vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-06-14 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — VA mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue related to modification, forbearance, short sale, deed-in-lieu, bankruptcy, or foreclosure
Company: Freedom Mortgage Company
State: HI

Complaint narrative:
About On XX/XX/year> at about XXXX pm XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX entered my name and or number on XXXX an app or website that allows someone to see everything you do on your phone. XXXX XXXX also got me fired using his position to leverage my position, I won a lawsuit for that firing. My number has been accessed by several people since then. It has caused financial hardship so paying my mortgage was possible and thats why he is messing with my financial situation and my personal communications.

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 2026-06-14 00:00:00
Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan — Installment loan
Issue: Charged fees or interest you didn't expect — 
Company: LDF Holdings, LLC
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
I am a North Carolina resident. I took out a loan with Makwa Finance for an original principal of {$460.00} with an APR of approximately 500 % or higher. Makwa Finance is operating as an unlicensed lender in North Carolina in violation of state law : - N.C. Gen. Stat. 24-1.1 : Consumer loan interest is capped at 30 % APR. - N.C. Gen. Stat. 53-281 : Payday lending prohibited in North Carolina . - N.C. Gen. Stat. 24-2 : Usurious contracts are unenforceable as to interest ; borrower may recover twice the interest paid. Makwa Finance claims tribal sovereignty under the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX / LDF Holdings , LLC. However, federal courts have rejected this exemption for online lending to non-tribal-member state residents ( XXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Cir. XXXX ; XXXX v. XXXX XXXX, XXXX Cir. XXXX ). The XXXX XXXX has jurisdiction over North Carolina. The Minnesota Attorney General obtained a consent order in XX/XX/XXXX against LDF Holdings ( Makwa 's parent operator ) requiring them to stop high-cost lending in Minnesota and discharge illegal loans. Makwa was specifically named as part of the LDF Lending Companies covered by a federal class action settlement ( loans issued between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX ). PAYMENTS AND DEBT STATUS : I have paid in excess of the original principal of {$460.00}. Under N.C. Gen. Stat. 24-2, the entire interest is forfeited on usurious loans, and the loan is therefore satisfied in full. Makwa continues to claim a balance of {$1700.00} and that a payment of {$460.00} is " due '' on XX/XX/XXXX, which is legally meritless. ACH REVOCATION AND DISPUTE : On XX/XX/XXXX, I revoked ACH authorization in writing under 15 U.S.C. 1693e. Makwa confirmed the revocation. I subsequently sent a formal debt dispute under 15 U.S.C. 1692g citing NC usury statutes and demanding cessation of collection. BAD FAITH CONDUCT EMAIL BLOCKING : After acknowledging my dispute, Makwa Finance took the additional step of BLOCKING my email address from receiving any further communications. I have preserved the bounce-back error message from XXXX showing a " XXXX permanent failure : blocked '' response. Blocking a consumer 's good-faith debt dispute communications is a violation of : - 15 U.S.C. 1692e ( deceptive practices ) - 15 U.S.C. 1692f ( unfair practices ) - The general duty of good faith in debt collection under the FDCPA This is intentional conduct designed to evade legally protected dispute communications and to create plausible deniability for ongoing collection of an unenforceable debt. I am requesting that the CFPB investigate Makwa Finance 's illegal lending activity in North Carolina and their bad-faith conduct in blocking consumer dispute communications.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-06-14 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Other banking product or service
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Information belongs to someone else
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
Attach this dispute index to every submission Dispute Index / Items Not Mine Furnisher Routing XXXX Account XXXX Open date Dispute reason XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Never opened, authorized, signed for, used, or benefited from this account XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Never opened, authorized, signed for, used, or benefited from this account XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Never opened, authorized, signed for, used, or benefited from this account

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 2026-06-14 00:00:00
Product: Debt or credit management — Debt settlement
Issue: Problem with customer service — 
Company: Progress Law, LLC
State: CO

Complaint narrative:
Issue Description : The Cancellation Demand : On XX/XX/year>, I submitted a formal written cancellation of my debt settlement and escrow agreements, along with a strict cease-and-desist directive revoking all consent for communication. The Contractual Breach : The contract explicitly mandated the return of all unearned funds held in my escrow account within XXXX ( XXXX ) business days. The companies failed to meet this deadline. The Delay Tactics : Instead of processing the refund immediately, the company sent an email on XX/XX/XXXX demanding I sign a new electronic form and stated the closure could take XXXX business days. On XX/XX/XXXX, they sent another notice stating the refund could take up to XXXX business days. The Unauthorized Deductions & Lack of Accounting : A blind deposit was placed into my bank account on XX/XX/year>, missing the XXXX deadline. On XX/XX/XXXX, the company stated my refund would be reduced by " open settlement fees, banking fees, or the like ''. The company completely failed to provide a legally required itemized accounting ledger to justify these withheld funds, making it impossible to verify if the refund amount is legally accurate. The Harassment : My XX/XX/XXXX communication included a strict XXXX and XXXX, revoking all consent for communication except for a single written confirmation of cancellation. In direct defiance of this directive, the company sent XXXX ( XXXX ) unauthorized emails between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, including a customer service survey on XX/XX/XXXX, and aggressive retention/marketing emails on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/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 2026-06-14 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — Store credit card
Issue: Getting a credit card — Card opened without my consent or knowledge
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
XX/XX/year>, I applied for a Home Depot credit account when I typed my SSN in and submitted my form an account popped up with the name : XXXX XXXX he is using my SSN. This is a form of XXXX XXXX XXXX. I would like for XXXX XXXX to cancel XXXX XXXX account and prosecute him.

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 2026-06-14 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Opening an account — Didn't receive terms that were advertised
Company: U.S. BANCORP
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am writing regarding the {$1500.00} XXXX XXXX Checking bonus associated with my account. I have satisfied all requirements for the promotion, and your customer service representatives have confirmed that the promotional offer was properly attached to my account and that all qualifying requirements were met. However, I have not yet received the {$1500.00} bonus. I was recently informed that the bonus may be denied because I previously opened another business checking account. However, the prior account and the current account represent XXXX separate businesses. XXXX account was opened using my Social Security Number ( SSN ), while the other was opened using a separate Employer Identification Number ( XXXX ) for a different business entity. Based on the terms of the promotion, these are distinct business accounts and should be evaluated separately. Therefore, I believe I am eligible for the bonus associated with this account, having fully met all promotional requirements. I respectfully request that U.S. Bank review my account again and promptly issue the {$1500.00} Platinum Business Checking bonus. If there is any specific provision in the promotion terms that U.S. Bank believes disqualifies my account, please provide the relevant language and explanation in writing. Thank you for your time and assistance. I look forward to your prompt resolution of this matter and payment of the bonus.

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 2026-06-14 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: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: MD

Complaint narrative:
b'Subject: Citibank held me, a fake-check scam victim, liable for losses; froze my account without notice\n\nI am the victim of a fake-check scam committed by criminals impersonating the lender "XXXX XXXX." They contacted me on XXXX XXXX via phone/text claiming they could improve my credit score through a program of small deposits and rapid repayments.\n\nBetween XXXX and XXXX the scammers deposited number of checks, around 15 total via mobile deposit into my Citibank checking account ending in XXXX, totaling approximately $XXXX. Citibank made these funds fully available the same or next business day. This availability reasonably led me to believe the checks had cleared and contained real funds. Relying on that, I sent repayments via my Citibank debit card totaling approximately XXXXOn XXXX, without any notification, warning, or fraud alert, Citibank abruptly froze my account. Only after five days was I informed the deposited checks had been returned unpaid. Citibank then reversed the deposits, applied my own legitimate funds toward the returned items, and drove my balance to approximately negative $XXXX.\n\nMy complaint against Citibank:\n1. Its fraud-monitoring systems failed to flag a well-documented, widespread scam pattern (rapid mobile check deposits followed by immediate outbound payments) before I incurred losses yet flagged it quickly enough to freeze my account afterward.\n2. It made funds available in a manner that created the reasonable appearance of cleared checks, without any warning that deposits could later be reversed.\n3. It froze my account without notice and left me without access to my own funds for [number] days.\n4. It is treating me, a documented crime victim, as the liable party.\n\nI have reported this crime to local police department, report XXXX XXXX the FTC (Federal Trade Commission, report XXXX XXXX and the FBI IC3 (Internet Crime Complaint Center).\n\n5. I have all the copies of these bad checks that actually Citibank dared to send to me as a proof ( sic!!!) of the fraudXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX MD XXXX XXXX XXXXCiti acc XXXX XXXXLast 4 of SS XXXX

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 2026-06-15 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: REGIONS FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I was charged for two XXXX shipments to my Regions debit card, ending in XXXX. I never placed or authorized these shipments. When I contacted XXXX, they said I dont own the account and refused to give me invoices or any details. I disputed the charges with Regions, but they came back saying the charges are valid. These are not my shipments, and I should not be responsible for them. XXXX XXXX amount XXXX on XX/XX/year> XXXX XXXX amount XXXX on XX/XX/year>

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 2026-06-14 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: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint against Wells Fargo and XXXX regarding two disputed charges on my Wells Fargo XXXX XXXX XXXX credit card that I have been trying to resolve for several months without success. Dispute XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX I was promised a refund of the remaining balance on this reservation by both the XXXX XXXX hotel and XXXX. I never received the amenity/service this charge was for, and despite being promised the refund, it has never been issued. When I disputed the charge with Wells Fargo, I was told to resolve it directly with XXXX and the hotel. Since then, I have been sent back and forth between Wells Fargo, XXXX, and the hotel for months, with no party taking responsibility. Because this disputed amount remains on my account, it has now caused missed payments and damaged my XXXX XXXX. I do not believe I should be required to pay for a service I never used and was promised would be refunded. Dispute 2 XXXX hotel reservation During this stay I experienced serious mistreatment, including racial discrimination and a refusal by hotel staff to cooperate. I spent an entire day of my trip on the phone with XXXX trying to resolve the situation. XXXX told me the resolution would take longer than expected, which forced me to book and pay for a separate hotel out of pocket so I would have somewhere to stay. I should not be held responsible for a charge tied to a reservation I could not use due to the hotels conduct.

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 2026-06-14 00:00:00
Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan — Installment loan
Issue: Charged fees or interest you didn't expect — 
Company: LDF Holdings, LLC
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
I am a North Carolina resident. I took out a loan with Lendumo ( operated by Niswi, LLC ) for an original principal of {$400.00}. The APR was approximately 500 % or higher. Lendumo is operating as an unlicensed lender in North Carolina in violation of state law : - N.C. Gen. Stat. 24-1.1 caps consumer loan interest rates at 30 % APR. - N.C. Gen. Stat. 53-281 prohibits payday lending in North Carolina entirely . - N.C. Gen. Stat. 24-2 makes any usurious contract unenforceable as to interest and allows the borrower to recover twice the interest paid. Lendumo claims tribal sovereignty under the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( LDF Holdings , LLC ). However, federal courts have ruled this does not exempt them from state usury laws when lending to non-tribal-member residents ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Cir. XXXX ; XXXX v. XXXX XXXX, XXXX Cir. XXXX ). XXXX XXXX / Lendumo is the subject of active federal litigation : XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX, et al. ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX Illinois ). The Minnesota Attorney General also obtained a consent order in XX/XX/XXXX against LDF Holdings stopping similar lending practices in that state. I have paid significantly more than the original principal of {$400.00} on this loan. Under N.C. Gen. Stat. 24-2, I have overpaid this loan and am entitled to a refund of all interest paid, plus statutory damages of twice the interest paid. After I sent a written ACH revocation under 15 U.S.C. 1693e and a debt dispute under 15 U.S.C. 1692g, Lendumo closed my account. However, they have not confirmed in writing that : 1. The balance is {$0.00} with no further amount owed 2. No negative credit reporting will be made or has been made 3. The account will not be sold to a debt buyer 4. I will be refunded for amounts paid in excess of principal I am requesting that the CFPB investigate Lendumo 's illegal lending activity in North Carolina.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-06-14 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Fee problem
Company: TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
I have had the same account with Truist for 20 years with no fee. All of a sudden, without explanation or consent, they started charging me a {$25.00} fees.

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 2026-06-14 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Medical debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Impersonated attorney, law enforcement, or government official
Company: Renton Collections Inc.
State: WA

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting a complaint against Renton Collections , Inc. for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). I received notice of an alleged debt and timely sent a written debt validation request via certified mail. XXXX tracking confirms delivery on XXXX ( date XXXX be in error ; actual year should be corrected ). The collection agency has not responded to my dispute, has not provided any validation of the alleged debt, and has not identified the original creditor, the nature of the debt, or when it was incurred. Under 15 U.S.C. 1692g, a debt collector must cease collection activity until validation is provided. Their failure to respond leaves the debt unverified. Additionally, I was never given clear or accurate information about the origin or basis of this alleged debt.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-06-15 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Deposits and withdrawals
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I made a purchase on XX/XX/year>, in the amount of {$88.00}. I acknowledge that I authorized the transaction ; however, I never received the item I purchased. I have made multiple attempts to contact the company and cancel my order. Unfortunately, my requests have gone unanswered, and it has now been over a month without any resolution or communication from the merchant. I chose to file a dispute with Wells Fargo, but my claim was denied because the original payment was authorized. While I understand that I approved the initial transaction, my dispute is based on the fact that I attempted to cancel the order and did not receive the product. Despite my repeated efforts to resolve the matter directly with the company, they have failed to respond. I respectfully request that this situation be reconsidered, as I have made every reasonable effort to resolve the issue and have not received the goods or the customer support necessary to address my concerns.

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 2026-06-15 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Repossession — Voluntary repossession
Company: ALLY FINANCIAL INC.
State: CT

Complaint narrative:
My vehicle became XXXX and was left at a XXXX dealership in XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted Ally and requested a voluntary surrender of the vehicle. I provided the vehicle 's location and repeatedly followed up over the following months. Between XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, Ally representatives informed me that they were processing the surrender request, attempting to contact the dealership, obtaining information about the vehicle, verifying its location, and addressing storage fees. On XX/XX/XXXX, I was told that Ally had verified the vehicle 's location and was negotiating storage fees with the dealership. I was never provided a written denial of my voluntary surrender request. On XX/XX/XXXX, I was informed by Ally that they would not recover the vehicle because it was not financially beneficial to do so and that they do not repossess non-running vehicles. I questioned why this was not communicated when I first requested voluntary surrender in XXXX. I was also told that a letter regarding this decision should have been sent, but Ally could not confirm that one had actually been sent. Throughout this process, I repeatedly requested information and written documentation. Ally generally communicated only through phone calls and did not provide a written explanation of the status of my voluntary surrender request, the decision not to recover the vehicle, or documentation supporting the balance now being claimed. I have since received a letter stating that I owe approximately {$10000.00}. I am requesting a written explanation of how my voluntary surrender request was handled, documentation supporting the claimed balance, copies of records related to the surrender and recovery process, and clarification regarding the current status of the vehicle.

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