BEE-spoke-data/consumer-finance-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2015-08-13
Company: Ocwen Financial Corporation
State: TN
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Complaint:
XXXX as Trustee wrongfully foreclosed on our home. 

1. XXXX is named indispensable party in Federal complaint. XXXX as Trustee wrongfully answered the complaint. XXXX did not answer complaint. 
2. Attorney for XXXX represented different corporate entities regarding XXXX in XXXX XXXX XXXX Court. 
3. Loan was still in original XXXX XXXX trust after the foreclosure and sale indicating the loan had not been satisfied and removed from the trust as the Pooling and Servicing Agreement ( PSA XXXX states should have been removed or replaced by a similar loan. 
4. No original note was filed in any court and note was not assigned to XXXX. 
5. Only a fraudulent XXXX assignment of Deed of Trust was presented in court. 
6. No corporate disclosure for XXXX was filed in federal court. 
7. XXXX Memorandums from XXXX should not be used in any foreclosure actions. This should verify beyond all claims that XXXX, as Trustee committed a wrongful foreclosure. 
8. Representative of XXXX states that XXXX has no equitable interest in any of the loans that it is trustee for. 
9. XXXX, as Trustee claimed to be owner and holder of XXXX loan in federal court. Memorandums presented by XXXX show XXXX, as Trustee is not. 
10. Attorney for XXXX falsely claimed that documents presented were original, true and correct and they were not. This attorney contradicted his statements regarding same which upon information and belief could be considered perjury. 
11. XXXX is registered to do business in Tennessee. XXXX, as Trustee is not registered in TN. 
12. Fraudulent documents were consistently produced by attorney for XXXX, Litton loan, etc., but were claimed to be true and correct throughout the federal complaint. 
13. The XXXX never received any notification that the loan had been satisfied. 
14. The XXXX never received any IRS form XXXX from any entity connected with their loan. Upon information and belief, this could be considered tax evasion by these entities.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2015-09-07
Company: Ocwen Financial Corporation
State: FL
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional fixed mortgage
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Complaint:
We received a permanent HAMP approval for our first mortgage on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. In accordance to HAMP 2MP, the bank/servicer has an obligation to review the borrower 's XXXX lien, offer a trial period on same, and or extinguish or reduce payments on it ( rate/principal/term waterfall ) in proportion to the HAMP granted first lien. 

Our XXXX mortgage lender, XXXX, is required to report the permanent modification using the HAMP Reporting Tool. Our XXXX mortgage lender GMAC, serviced by an XXXX Call Center in XXXX, keeps transferring me to Ocwen 's Collection Agency or XXXX . They finally advised me that the XXXX mortgage was " written off '' to their affiliated collection company, XXXX XXXX, back in XXXX of XXXX and there is a XXXX balance as it relates to Ocwen. I am cognizant that " write off '' is an accounting terminology and by no way removes the lien or debt. 

Back in XXXX of this year, XXXX XXXX sent us an offer to settle just after we had been verbally approved for our HAMP permanent modification in XXXX of XXXX but had not yet received the attached documents. 

I reviewed the mortgages and liens via our county 's Comptroller 's Office and Ocwen nor GMAC ever processed a lien on our property in addition to the original mortgage. 

Please note, both the XXXX and XXXX mortgage were DISCHARGED AND NOT REAFFIRMED in bankruptcy under Chapter XXXX back in XXXX. 

I have taken the initiative to fax the HAMP permanent modification approval to Ocwen and can not verify receipt of the fax as the loss mitigation department will not speak to me. 

We were advised that the HAMP has to be " matched '' and the Department of Treasury has to officially notify GMAC/XXXX. However, no one can verify nor deny that our HAMP approval on our XXXX mortgage was reported and reflected in the Lender Processing Services ' Applied Analytics Division ( LPS ) data base. 

Our HAMP permanent modification on our XXXX mortgage has " fallen through the cracks '' and no one can assist us as to the status of the tandem 2MP process. 

We seek your help!

Company response to consumer: Closed
Consumer complaint received 2015-11-18
Company: Ocwen Financial Corporation
State: CA
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Complaint:
In XXXX of 2008 I called my Mort co. GMAC to inquire about the Modification process from a letter I received from them. They told me I had to be at least 30 days behind before I could start the process. I explained that I have never missed any payments on anything and did n't feel good about being late on a Mort payment. They said it would only take 30 days or so and I should not worry about bad credit. Well that was the beginning of my 18 month nightmare!!! I have a Mort brokerage education so I knew how to put together a loan package for mortgages. After they received the completed loan doc 's they kept requesting the same information time and time again. I faxed them my tax returns alone at least 5 times. After XXXX temporary 90 day payment plans they said they were going to come up with my new modified payment. But that did n't happen. After 18 long months of not knowing what was happening with my Mortgage I finally got a letter stating the modification was denied because they could not figure out my income!!!!!! What!!! They said I had to back pay all my missed mort payments as well as late fee 's, penalties and random inspections ( to see if I still lived here ) or they were taking my Home. I had to sell over {$60000.00} from my XXXX and pay early withdrawal penalties and taxes and hand that money over to GMAC. I paid the mort the next 12 months and then hired a lawyer to help me with the modification once more. After almost 3 years of sleepless nights I finally got the modification completed. GMAC has since sold my loan to OCWEN and I did receive a {$500.00} check from GMAC for any wrong doings with the modification. I 'm now XXXX yrs old had to start my XXXX back again because the market was down almost 50 % when I sold and took a huge loss just to pay them. They knew what they were doing they knew how much money I had and they deceived me at every turn. My Loan # XXXX same # as when GMAC owned it but now OCWEN loan servicing has it there # XXXX. After the modification GMAC divested itself from any of these mortgages. They should be held accountable for the time and money I had to spend just to lower my mortgage to the current interest rate. That 's all I wanted in the first place.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2015-10-26
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: NM
Product: Credit card
Issue: Advertising and marketing

Complaint:
I was making a XXXX Airline reservation, when I was offered a credit card that showed the cost of the ticket would be {$100.00} less, if I applied and was accepted. I applied for the card, was accepted and notified that I could use it to make purchases right away. Went back to the reservation web site and indeed the cost of the ticket was {$100.00} less. BUT, timed out during the process. Now I am not able to receive the {$100.00} discount on the ticket. I have been told several different stories regarding this issue. I was told to use the card I will receive the credit. I tried this and card would not work. I was told by Citi that getting timed out happens and the credit card company can work with AA to get it fixed to make purchase. Finally, I was told I can not use the card for 7 days until it is activated and they can not cancel it until it is activated. Bottom line, this was false advertising, the reason for my getting the card I am not able to take advantage of. I have spent many hours over 3 days with no resolution.

Company public response: Company chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2016-10-14
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: PA
Product: Credit card
Issue: Other

Complaint:
This complaint is not an acknowledgement of the debt, and is not an indication that payment will be made. The goal of this complaint is to bring forth a FCRA violation by XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, Citicards ( original creditor ) and XXXX ( or XXXX ; collection agency ). 
I currently have a {$6400.00} collection from XXXX XXXX ( aka XXXX ) illegally appearing on my credit reports. The Original Creditor of this account is Citicards. Upon reviewing my ENTIRE statement history from Citicards ( attached ) it is clear that the date of first delinquency of this account is on or before XXXX XXXX. By the XXXX XXXX report, the available credit limit was {$0.00} - in other words, my credit had been REVOKED, as the account was in serious delinquency. This date explains why the Citi tradeline does not appear in any of my credit reports. However, the XXXX XXXX tradeline appears since it misrepresents the date of first delinquency. Based on the date of first delinquency of XXXX XXXX, the tradeline should appear on my credit reports until XXXX XXXX. I am writing to request that the credit bureaus ( XXXX, XXXX and XXXX ) immediately delete this tradeline. I am also writing to request Citicards ( as required by law ; and as the original creditor ) to instruct the credit unions and XXXX XXXX to stop reporting this tradeline. I am also writing to require XXXX XXXX to immediately stop reporting this tradeline.

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 2015-05-11
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: GA
Product: Credit card
Issue: Closing/Cancelling account

Complaint:
In XX/XX/XXXX my bloomingdales card was compromised and some fraudulent activity occurred. I made a dispute and investigation was started. When I initially made this dispute, I also made a XXXX payment on my account. When I spoke to someone from the fraud department, they informed me that I would not be required to make any payments on my account until the investigation was complete. The investigation has now been completed and I was given credit back into my account. I went in to a bloomingdales department store on XXXX to make a payment and was told my account was closed. The sales associated connected on telephone with customer service who then informed that it was closed and error and she tried to reinstate it but could not because it was a sunday and the department she needed to reinstated was closed. She told me to call back on Monday.

Company public response: Company chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2017-01-13
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: CA
Product: Bank account or service
Sub-product: Checking account
Issue: Account opening, closing, or management

Complaint:
Last year, I took advantage of a Citibank offer of a {$400.00} Cash bonus for opening a new checking account. The requirements were to open a new checking account, deposit at least $ XXXX, and keep the $ XXXX in the account for at least 30 days. At the end of this 30 days, I was promised that I would receive the {$400.00} within 90 days. I opened the account on XX/XX/XXXX, deposited $ XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, and kept it in the account until XX/XX/XXXX. 90 days from XX/XX/XXXX was XX/XX/XXXX, and I still have not received my {$400.00} cash bonus. I have called Citibank numerous times, but am never able to get a straight answer as to when I can expect to receive my {$400.00}.

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 2016-01-08
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: CO
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: FHA mortgage
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Complaint:
The trouble with CitiMortagage began several years ago. I was XXXX. When the market fell apart, so did my income and I got behind on my payments. XX/XX/XXXX I started a new job at the company that used to sell me my materials. This job is indoors and offers consistent pay regardless of weather and the construction market. XX/XX/XXXX we started the process for a re-modification on our home. We were approved as of XX/XX/XXXX and set to make three ( 3 ) months of trial payments thru XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX. After completing this process we found that we had been denied due to some missing paperwork. A sale date of XX/XX/XXXX was set at this point. I complained to them about the fact that we had responded to everything they had sent in a very timely manner and that we had never received the papers they were referring to. They then sent the paperwork out, we had them signed and notarized and sent back in the same day. Then they told us that the previous paperwork had expired and we would need to refile everything we had done. She sent me the list and I got everything they requested sent off that same day. This all took place in XX/XX/XXXX. It was not until XX/XX/XXXX that they came back with an official denial of the re-modification. The reason they gave was that since I had to file for a re-modification twice in the same year they believed my situation had not changed. I was fully capable of making the payments and had done everything asked of me. It feels as though I am being bullied out of my home of 13 years. 
At the time of denial i was told that a short sale was approved. I contacted my realtor and we found a buyer and asked for a postponement in order to close. They have now denied the postponement claiming that I am not approved for a short sale. This was an FHA loan and I have been told that if a re-modification was denied that I am automatically approved for a short sale.

Company public response: Company chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2016-07-17
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: NY
Product: Credit card
Issue: Other

Complaint:
Finance charges applied to account when I had signed up for free financing for purchase of computer. Also automated bill pay does not work and no customer service representative picks up forcing consumer to pay late fees. Very disturbing. Finally got one " XXXX '' who advised lots of consumers were complaining about this. Advised her I was making a complaint. Please investigate.

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 2016-07-26
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: MD
Product: Credit card
Issue: Billing disputes

