a invoice or did they obtain authorization. These charges were not made by a minor or am I aware of anyone that made charges to my account. Google blamed my friends and family, refunded half towards a judgement for not getting expressed consent as i have been stating and deleted the remaining {$4000.00} and hundreds of transactions they ran through my bank out of their system. Google told me about a week ago to go to authorities because my info was stolen and its on another account. Why has it taken 2.5 years since i found out to have them tell me to go to authorities? Why did Google state in responses to complaints with the Attorney General and the FTC they were aware of the issue and to have me contact them and not state my unemployment card was on someone else 's account? I want the account and googles billing practices investigated. If Google would of investigated, the XXXX breach would of been made public sooner. I came to them and told them that there was a XXXX on my XXXX account that linked to his XXXX able to bill without permission. ( Google wallet separate charges ) I have given not XXXX person authorization to bill, add my payment method and not XXXX person has asked for my permission. I did not create a Google Wallet or Google Payments account. These are fraudulent transactions Google processed with out the expressed consent of the account holder, and are altering and deleting information 3.5 years after the first charge, 3 years since they flagged it 16 times without contacting me. Those flags have now been deleted from the invoice, yet I am told i didnt tell them fast enough what they concealed from me! Who benefited the transactions? Who received the credit from the purchase? How much was taken? These are all questions I have asked repeatedly, to be told i did not tell them fast enough, what it is obvious they have known! 
I would like Google to explain if a guest account for a application on a android device is phone specific and for billing purposes the same guest account is google account specific, what steps were taken to verify if the transactions were legitimate? 
please see complaint numbers below filed with CFPB for back up documentation. 
XXXX filed XXXX/XXXX/2016 XXXX filed XXXX/XXXX/2016 XXXX filed XXXX/XXXX/2016 XXXX filed XXXX/XXXX/2016 XXXX filed XXXX/XXXX/2016 XXXX filed XXXX/XXXX/2016 XXXX filed XXXX/XXXX/2016 XXXX filed XXXX/XXXX/2016

Company response to consumer: Closed
Consumer complaint received 2017-10-12
Company: Southern Service Systems, Inc.
State: AR
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: Other debt
Issue: Written notification about debt
Sub-issue: Didn't receive notice of right to dispute

Complaint:
This company mailed a letter about a collection for XXXX, dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, for {$100.00}. 
It states " ... if this account is not paid within 30 days from the date of this letter our client has instructed us to review the account and make a recommendation as to further collection action that needs to be taken. '' It does not state there are 30 days to dispute the validity. 
I have not responded.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2016-09-19
Company: Resurgent Capital Services L.P.
State: VA
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: I do not know
Issue: Disclosure verification of debt
Sub-issue: Not given enough info to verify debt

Complaint:
There is a company by the name of LVNV FUNDING, that has stated they returned the debt back to the original owner of the alleged debt, however ; the information they are reporting to the credit agencies is reflecting different information. I have tried contacting them and have used a letter that is available via the CFPB website to contact a creditor and ask them to provide validate the alleged debt. Well, they have indicated to the CFPB that they are no longer seeking this debt, yet their actions are indicating other wise and are continuing to damage my credit.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2016-04-08
Company: Resurgent Capital Services L.P.
State: SC
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: I do not know
Issue: Cont'd attempts collect debt not owed
Sub-issue: Debt resulted from identity theft

Complaint:
someone stole my identity information and used it to create several accounts that i have protested because they are fraudulent I have a police report with the information as well as had to report to the ftc id theft affidavit notarized but this company is reporting this on my credit and trying to collect

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2015-10-23
Company: Resurgent Capital Services L.P.
State: FL
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: Credit card
Issue: Cont'd attempts collect debt not owed
Sub-issue: Debt is not mine

Complaint:
This debt has passed the statue of limitations for this company to attempt to try and collect and/or report the account to the credit bureau 's. I have now received more harassing mail attempting to collect on a debt I do not owe, and threatening to report it after its already been removed from the credit bureau reports.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2015-10-28
Company: FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF PENNSYLVANIA
State: PA
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional fixed mortgage
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Complaint:
My complaint is with First National Bank. I have had a mortgage with this bank since XXXX 2015. There is no way for a customer to access their escrow account or see any escrow activity. I now have received a tax bill for {$4300.00}. FBN should pay this from my escrow account. I called and they explained it was never set up, that they will do this. I faxed them all the documentation and they told me they would set it up, pay and follow up with me. 8 days later, no follow up. I call FNB again. They explain they can not find my paperwork - to please resend. It is just very frustrating because I, as a customer, have no way to view my account and see what is going in and what is being paid out. I will resend them the documentation again and call again to see if anyone has it and will pay it. Please require First National Bank to make customers ' escrow account activity available online. Thank you.

Company public response: Company chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2015-11-06
Company: Gurstel Law Firm, P.C.
State: AZ
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: Credit card
Issue: Taking/threatening an illegal action
Sub-issue: Seized/Attempted to seize property

Complaint:
I was served with a Summons in Civil court by Gurstel Chargo P.A XXXX AZ in regards to a debt with XXXX. While I did have a credit card with them, it was paid on time each month & then paid off. I have not received a bill or phone call regarding any remaining debt in over a year. The first notification was this Summons. It threatens to garnish wages or seize property if not responded to.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2016-01-15
Company: ENOVA INTERNATIONAL, INC.
State: SC
Product: Payday loan
Issue: Charged fees or interest I didn't expect

Complaint:
I mistakenly took a {$650.00} loan/payday loan which the lender describes as an installment loan on XXXX/XXXX/15 because I had expenses I could n't afford. I did n't realize the APR was 388.28 % nor do I have a copy of the loan disclosure.

Company public response: Company disputes the facts presented in the complaint
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation