vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-09 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Unifin Inc.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
The following items on my credit report are inaccurate, unverifiable, outdated, or incomplete, in direct violation of the FCRA : 1. Account : XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX - Violation : Inaccurate and unverifiable information under * * 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) * * and * * 1681e ( b ) * *.

- Details : This account is reported as delinquent, but I have no record of this account XXXX XXXX XXXX. or any contract with The information is unverifiable as the creditor has not provided documentation proving the debt 's validity.

- Demand : Immediate deletion due to failure to verify the accuracy of this information.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-09 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Federal student loan servicing
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Received bad information about your loan
Company: EdFinancial Services
State: NV

Complaint narrative:
My son went to school at XXXX XXXX in XXXX XXXX, California. The school then closed before he could finish his studies. He then enrolled into the XXXX XXXX to continue to get some type of training. He was making payments while he was going to school on both the Student loan and the parent loan he applied for the paperwork for the foreclosure or discharge due to the closure of the school and received a refund and we also received an email stating that it had been closed for his loans. I continue to get paperwork from ED financial federal student loan Stating that he still owes. I can enclose the email from ED financial showing that they stated it was disclosed.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-09 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Vengroff Williams, Inc
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
While on XXXX  leave, I was informed that I would be paid under short-term XXXX benefits. 

In XX/XX/year>, my employer transitioned to a new company. All employees were required to reapply for their positions and re-enroll in benefits. During the enrollment period, I was instructed that I needed to elect short-term XXXX coverage in order to be paid for the six weeks I would be on leave. At no point was I informed of any pre-existing condition clause. At that time, I was approximately six months pregnant, and the new benefits were set to take effect in XX/XX/year>. 

Neither my employer nor the insurance company advised me that a pre-existing condition clause could affect my eligibility. When I applied for short-term XXXX benefits in XX/XX/year>, my claim was approved on XX/XX/year>, for a total amount of {$1200.00}. 

On XX/XX/year>, I received a letter from XXXX XXXX stating that there was an overpayment on my account and that I was required to repay the full amount by XX/XX/year>. This placed a significant financial burden on me, as I am a part-time employee with other ongoing financial obligations. During a phone call on XX/XX/year>, the claim examiner, XXXX XXXX, informed me that my claim had initially been flagged for a pre-existing condition but was processed and paid before they properly reviewed their own policy. 

I filed an overpayment appeal explaining that repayment would cause financial hardship. The appeal was received by XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/year>, via mail. I did not receive any confirmation or updates by mail or phone ; I only saw that it had been received when I checked my XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. 

On XX/XX/year>, I received a letter stating that my appeal had been reviewed and denied. The following day, during a phone call with XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/year>, I was told that their decision would stand, that they do not offer any financial hardship assistance or waivers, and that the debt had already been sent to collections on XX/XX/year>. I was unaware that it had been sent to collections and believed they were required to wait until after the appeal process was completed. 

This situation has caused significant stress and financial hardship. I respectfully request that the overpayment be waived, as the error resulted from the companys own failure to identify and apply their pre-existing condition policy before approving payment.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-10 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account information incorrect
Company: Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX   I disputed the PORTFOLIO RECOVERY collection via XXXX XXXX ( XXXX  ). 
Result shows " XXXX  '' / '' Dispute resolved-subscriber disagrees '' after XXXX days. 
XXXX  failed to complete a reasonable investigation within 30 days violates FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ). 
No verification documents were provided ( contract, payment history, DOFD, assignment ). 
Balance reported as {$1200.00} is unverifiable.

Account shows " Needs attention '' under Portfolio Recovery, but dispute view shows different accounts clear reporting mismatch and inaccuracy. 
Prior dispute remains unresolved with stale " Account in Dispute '' remark. 
This is inaccurate reporting.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-09 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem — Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
XXXX Accounts, same account number # : XXXX Reported Balances : {$9600.00} and {$9600.00} Reporting Bureaus : XXXX, TransUnion, and XXXX XXXX XXXX is reporting two separate repossession accounts with the exact same account number ( XXXX ) and XXXX different balances ( {$9600.00} and {$9600.00} ) across all three credit bureaus. This is a clear case of duplicate and inconsistent reporting, which violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and Metro 2 data-furnishing standards. 
I have disputed this account multiple times with XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX, and I have also requested written validation and verification directly from XXXX XXXX XXXX. To date, I have not received a single piece of documentation no billing statements, no repossession notice, no proof of sale, and no calculation of deficiency balance. 
The tradeline continues to show account not in dispute despite my ongoing disputes, which constitutes deliberate noncompliance under : FCRA 607 ( b ) failure to report with maximum possible accuracy.

FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) furnishing data known to be inaccurate.

FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) failure to report the account as disputed.

FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) failure to reinvestigate within 30 days.

FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) failure to delete unverifiable information. 
Under Metro 2 4.2.2, 4.3.1, and 6.2.1, furnishers are required to ensure each tradeline is uniquely reported, supported by factual documentation, and coded accurately. XXXX XXXX XXXX duplication of the same account with two different balances violates these standards and results in double derogatory reporting ( double jeopardy ).

Because no validation has been provided and the information remains inconsistent, the data being reported is hearsay, not verifiable fact.

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 2025-11-09 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Getting a credit card — Problem getting a working replacement card
Company: Newport Intermediate Inc.

Complaint narrative:
Summary of Issue : I am a consumer residing in XXXX. In XX/XX/year>, I was issued a digital prepaid reward XXXX funded by XXXX XXXX XXXX and fulfilled through XXXX  / Onbe. At no point was I informed by XXXX or XXXX that I would need to complete a separate identity verification process through MyPaymentVault in order to claim the reward. This requirement was only presented after the reward had already been issued, causing unnecessary delay and confusion.

Because I had not been informed in advance that any identity verification would be required, I was initially cautious about providing personal information. However, after confirming that the request was legitimate, I completed all requested information in good faith. On XXXX XX/XX/year>, MyPaymentVault confirmed in writing that my identity verification was successfully completed and that I could now access my payment. 
Only a few days later, I received another message from MyPaymentVault stating that the reward had been cancelled and was no longer eligible to be claimed, with no explanation or prior notice. I complied fully with all verification requirements, and no reason was provided for the sudden cancellation. 
I contacted MyPaymentVaults customer service ( XXXX ) several times to request clarification and correction. The responses I received were generic, unsigned, and failed to address my specific questions. MyPaymentVault then instructed me to contact XXXX, claiming they had cancelled the reward. As a result, neither company has taken responsibility, and I remain unable to access the prepaid reward.

These actions constitute an improper and unexplained cancellation of a verified prepaid reward, compounded by poor communication and lack of transparency about the verification process itself.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-09 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account information incorrect
Company: Self Financial Inc.
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
I have been trying to get information that has been reported erroneously on my personal credit report and have not been able to get it corrected.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-09 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account information incorrect
Company: Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/year> I disputed the PORTFOLIO RECOVERY collection via XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ). 
Result shows " XXXX  '' / '' Dispute resolved-subscriber disagrees '' after 47+ days. 
XXXX  failed to complete a reasonable investigation within 30 days violates FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ). 
No verification documents were provided ( contract, payment history, DOFD, assignment ). 
Balance reported as {$1300.00} is unverifiable.

Account shows " Needs attention '' under Portfolio Recovery Associates, but dispute view shows different accounts clear reporting mismatch and inaccuracy. 
Prior dispute remains unresolved with stale " Account in Dispute '' remark. 
This is inaccurate reporting.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-10 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem — Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I am writing to dispute inaccurate reporting on several accounts listed under my name. I value accuracy and transparency in my credit history and am requesting that these matters be thoroughly reviewed and corrected in accordance with federal law. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-09 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: DISCOVER BANK
State: IN

Complaint narrative:
Discover Bank mishandled my billing dispute for a website design service I purchased from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  on XXXX in the amount of {$1200.00}. The merchants website and emails clearly advertise a 100 % money-back guarantee and 100 % satisfaction guarantee. I requested a refund two times by email ( XXXX, XXXX ) after receiving unsatisfactory mockups but did not receive a refund or a promise of a refund. I then filed a dispute and provided written documentation to Discover on XXXX, but they coded the dispute as merchandise not received instead of refund not received and ultimately sided with the merchant on XXXX. On XXXX, I supplied additional information to Discover ( an email from the merchant on XXXX agreeing to a refund if I was still unhappy, and my reply on XXXX requesting a refund for a THIRD time ). Despite this new evidence, Discover upheld their decision on XXXX. In the end, I received nothing. The merchant NEVER delivered a fully built, fully functional website, I did NOT receive a refund despite requesting one on THREE different occasions, and Discover still sided with the merchant. I believe Discover failed to conduct a reasonable investigation under the Fair Credit Billing Act and ask that the charge be reversed or the case re-evaluated under the proper dispute category.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-10 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Improper use of your report — Reporting company used your report improperly
Company: Experian Information Solutions Inc.
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
This is a formal demand for the complete disclosure of the method of verification used during your prior investigation ( s ) of the disputed items on my credit report. Under FCRA Section 611 ( a ) ( 7 ) [ 15 U.S. Code 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ) ], you are legally required to provide a description of the procedures used to determine the accuracy and completeness of the disputed information, including the name, address, and contact information of the party who verified the data. The fact that these inaccurate items are still being reported leads me to believe that no actual verification was conducted, and that you may have relied on automated or incomplete responses from the furnisher, which is a violation of your duty to perform a reasonable investigation under FCRA Section 611 ( a ).

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 2025-11-10 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Improper use of your report — Reporting company used your report improperly
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
This is a formal demand for the complete disclosure of the method of verification used during your prior investigation ( s ) of the disputed items on my credit report. Under FCRA Section 611 ( a ) ( 7 ) [ 15 U.S. Code 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ) ], you are legally required to provide a description of the procedures used to determine the accuracy and completeness of the disputed information, including the name, address, and contact information of the party who verified the data. The fact that these inaccurate items are still being reported leads me to believe that no actual verification was conducted, and that you may have relied on automated or incomplete responses from the furnisher, which is a violation of your duty to perform a reasonable investigation under FCRA Section 611 ( a ).

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 2025-11-09 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — USDA mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — Applying for or obtaining a modification, forbearance plan, short sale, or deed-in-lieu
Company: PLANET HOME LENDING, LLC
State: AL

Complaint narrative:
Planet home will not send correct information to XXXX XXXX for a loan modification.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-10 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem — Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
My name is XXXX XXXX XXXX there is no third party involved in the filing of this complaint and this complaint has not been made in error.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-09 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem — Investigation took more than 30 days
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
This is a Metro 2 factual dispute against all three credit bureaus for their continued reporting of unverified and inaccurate late-payment information from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and XXXXXXXX XXXX . 
Each of these tradelines is still being reported as Account Not in Dispute, which is false. I have filed multiple disputes with the bureaus and directly with the furnishers over the past 60 days, yet none of these companies have produced any actual documentation or validation to support the alleged late payments.

Under FCRA 607 ( b ), the credit bureaus must ensure the maximum possible accuracy of every item they publish. Under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ), furnishers are legally required to report an account as in dispute once notified by the consumer. Continuing to publish these tradelines as undisputed violates both provisions.

Furthermore, neither the bureaus nor the furnishers have produced any bank statements, billing records, or payment ledgers showing that a late payment ever occurred. Without documentary proof, these negative marks are hearsay data not verified facts and violate FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), which requires a reasonable reinvestigation supported by evidence.

According to the Metro 2 Compliance Manual 4.2.2, 4.3.1, and 6.2.1, furnishers and CRAs are obligated to maintain complete and verifiable documentation for any derogatory or delinquency code ( such as 30/60/90-day late ). Reporting unverifiable information for over 60 days after a formal dispute is willful noncompliance with both Metro 2 standards and the FCRA.

These disputes are not identity-theft claims and are not filed by any credit-repair company. They are factual, direct disputes submitted by me, the consumer. The bureaus continued reporting without verification demonstrates reckless disregard for federal law and consumer-reporting accuracy obligations.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-09 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Savings account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem accessing account
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: AZ

Complaint narrative:
Citibank Savings sent us a letter that our account is inactive and will be blocked in 60 days. I called today and spoke with XXXX. He confirmed that Citibank does not recognize the transactions we have made almost monthly, i.e., by logging into Citibank Savings with our username and password, we have many multiple times authorized Citibank to debit our checking account at XXXX  XXXX XXXX and deposit these funds into our Citibank savings account. 

Citibank has no branches in Arizona. Making deposits electronically is the only feasible way to to that, and authorizing it via ACH is clearly customer initiated. However, I was told that Citibank will block my account, since they do not consider these customer initiated. 

I have decided to eventually close this account. However, the CFPB needs to do something to prevent Citibank from inflicting this terrible customer service upon other individuals.

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 2025-11-09 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Rental debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: FAIR COLLECTIONS & OUTSOURCING, INC.
State: IN

Complaint narrative:
Companies : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and Fair Collections and Outsourcing Issue Type : Attempt to collect debt not owed / Incorrect credit reporting I am the guarantor on a lease for XXXX XXXX. The landlord and its debt-collection agency are pursuing rent charges for XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX even though the agreed lease term was XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. Management confirmed the 10-month term in writing. The tenant vacated and returned keys on XX/XX/XXXX. 
The landlords ledger shows a {$0.00} balance on XX/XX/XXXX, unauthorized rent and utility charges on XX/XX/XXXX ( {$1800.00} ), a late-fee of {$75.00} on XX/XX/XXXX showing they treated XXXX as unpaid rent, further rent charges on XX/XX/XXXX, and three credits on XX/XX/XXXX labeled Credit 28 days totaling {$1500.00} the security deposit wrongfully applied to post-lease rent. No refund or itemized deductions were issued by the statutory deadline ( XX/XX/XXXX ). 

These actions violate Indiana Code 32-31-3-13 ( no rent owed after termination ) and 32-31-3-14 ( failure to return deposit ) and constitute false representation under FDCPA 1692e. The debt collector has also contacted other tenants about the same disputed balance, contrary to 1692c ( b ).

I request that CFPB investigate, require deletion of any credit-report entries, and ensure return of the {$1500.00} deposit plus appropriate relief.

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 2025-11-10 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: FL

Complaint narrative:
I filed a previous dispute with Experian because they have XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX accounts reported, even though only one exists. 
This is affecting my credit report, making it very low compared to XXXX  or XXXX. 
After the previous dispute, Experian only updated the account balance and history, but did not delete the duplicate account because my creditor made a replacement. This constitutes a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). Experian needs to correct that inaccurate information.

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