Complaint:
I purchased my home in XXXX XXXX and took advantage of a 6-month interest free financing promotion offered through the Home Depot Consumer Card. I made regular on-time payments to the account and decided to pay off the entire amount before the promotion period ended on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. I inquired whether the promotion period could be extended for a short time and was granted a 20 day grace period, i.e., until XXXX XXXX, XXXX, to pay off the balance. To ensure I paid the full balance and to avoid any possible confusion, I requested that a Citi Financial representative provide a final pay off amount. The representative provided to me the exact balance of {$4500.00}. I also asked that she make note of the quoted pay off amount to prevent the very situation I am currently facing. On XXXX XXXX, XXXX, I paid the entire {$4500.00}. Notwithstanding this payment, on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, another Citi Financial representative informed me that there was an additional {$530.00} that remained on my account. When explaining the error, she suggested that although each of my purchases met the 6-month interest free promotional threshold, Home Depot/Citi Financial charged my account separately for an online purchase where all items were ordered and purchased at the same time but shipped separately. The total online purchase met the {$290.00} promotional threshold. She further noted that Home Depot/Citi Financial would have corrected the accounting error if I had informed them of the error within the promotional period ; but by her calculations it was " too late. '' The promotion period was extended until XXXX XXXX, XXXX. Thus, by the representative 's statement, Home Depot/Citi Financial could have corrected the accounting error since my inquiry was made during the promotion period. The heart of my complaint, however, pertains to the the false representations made to me by Citi Financial regarding the final payoff amount. Citi Financial misrepresented the amount and character of the debt owned. I recently filed a complaint in this matter with the XXXX but Citi Financial refused to correct its error and the complaint was closed without further investigation. Citi Financial admittedly quoted me a final payoff amount of {$4500.00} but suggests that this was only the principal balance. This too is a false representation. The final interest free promotion was not included on any of my billing statements. For that reason, I expressly requested a FINAL pay off amount from Citi Financial and was quoted the {$4500.00} figure. I have paid this amount in full and am now being asked to silently accept the financial penalties borne from Citi Financial 's error.

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 2017-03-26
Company: SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.
State: CA
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional fixed mortgage
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Complaint:
Dear Sir or Madam : After review of the financial information that SPS has provided to me it appears that SPS was dually tracking my residential mortgage loan while I was working on a loan modification and reviewing their offer for a repayment plan. Not only did they dual track me but they also harmed me financially as they charged the expenses of {$1100.00} to my account. This is a direct violation of the California Homeowner Bill of Rights, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, RESPA and Truth in Lending statues and laws. 

On XXXX XXXX, XXXX, I submitted a home affordable loan modification application to SPS both via facsimile and email. I experienced a material change in financial circumstances and submitted that change to my " mortgage servicer ''. I never received an acknowledgment of that application nor did I receive any outcome. However, on XXXX XXXX, XXXX SPS charged {$760.00} to my account, paid to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and noted my account with Foreclosure Attorney. 

On XXXX XXXX, XXXX SPS sent me a letter offering a repayment plan. I did not agree with that plan and filed an appeal. SPS gave me until XXXX XXXX, XXXX to respond to their offer. However, SPS ordered and charged to my account a Foreclosure Broker Price Opinion in the amount {$89.00} and on XXXX XXXX, XXXX they charged to my account {$280.00} paid to The XXXX and noted on my account Foreclosure Attorney. 

These were outright illegal lending practices as SPS positioned themselves to foreclose and take my property while in direct violation of the law. 

I am requesting that your office conduct an industry standard investigation into my allegations. Please apply all penalties and sanctions as applicable to State and Federal Law to discontinue this behavior as it clearly demonstrates a pattern and practice of non-compliance, as well as malicious intent. 

Thank you, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Enclosures : Payment History XXXX XXXX XXXX SPS Repayment Plan Letter XXXX Screenshot of Email of HAMP application XXXX

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2016-01-29
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: TX
Product: Credit card
Issue: Rewards

Complaint:
I was solicted ( in XXXX XXXX ) through the XXXX Mail by Citi Card to participate in a promotion to sign up for the XXXX program, a company with which I have an airlines sky miles account. The promotion offered XXXX miles in return for using the card to make {$1000.00} in purchases over the next 3 months after approval. I applied online and was approved for the card. I made the purchases of over {$1000.00} dollars during my first month but the miles did not appear in my XXXX account. When I called CitiCard on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX to inquire about why my miles had not been added to my XXXX account I was told I was not eligible for the promotion because I had previously had an account with Citi in the past 24 months that had been cancelled. CitiCard knew this information when they sent me the solicitation. Citi Card did not inform me when I signed up and was approved for the card that I would not be eligible for the promotion. They XXXX let me spend money on the card knowing that I would not be eligible for the promotion. I believe this Citi Card " come on '' offering promotions knowing full well they will not award the the promised award is both a deceptive and fraudulent business practice and that Citi Card should be held accountable. Had Citi Card notified me that I would not be eligible for their promotion ( they did not ), I would not have signed up for the new account but would have instead used my XXXX credit card. They are deserving of my business. Citi Card is not. I have cancelled my Citi Card account.

Company public response: Company chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation