vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-05-29 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Communication tactics — Frequent or repeated calls
Company: DRB-40, LLC
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
The debt collection company is harassing distant family members that I have not contacted in 20+ years. They have provided false information to that family member stating I was in legal trouble and I needed help with resolution. Today they contacted that family member again ( which I have chosen to avoid contact with ) and left a voicemail saying they were trying to get ahold of me. This family member has lived in Texas since I was a child and I would have never added them as a reference or attached them to any personal loan application, so the information the debt collection company is providing is false. Furthermore, they are contacting previous employers that I have not worked with for the past 3 years.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-05-29 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Information belongs to someone else
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: SC

Complaint narrative:
Consumer Reporting Agencies play a crucial role in gathering and assessing consumer credit information. However, they must exercise their responsibilities with fairness, impartiality, and respect for the consumers right to privacy. The banking system relies on accurate and fair credit reporting, and when these reporting methods are unfair, it undermines public trust, which is vital for the system 's stability. I never gave my explicit, written consent for these agencies to report my information, which is a violation of 15 U.S. Code 1681b ( 2 ). This violation has led to an alleged case of identity theft, breaching 15 U.S. Code 1681c-2. The accounts in question are not related to any transactions made by me. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act was created to ensure that laws and procedures are in place to protect consumers from abusive, deceptive, and unfair practices by debt collectors. In this case, the company has violated 15 U.S. Code 1692f, which prohibits debt collectors from using unfair or unconscionable means to collect a debt. Specifically, they can not collect any amounts that arent explicitly authorized by the agreement or allowed by law. Additionally, the company has violated 15 U.S. Code 1692e, which prohibits the use of false, deceptive, or misleading representations in debt collection efforts. This includes using deceptive methods to collect a debt or gather consumer information. Moreover, they are forbidden from contacting consumers at inconvenient times or places, or engaging in behavior that harasses or abuses consumers. In this case, the company has harassed me by claiming I owe a debt that I do not recognize as my responsibility. They have also contacted me at inconvenient times and places, in violation of the law.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-05-29 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was result of identity theft
Company: Southwest Credit Systems, L.P.
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
SOUTHWEST CREDIT SYSTE is falsely reporting on my credit. I have never had any accounts with them. Per my research SOUTHWEST CREDIT SYSTE is a debt collector. They are falsely reporting on my credit!! Account number is XXXX is falsely reporting to my credit file and is against my rights and fair credit act. Under U.S Code 1618d - Disclosure of investigation consumer report ; you are in violation.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-05-29 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Other features, terms, or problems — Problem with balance transfer
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
On two separate dates ( on or about XXXX and on or about XXXX ) I called the number on the back of my Citi XXXX card and requested a balance transfer around XXXX from XXXX XXXX to my Citi XXXX account. The first time I called they told me they couldn't find the name, XXXX XXXX and therefore couldn't help me with a balance transfer. The second time I called the number on the back of my Citi XXXX card to request a balance transfer from XXXX XXXX to my Citi XXXX card account, I was told that my XXXX XXXX account number XXXX showed 3 or 4 different companies and none of them were XXXX XXXX. Therefore they couldn't help me with a balance transfer.

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 2026-05-29 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Reverse mortgage
Issue: Closing on a mortgage — Fees or costs after closing
Company: Ocwen Financial Corporation
State: OH

Complaint narrative:
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Complaint I am submitting this complaint regarding attorney fees and related default servicing charges that were added to the payoff of a reverse mortgage serviced by Onity Mortgage Corporation ( formerly PHH Mortgage Corporation ). Following the death of the borrower on XXXX XXXX, 2026, I began the process of refinancing and paying off the reverse mortgage to retain the property. Throughout this process, I worked toward satisfying the debt and ultimately completed the payoff through a refinance on XXXX/2026. I was within constant contact with them. When I requested the final payoff statement, I discovered approximately {$1800.00} in attorney fees and {$600.00} in title examination fees that had not previously been disclosed to me. They were assessed the day after I advised the loan was closing. I questioned these charges and requested an explanation. Onity Mortgage responded that the loan had been referred to counsel on XXXX XXXX, 2026, and that the attorney fees reflected work " performed or anticipated '' in connection with foreclosure-related activities. The company further stated that fees listed on the payoff statement may include both amounts already incurred and amounts expected to be incurred before the payoff date. My concerns are : The attorney fees were not disclosed until the payoff stage and assessed when they had full knowledge i was in process of obtaining finance. The company has not provided an itemized invoice showing the specific legal services performed, the dates of service, or the actual amounts billed. The company 's response indicates that some portion of the fees may have been anticipated or estimated rather than actually incurred. I was actively pursuing a refinance and payoff of the loan, yet significant legal fees were assessed shortly after referral to counsel. I have not been provided documentation sufficient to determine whether the fees were reasonable, necessary, and actually incurred. The payoff was completed withing 4 months of my mothers death. I was advised that i should have XXXX months before any extension is required. The loan has now been paid in full because I was required to complete the refinance transaction. However, I continue to dispute the attorney fees and related charges and request : A complete itemization of all attorney fees and costs charged to the loan. Copies of invoices or billing records supporting those fees. Identification of which charges were actually incurred and which were anticipated or estimated. A review of whether any fees were unearned, excessive, or improperly included in the payoff. Reimbursement of any amounts that were not actually incurred or were otherwise improperly charged. I respectfully request that the company provide full documentation supporting these charges and review whether a refund is appropriate.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-05-29 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement — Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a formal complaint against Bank of America for failing to properly investigate a merchant breach of contract and a total failure of consideration, resulting in a wrongful double-denial of my billing dispute. On XX/XX/year> I paid XXXX XXXX XXXX the sum of {$6000.00} using my credit card for a one-year hair system contract. On day one, the merchant 's product completely failed to adhere and caused severe physical scalp irritation, making it entirely unsafe to use. On day two, I returned to the merchant 's XXXX XXXX, and their staff physically removed and repossessed the defective hair system from my head to mitigate my physical injury. The merchant is currently in possession of both the repossessed product and my {$6000.00}, providing absolutely XXXX ongoing goods or services to me. I initiated a billing dispute twice, but Bank of America closed the files, citing the merchant 's internal retail 'no refund ' policy. However, under California law, a retail policy can not enforce a contract where the product is inherently unmerchantable and physically rejected by the consumer 's body on day one. By allowing the merchant to retain thousands of dollars for a repossessed item, the credit card issuer is permitting blatant unjust enrichment. While my credit card statement explicitly confirms the debit to XXXX XXXX XXXX, the merchant holds the master service contract and original intake receipts. I have exhausted all internal dispute limits with the bank 's low-level customer service representatives. I request that a compliance officer manually review this file, evaluate the merchant 's complete failure of consideration under Fair Credit Billing Act standards, and reverse this charge permanently

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 2026-05-29 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Fees or interest — Charged too much interest
Company: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a formal complaint against Synchrony Bank ( CareCredit ) for deceptive communication practices, failure to provide monthly billing statements, and the unfair application of a deferred interest fee and associated charges. The Issue : Synchrony Bank recently penalized me with a substantial deferred interest charge over a small remaining promotional balance. I am disputing and requesting a complete chargeback/reversal of {$200.00} for the deferred interest fee, as well as {$11.00} for the statement/associated fees. I was entirely unable to track or pay this balance because Synchrony Bank failed to send me a single monthly billing statementby mail or emailfor the entire year of 2026. Deceptive Customer Service : Well over a year ago, I proactively called CareCredit customer service to confirm my account settings and protect my credit. A customer service representative explicitly assured me that I would receive an email or mail alert prior to my account coming due or the promotional period expiring. Relying on this representation, I expected a notification. No notice or statement was ever sent to me in XXXX. Furthermore, CareCredit recently began charging a penalty fee just to receive a standard paper statement. By creating a paywall for physical mail while simultaneously failing to deliver the promised electronic statements or email alerts, Synchrony Bank completely cut off my access to my account status. Company Refusal to Cooperate : When I discovered the fees and tried to resolve this over the phone, I was met with complete resistance. I spoke with a supervisor who refused to reverse the charges, told me " too bad, '' and stated that it was entirely my fault for not manually logging into their website to check for online statementscompletely dismissing the fact that their own staff had promised me proactive alerts. Federal Violations : Synchrony Banks breakdown in statement delivery violates federal consumer protection standards regarding clear and accessible billing disclosures. They provided a false sense of security through their representative 's verbal promises, hid standard statements behind a paper fee wall, and failed to deliver electronic alternatives, directly causing these financial penalties. Desired Resolution : Because these fees are the direct result of Synchrony Bank 's failure to communicate and deliver statements, I request that the CFPB compel Synchrony Bank to : Reverser/charge back the {$200.00} deferred interest fee in full. Reverse/charge back the {$11.00} in statement/associated fees. Ensure my credit profile remains undamaged and protected during this process.

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 2026-05-29 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem caused by your funds being low — Overdrafts and overdraft fees
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
This has happened to me on multiple occasions with Wells Fargo bank I make a purchase, On XX/XX/XXXX, I made a purchase at a store. The transaction initially appeared on my account, but then it disappeared. On XX/XX/XXXX, without any warning, the charge was finally processed Ive contacted the bank about this before, but Im told Ive exhausted my available fee reversals and must go through a claims process that can take weeks. Its extremely frustrating because this keeps happening. To make matters worse, the bank then tries to sell me overdraft protection for a monthly fee. From a customers perspective, it feels like a system that benefits the bank while creating unnecessary financial hardship for account holders.

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 2026-05-29 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: MORGAN STANLEY & CO. LLC
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
Card was stolen on XXXX2026. Unauthorized transactions occured. Agents have made false statements have been made to me multiple times regarding time lines for provisional credits. have been promised to receive them the XXXX, then absolute latest the XXXX. it is the XXXX and nothing has been done and i keep getting the run around from this company. i have tried to provide relevant information, police report, case numbers, and the have declined to receive any of that. this is causing me extreme financial distress being out money and this company continues to make up imaginary timelines and change them when things dont occur on time. i need the money put back on my account.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-05-29 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was result of identity theft
Company: National Credit Systems,Inc.
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
NATLCRSYS is falsely reporting on my credit. I have never had any accounts with them. Per my research NATLCRSYS is a debt collector. They are falsely reporting on my credit!! Account number is XXXX is falsely reporting to my credit file and is against my rights and fair credit act. Under U.S Code 1618d - Disclosure of investigation consumer report ; you are in violation.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-05-29 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Federal student loan debt
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive enough information to verify debt
Company: Central Research Inc
State: WA

Complaint narrative:
" I am filing a formal complaint against CENTRAL RESEARCH INC ( CRI ) for a direct violation of the FDCPA and FCRA regarding their persistent refusal to provide written debt validation.In response to my previous complaint, CRI summarily closed the ticket by stating the account is now in 'forbearance. ' However, updating an account status does not absolve a collector of their legal obligation to verify the underlying debt.CRI has completely failed to provide me with any written verification, original promissory notes, or itemized payment histories establishing that I legally owe this debt to them. Furthermore, as documented previously, this collector has engaged in bad-faith name-masking, switching their reporting name from 'CENTRAL RESEARCH INCXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX/CRI ' to evade prior regulatory deletions under Case # XXXXSimply altering the reporting status to 'forbearance ' while refusing to provide written validation is non-compliance.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-05-29 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Information belongs to someone else
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
I recently reviewed my credit report and I was shocked by what I found. There are accounts and inquiries on here that I never opened and have no knowledge of. This is seriously affecting my ability to get approved for credit and its causing me a lot of stress. I need these accounts removed from my report immediately. Ive attached the specific items Im disputing that need to be removed immediately. Please look into this as soon as possible I am stressed!

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 2026-05-29 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Getting a credit card — Application denied
Company: GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
Product : Apple Card ( Goldman Sachs Bank USA ) Issue : Credit Performance / Unfair Credit Practices and Systemic Data Mismatch Corruption Statement of Fact : I am filing a formal complaint against Goldman Sachs for operational incompetence and deceptive customer service routing, resulting in an automated identity verification lock that their own staff created. My verified primary telephone number for all global banking transactions has been established since XXXX. I maintain a flawless, high-tier credit history with 13 active tier-1 and military financial accounts ( including XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX ). My identity is fully verified under federal KYC guidelines across the entire banking industry, except with Goldman Sachs. Timeline of Core Operational Failure : XX/XX/XXXX : I applied for the Apple Card using my legitimate primary financial number and was erroneously denied due to " inability to verify identity. '' XX/XX/XXXX : I applied a second time using the exact same correct information and was hit with the same automated denial. XX/XX/XXXX ( Phone Interaction ) : I contacted Goldman Sachs customer support to resolve the error. The front-line representative explicitly told me the system was rejecting me because of my primary number, and instructed me to submit a third application using my temporary secondary iPhone device number instead. XX/XX/XXXX ( Back-Office Interaction ) : I was transferred to a back-office specialist who immediately realized the front-line agent had made an error. They stated that using the iPhone number forced a massive data mismatch against my XXXX profile. The specialist promised a manual 5-day lock on my application profile to clear the system flag. Instead, the automated system bypassed her manual hold and triggered a third consecutive automated denial. XX/XX/XXXX ( Today ) : I called back to get the manual lock resolved. I was passed around, hung up on during a supervisor transfer, and eventually spoken to by a supervisor who shifted through three separate excuses in a single call ( blaming the phone number, then questioning my verified SSN, and finally claiming I had " too many rapid applications '' ). The supervisor then attempted to stall me by telling me to " wait 30 days until after XX/XX/XXXX '' to file a complaint. Furthermore, I am continuously receiving automated credit limit and promotional pre-approval offers for the Apple Card via the credit bureaus ( such as an XXXX promotion received on XX/XX/XXXX ). This proves that my consumer credit files are completely healthy and ready for approval, yet I am entirely blocked from accepting these valid offers due to Goldman Sachs ' internal database mismatch lock

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-05-29 00:00:00
Product: Prepaid card — General-purpose prepaid card
Issue: Problem with a purchase or transfer — Card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase or transfer
Company: Chime Financial Inc
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
I sent money to an individual who claimed they had tickets for a sport event we wanted to attend. They sent pics, videos and screenshots that looked real of the tickets. I agreed to send money for 1 ticket and that ticket would be sent to me before I would proceed to do any other transactions. Once I sent the funds the individual made excuses to not send them. Once I seen she wasnt going to send anything to me I asked for a refund and said I didnt wish to continue the transaction. She had said in the beginning that she would send all money back if the transaction wasnt complete. She tried to get me to send more money before she would send me any tickets but I told her I would not be sending anymore money and she just had excuses as to why she wouldnt send tickets or give a refund. She was an admin of a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and she reached out to me when I asked about it tickets.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-05-29 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Repossession — Loan balance remaining after the vehicle is repossessed and sold
Company: Exeter Finance, LLC.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am disputing the accuracy of the {$16000.00} balance being reported by Exeter Finance LLC. This number is grossly inflated and completely contradicted by Exeter 's own internal records and staff. Exeter Finance is providing completely inconsistent and conflicting amounts across all channels : XXXX. Their credit bureau reporting claims a balance of {$16000.00}. XXXX. Their official consumer account portal explicitly states my total 'Amount Remaining ' is {$11000.00}, with a past-due amount of {$4900.00}. XXXX. Furthermore, when I called Exeter Finance directly in XX/XX/year>, their representatives stated over the phone that it would take {$6000.00} to bring the balance up to date.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation