vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — International money transfer
Issue: Confusing or missing disclosures — 
Company: Newport Intermediate Inc.

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting a new complaint regarding an unresolved issue involving blocked funds in the amount of {$2300.00} from XX/XX/XXXX, which remains unresolved after more than three years. In previous responses, North Lane Technologies stated that documentation provided to me was associated with my account and linked to my internal identifier. However, in their most recent response, the company stated that it is now currently investigating the matter regarding the possibility that I received information belonging to another party. This represents a significant change in position and raises serious concerns regarding the accuracy of the information previously provided to me. The document I received in XX/XX/XXXX : references a different transaction date ( XX/XX/XXXX ) shows a different amount ( {$3100.00} ) contains identifying details such as address and country that do not match my personal information The only matching elements are my first and last name. Despite these discrepancies, I was instructed to use this documentation to recover my funds. This caused confusion, misdirected my efforts, and contributed to prolonged delays in resolving this matter. To date, the company has failed to provide any verifiable evidence demonstrating that this documentation is associated with my account. Instead, it has now moved to an investigation stage without addressing how such incorrect information was originally provided. Additionally, the company has not addressed key issues, including : why I was instructed to apply for an XXXX license before the funds were reported to the Office of Foreign Assets Control the delay between XX/XX/XXXX ( initial block ) and XX/XX/XXXX ( reporting ) the lack of accurate documentation related to my actual transaction the overall delay of more than three years in resolving this matter While the company states that reporting to XXXX was outside of its control, this does not explain the incorrect guidance and documentation provided directly to me. Key Concerns Inconsistent and changing statements regarding ownership of documentation Provision of documentation that does not match my identity or transaction Instruction to rely on incorrect documentation Lack of verifiable evidence supporting the companys claims Failure to provide a clear timeline or resolution despite ongoing investigation Continued delay in resolving the matter

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Other features, terms, or problems — Privacy issues
Company: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: AL

Complaint narrative:
I became aware that someone had stolen my identity in or around the weekend of XXXX. I was able to rectify the situation with all of my credit cards except the one held by Capital One. Since this time, they ( Capital One ) have allowed control of my account to revert to the fraudulent part at least 6 times in as many days ( twice in one day as well ) despite our ( my wife and my own ) insistence that our account be frozen or better yet closed. We have stated repeatedly that none of our contact information has changed yet Capital One appears to display repeated and gross incomitance in any means of securing our account. We simply wish to pay the balance we owe, close the account and cease any and ALL future interactions with their company. As yet they seem unwilling to provide us with ANY means of rectifying the situation as we draw near the 2-week mark of this nightmare. Capital One has also, while equipped with irrefutable knowledge of this identity theft, assisted these thieves in attempts to open new Credit Card accounts in my name as well. While the attempt has been unsuccessful, it did negatively affect our credit rating. Anything you can do to bring resolution to this daily nightmare would be deeply appreciated.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Deposits and withdrawals
Company: Netspend Corporation
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
Consumer : XXXX XXXX Authorized Representative ( POA ) : XXXX XXXX Contact : ( XXXX ) XXXX Date : XX/XX/year> Company : Netspend Complaint Summary I am filing this complaint on behalf of my mother, XXXX XXXX, a XXXX woman currently hospitalized in the XXXX XXXX XXXX at XXXX XXXX XXXX with XXXX XXXX XXXX. Despite providing valid identification, verified account information, and a legally executed Durable Power of Attorney, Netspend has blocked access to her account since XX/XX/year>, preventing access to her funds needed for critical living expenses, medical coordination, and financial obligations. Key Issues Unlawful Restriction of Funds Netspend has denied access to deposited funds without providing a lawful or timely explanation. This has caused financial hardship during a medical emergency. Failure to Honor Power of Attorney A valid Durable Power of Attorney was provided. Netspend has refused to properly implement or recognize the POA, creating unnecessary barriers. Inconsistent and Unreasonable Documentation Requests Multiple documents have been submitted and approved ( Drivers License, Social Security Cards ). Proof of address was rejected despite medical circumstances preventing traditional documentation. Requirements have been inconsistent and appear designed to delay resolution. Customer Service Failures Repeated calls have resulted in excessive hold times, disconnections, and refusal to assist. Representatives have required the account holder to be present, despite documented incapacity. Legal and Regulatory Concerns Netspends actions may constitute violations of : Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ) Regulation E ( 12 CFR 1005 ) Failure to provide reasonable access to funds and improper restriction of account access. Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ( UDAAP ) under the Dodd-Frank Act ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ) Conduct that is harmful, obstructive, and unreasonable, particularly involving a vulnerable elderly consumer. CFPB Consumer Protection Standards Failure to provide timely resolution and fair treatment. Potential Elder Financial Abuse Concerns due to withholding access to funds during a medical crisis. Impact Inability to pay essential bills ( utilities, housing, medical-related expenses ) Emotional distress during a life-threatening medical situation Delay in transitioning financial control to the authorized caregiver Interference with lawful financial management under POA

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 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Mobile or digital wallet
Issue: Managing, opening, or closing your mobile wallet account — 
Company: Block, Inc.
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
Cash App ( Block, Inc. ) abruptly closed both my personal and business accounts without prior warning or a clear explanation. This occurred around XX/XX/year> At the time of closure, I had an active loan associated with the account. Once my accounts were disabled, I was completely unable to log in, access my balance, or make payments toward the loan. Immediately after discovering the account closure, I attempted to resolve the issue by contacting Cash App support and requesting : * The reason for the account closure * An alternative method to repay the loan * Clarification regarding my loan status and repayment obligations Cash App did not provide a meaningful explanation for the closure and failed to provide a timely or accessible method for repayment. Despite blocking my access to the platform and preventing repayment, Cash App reported missed payments on the loan. As a result, my credit score was negatively impacted. I am willing and able to repay the loan. However, Cash Apps actions directly interfered with my ability to do so. Reporting missed payments under these circumstances is inaccurate and unfair. This situation has caused financial harm and credit damage due to the companys failure to provide access or a reasonable repayment alternative after closing my account.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Auto debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was paid
Company: Exeter Finance, LLC.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint regarding inaccurate credit reporting by Exeter Finance related to an auto loan. In 2020, my vehicle was involved in an accident and was declared a total loss. Following the loss, my primary insurance paid the vehicles value, and GAP coverage was used to satisfy the remaining balance of the loan. As a result, the account was fully paid and now reflects a {$0.00} balance. However, despite the account being satisfied through insurance and GAP coverage, Exeter Finance continues to report this account inaccurately across multiple credit bureaus. The account is reported inconsistently, with some bureaus listing it as paid while others report it as derogatory or as a charge-off, along with comments indicating an unpaid loss. This reporting is misleading and does not accurately reflect the true status of the account, which was resolved and paid through third-party coverage. A satisfied account should not be reported in a manner that suggests an outstanding or unresolved debt. I have attempted to resolve this issue directly by requesting validation of the debt, clarification of the reporting, and confirmation of whether a Form 1099-C was issued. However, I have not received a clear or adequate response, and the inaccurate reporting remains. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) and 1681s-2 ( b ) ), furnishers are required to report accurate and complete information. Exeter Finances reporting is inconsistent and misleading across bureaus, which indicates a failure to meet these obligations. I am requesting that this account be removed entirely from my credit report if it can not be reported accurately and consistently across all credit bureaus. At minimum, the account should be corrected to reflect its true status as paid and satisfied through insurance and GAP coverage, without derogatory or charge-off reporting. Additionally, I request written confirmation as to whether any Form 1099-C was issued in connection with this account.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Closing your account — Company closed your account
Company: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: TN

Complaint narrative:
Capital One filed a credit bureau dispute for my account which is a breach of contract simply because Capital wasnt hired by me to do so. Employees have made allegations claiming that I owe them a debt due to alleged credit cards being restricted by employees at Capital One without providing me without the evidence of indebtedness along with possession of a contract. I also would like to report Capital One for securities fraud. Capital One employees continue to harass me by way of email for allegedly none payment on a closed account.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Bounce AI, Inc.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am formally disputing the validity of the alleged collection and charge-off account being reported under my name. This letter serves as a request for full debt validation pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ) and the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) 15 U.S.C. 1681i. I do not acknowledge this debt as valid. Before any further reporting, collection activity, or communication regarding this account continues, I am requesting that you provide the following : Verification of the debt, including the original signed contract or agreement bearing my signature. The complete payment history and itemized breakdown showing how the alleged balance was calculated. Proof of your legal authority to collect or report this debt, including a copy of any assignment or purchase agreement from the original creditor. The name, address, and contact information of the original creditor for proper verification.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account — Transaction was not authorized
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
I am reporting Wells Fargo for a willful violation of Regulation E ( 12 CFR 1005.11 ) and inaccurate reporting of a verified dispute. On XX/XX/XXXX, I formally revoked authorization for all purchases via email twice to XXXX XXXX XXXX On XX/XX/year>, I verbally informed Wells Fargo of this. At this point, I also began documenting this with the FTC. What's interesting is Wells Fargo has helped me get back $ XXXX back from XXXX XXXX ; however, they are adamant about not giving me back my final {$97.00} I lost to the merchant. I originally authorized this {$97.00} on XX/XX/year> before revoking authorization on XX/XX/XXXX. In a " Formal Resolution Letter '' on XX/XX/year> ( Case # XXXX ), Wells Fargo officially admitted that they " verified my request for cancellation was placed on XX/XX/year>. '' Despite this written admission, the bank is arbitrarily refusing to reverse the unauthorized {$97.00} that I revoked within the criteria that was verbally given to me ( within at least one day before the service began, which the service began on XX/XX/XXXX ). They stated I had " no rights to dispute with the information provided. '' The bank has failed to conduct a " reasonable investigation '' under Regulation E. The bank 's internal system successfully recognized my XX/XX/XXXX revocation by declining a second {$97.00} on XX/XX/XXXX. This proves that the bank 's system were aware the merchant was unauthorized and fraudulent. It is important to note that Wells Fargo reversed a related {$61.00} charge on XX/XX/XXXX by recoding it as unauthorized/recurring ; therefore, I expected the same logic to be used for the {$97.00}. This inconsistent and inaccurate reporting is a direct violation of the spirit of the {$56.00} XXXX XXXX v. Wells Fargo Settlement ( finalized XX/XX/year> ) regarding inaccurate data. Furthermore, the bank 's refusal to honor a verified stop-payment reflects the same {$33.00} XXXX XXXX v. Wells Fargo XXXX XXXX XX/XX/year> ) regarding assisted subscription scams.

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 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — Store credit card
Issue: Fees or interest — Charged too much interest
Company: Bread Financial Holdings, Inc.
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
I am a New Jersey resident filing a complaint regarding the application of deferred interest by Comenity Bank. A promotional balance under a deferred interest plan was nearly satisfied, with approximately {$1800.00} remaining prior to expiration. A transaction posted immediately before the promotional expiration date, which affected payment allocation and reduced the ability to apply funds toward the promotional balance. Subsequently, approximately {$2900.00} in retroactive interest was assessed in a single billing cycle, increasing the account balance significantly. While the promotional terms allow for deferred interest, I am requesting review of whether the timing of posted transactions and payment allocation were applied in a manner that fairly allowed the promotional balance to be satisfied. I previously filed a complaint with the CFPB, which resulted in a general policy response but did not address this specific issue of allocation and timing. I am requesting that this matter be reviewed for fairness and proper application of account terms as it affects a New Jersey consumer.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 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: MA

Complaint narrative:
In XX/XX/year>, I paid a {$500.00} cruise deposit using my Bank of America credit card. Shortly after booking, a federal government travel restriction prevented me from leaving and re-entering the United States, making it impossible for me to take the cruise. I contacted the merchant ( XXXX XXXX ) to cancel due to this government restriction and requested a refund or credit, but they refused based on a non-refundable deposit policy. I then filed a dispute with Bank of America, explaining that the service could not be used due to a government-imposed restriction beyond my control. Bank of America denied the dispute, stating only that the deposit was non-refundable. I submitted a formal appeal with supporting documentation explaining the government restriction and why the service could not be used. However, Bank of America did not address these facts and again relied solely on the merchants policy without evaluating whether the service was actually provided or whether the situation qualified as an exception. As shown in my appeal letter, Bank of America did not request additional information, did not consider the evidence submitted, and did not provide a detailed explanation of its decision. The dispute was effectively denied based only on the merchants terms, without evaluating the actual circumstances.

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 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am requesting validation of the alleged debt referenced in your recent communication, including the original creditor, the total amount owed, documents proving my responsibility for the debt, and proof that your company is authorized to collect it.

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 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Telecommunications debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was paid
Company: SUNRISE CREDIT SERVICES, INC
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
XXXX XXXX XXXX was did not honor the deal i made with the salesman was a combo deal internet and mobile service instead they made two diffreind accounts one for the internet and another one for the mobile service to charge more i call the salesman but he never answer me the calls or texts whenn i see the problems whit XXXX XXXX XXXX i closed the accounts in less then month and pay everything included the cell phone but they still send it a collellections agency this is the second one sunrise credit services XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX making false claims and arrasment on behave of XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/year> for XXXX XXXXXXXX when i paid everything when i closed the accounts wiht XXXX XXXX XXXX thats double the amount the the first collection agency about 2 months ago credence resource mana XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX tx. XXXX please take a look on this complain

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 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Lease
Issue: Getting a loan or lease — Loan opened without my consent or knowledge
Company: AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORP
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I went in on XXXX XXXX and received a loan from the company for a XXXX XXXX and they were approved under false pretense the application had my name and information from an over the phone process but once loan application was submitted and approved they called and was asking questions the salesman said when they call just say yes to verify that everything was completed and accurate I did when I got the car and they needed to send information to insurance company the insurance company had information that wasnt valid as mine so the company salesman had put in false information and on the very next day he called me after I sent him some customers before I found out he was falsely stating information to get the loan and asked me can my client you sent use your information as a co-signer and I said ok it was for my daughter come to find out when i get there and sign paperwork then she missed payments finding out he had put car in my name brand new car off of show room floor when just day before telling me all i qualified for was the used XXXX now hes submitted my name in on the new car from show room floor for her and put it in my name instead of the co-signer didnt find this out until she had a wreck someone rear ended her they got out and ran from the scene and she had not had insurance on the vehicle for XXXX months or so and then all of sudden they are pursuing me for the total of the car I dont think I should be responsible for the car if i was supposed to be the co-signer and was actually forged to be the sole owner when I had just signed for a loan the day before

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Old information reappears or never goes away
Company: Experian Information Solutions Inc.
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
I am addressing the issue with regarding the noncompliance. This is a violation of my privacy with my consumer report, since I control what is listed and As per the Fair Credit Reporting Act, particularly under 15 U.S.C. 1681n, there exists statutory civil liability for willful noncompliance. This provision stipulates that any person who willfully fails to comply with consumer protection requirements may be liable to the affected consumer for damages, including potential punitive measures and reimbursement of legal costs. This underscores the importance of addressing and rectifying this matter promptly and responsibly.

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 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
They are re-aging the debt that is over 2.5 years old and reported it to credit agencies as a new derogatory account. PORTFOLIO RECOVERY XX/XX/XXXX opening balance {$4700.00}... Claiming it's a new debt when it's not even from them. Saying it was opened on XX/XX/XXXX... But it was closed off by XXXX bank in the sometime in XXXX of XXXX... I'm trying to build up my credit and pay stuff of and they just messed up my credit with this... I was told this isn't legal... I tried to dispute it but it was denied.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation