vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-16 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: FL

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/year>, I initiated a XXXX transaction for {$950.00} through the XXXX XXXX card in order to pay my rent. XXXX reported this charge was completed on XX/XX/year>. However, because of XXXX 's shutting down of the XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX, these funds were pulled directly from my checking account on XX/XX/XXXX to pay XXXX. However, on XX/XX/XXXX, the charge was still posted to my XXXX card as a charge from XXXX, essentially double charging me. This balance was then later transferred to a new Wells Fargo credit card I that was automatically issued. I have attached evidence that unequivocally proves this double charge. On XX/XX/year>, I initiated a dispute with Wells Fargo over this charge and provided all of the previously mentioned evidence. My dispute was swiftly denied on XX/XX/XXXX, with the XXXX explaining that XXXX as a merchant was unable to refund the payment because over 60 days had passed since the original payment date. This was objectively incorrect, as my initiation of the dispute fell within 60 days according to the plain language of the Fair Credit Billing Act. This denial was also incorrect because XXXX was not a merchant in this situation, and Wells Fargo was the only entity that could resolve this dispute because they are the institution that oversaw XXXX credit card users. This was confirmed to my by an email from a XXXX representative on XX/XX/year>. On XX/XX/year>, after escalating the appeal of the denial, my dispute was re-opened by a representative of Wells Fargo 's executive team. On XX/XX/year>, my dispute was again denied under the reasoning that XXXX " could not pull back the funds. '' This is, again, untrue, as Wells Fargo is and was the financial institution that backed XXXX when this faulty charge was made. As such, I was twice denied the reasonable investigation I am entitled to pursuant to the Fair Credit Billing Act. Additionally, I was also not provided the evidence considered by Wells Fargo when making this decision that I am also entitled to under the Act.

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 2026-04-16 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Other features, terms, or problems — Other problem
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
In my opinion, Citibank is in error with regard to how it applies vendor credits when a Citi Flex Plan is active on a credit card account. In XXXX, XXXX, I opened a Citi Flex Plan loan in the approximate amount of {$8600.00}. During my most recent billing cycle ending XX/XX/XXXX, I received approximately {$4900.00} in credits from various vendors. Many of these credits were issued to correct vendor-related errors on specific transactions. Rather than applying these credits to offset the original credit card charges to which they relate, Citibank applied them toward my Flex Plan balance. This had the effect of accelerating repayment of the Flex Plan, while leaving other revolving balances in place and increasing the pay in full amount by almost {$5000.00}. I fully understand that customer payments in excess of the amount due may be applied toward a Flex Plan balance. However, I believe there is an important and meaningful distinction between customer payments and vendor-issued credits. Vendor credits are transaction-specific adjustments intended to reverse or correct specific charges. In my view, it would be more appropriate for such credits to be applied to the revolving balance associated with those original transactions, rather than redirected to a separate financing product. This distinction is important because the current approach : - Alters the expected financial outcome of vendor-issued corrections - Changes the effective cost of borrowing by potentially leaving higher-interest revolving balances outstanding - Does not appear to be clearly communicated at the time a Flex Plan is established I discussed this matter with a Citibank representative, but to no avail. I am concerned that this may reflect a broader process issue.

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 2026-04-16 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: NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX, I was charged {$990.00} by merchant XXXX XXXX XXXX/ The Executive Job Search for a program that explicitly advertised " Personalized Coaching with me for 6 months. '' What was delivered was a monthly group XXXX call with all enrolled participants, each permitted one question per session. This is not personalized coaching. I filed a dispute with Navy Federal Credit Union. Navy Federal denied it twice, citing the merchant 's non-refundable terms. This standard misapplies federal law. Under the Fair Credit Billing Act and Regulation Z, non-refundable clauses do not override a merchant 's obligation to deliver services as described. The correct chargeback basis is Services Not as Described ( Reason Code 13.3 ). I submitted a formal written appeal with full documentation including the merchant 's promotional email containing the explicit promise, and her own written response on XX/XX/XXXX admitting that group sessions constitute her coaching directly contradicting the advertised " personalized '' service. Navy Federal closed the dispute without properly applying the XXXX misrepresentation standard. Navy Federal failed to conduct a proper investigation under Regulation Z and denied a valid billing dispute based on an inapplicable standard.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-16 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive enough information to verify debt
Company: ONLINE Information Services, Inc.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
Through this CFPB complaint, I am formally asserting my rights under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) and the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) by submitting a combined dispute and validation request to Online Information Services. I have attached a detailed written request that outlines all necessary documentation to validate the alleged debt. Specifically, I am requesting : A complete copy of the original signed contract or agreement that created the alleged obligation. A full itemized account history, including all charges, payments, interest, fees, adjustments, and charge-offs. Documentation showing that Online Information Services currently owns the debt, including any purchase or assignment contract. The name and address of the original creditor. Copies of any prior notices or communications, including the validation notice required under 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( a ). Additionally, to verify the accuracy and completeness of the information associated with this account, I have requested : The Date of First Delinquency ( DOFD ), as recorded by the original creditor. The charge-off date of the account. The assignment or purchase date, including documentation of the transfer to Online Information Services. The full data set maintained for the account ( status, balance, date opened, dispute codes ). A description of the investigation procedure used, if this account has previously been disputed. This complaint ensures the request is formally submitted through a regulatory channel, with full documentation. Please ensure that all 10 items requested in the attached letter are addressed completely and directly.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-16 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — Foreclosure
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: HI

Complaint narrative:
I applied for a loan modification several times, and was denial, the clear reason was because I served time in XXXX XXXX for frauds, to me that is discrimination. I am submitting a complaint regarding my mortgage with Bank of America. My primary residence in Hawaii is currently in foreclosure, and I previously applied for a loan modification in good faith. My application was denied ; however, I do not believe my financial situation was fully or fairly evaluated. I am requesting a formal reconsideration of my loan modification application. I am willing to provide updated financial documentation, including household contributions, and I am prepared to make a good faith payment toward the arrears. I have made multiple attempts to communicate with Bank of America to resolve this matter and avoid foreclosure, but I have not received adequate assistance or clear guidance on how to proceed. Given that this is my primary residence and I am actively seeking to bring the loan current, I am requesting that foreclosure activity be paused while my application is reviewed again. I am committed to working cooperatively with the lender to find a solution that allows me to retain my home. Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter.

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 2026-04-16 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive enough information to verify debt
Company: CL Holdings LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
Through this CFPB complaint, I am formally asserting my rights under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) and the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) by submitting a combined dispute and validation request to Jefferson Capital Systems. I have attached a detailed written request that outlines all necessary documentation to validate the alleged debt. Specifically, I am requesting : A complete copy of the original signed contract or agreement that created the alleged obligation. A full itemized account history, including all charges, payments, interest, fees, adjustments, and charge-offs. Documentation showing that Jefferson Capital Systems currently owns the debt, including any purchase or assignment contract. The name and address of the original creditor. Copies of any prior notices or communications, including the validation notice required under 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( a ). Additionally, to verify the accuracy and completeness of the information associated with this account, I have requested : The Date of First Delinquency ( DOFD ), as recorded by the original creditor. The charge-off date of the account. The assignment or purchase date, including documentation of the transfer to Jefferson Capital Systems. The full data set maintained for the account ( status, balance, date opened, dispute codes ). A description of the investigation procedure used, if this account has previously been disputed. This complaint ensures the request is formally submitted through a regulatory channel, with full documentation. Please ensure that all XXXX items requested in the attached letter are addressed completely and directly.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-16 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Mobile or digital wallet
Issue: Unauthorized transactions or other transaction problem — 
Company: Paypal Holdings, Inc
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
Product : Money transfer / digital wallet Company : PayPal Date of occurrence : XX/XX/year> On XX/XX/year>, my mobile phone was stolen. Within 24 hours of the theft, an unauthorized transaction of {$2000.00} was sent from my PayPal account to an unknown person ( XXXX XXXX ) I do not know and have never transacted with. I did not authorize this transaction. At the time it occurred, I no longer had possession of my phone and my accounts had been compromised as part of the theft. I promptly reported the incident and filed unauthorized transaction claims with PayPal on two separate occasions. Despite the clear evidence of account compromise and device theft, PayPal denied both claims, stating that they found no fraud. Since then, I have taken the following actions : Reported the theft and account compromise Recovered and secured all other affected financial accounts ( bank, Uber, etc. ) Attempted multiple times to resolve the issue directly with PayPal Despite these efforts, PayPal continues to hold me responsible for a transaction I did not authorize. The situation has now escalated to the point where a collections agency is attempting to recover this disputed amount from me. This is deeply concerning, as I am being pursued for a fraudulent transaction resulting from identity theft and account takeover.

Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-16 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive enough information to verify debt
Company: National Credit Adjusters, LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
Through this CFPB complaint, I am formally asserting my rights under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) and the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) by submitting a combined dispute and validation request to National Credit Adjusters. I have attached a detailed written request that outlines all necessary documentation to validate the alleged debt. Specifically, I am requesting : A complete copy of the original signed contract or agreement that created the alleged obligation. A full itemized account history, including all charges, payments, interest, fees, adjustments, and charge-offs. Documentation showing that National Credit Adjusters currently owns the debt, including any purchase or assignment contract. The name and address of the original creditor. Copies of any prior notices or communications, including the validation notice required under 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( a ). Additionally, to verify the accuracy and completeness of the information associated with this account, I have requested : The Date of First Delinquency ( DOFD ), as recorded by the original creditor. The charge-off date of the account. The assignment or purchase date, including documentation of the transfer to National Credit Adjusters. The full data set maintained for the account ( status, balance, date opened, dispute codes ). A description of the investigation procedure used, if this account has previously been disputed. This complaint ensures the request is formally submitted through a regulatory channel, with full documentation. Please ensure that all 10 items requested in the attached letter are addressed completely and directly.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-16 00:00:00
Product: Prepaid card — General-purpose prepaid card
Issue: Trouble using the card — Trouble using the card to spend money in a store or online
Company: FIFTH THIRD FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
CFPB Complaint Draft ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Issue ) Subject : Expired XXXX XXXX XXXX Card Request for Resolution / Unredeemed Funds Complaint : I am filing a complaint regarding an expired XXXX XXXX reward card that contained a remaining balance of {$100.00}. I received this card as part of a XXXX lack of service gift. The card has now expired, and I was unable to use the funds before the expiration date. When I contacted both XXXX and XXXX regarding this issue, I was informed that the card can not be reissued and the remaining balance can not be recovered. I believe this is unfair, as the value on the card represents earned promotional compensation and not a voluntarily abandoned account. The card was issued in the name of : XXXX XXXX. I am requesting assistance in recovering the remaining funds by having XXXX provide an equivalent credit or replacement, as the funds were never used and were forfeited solely due to expiration. I don't believe it is legal for XXXX to pocket this amount. I have already attempted to resolve this directly with XXXX and XXXX, but both companies declined to provide any resolution. Thank you for your assistance in reviewing this matter.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-16 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Federal student loan servicing
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Problem with customer service
Company: Nelnet, Inc.
State: VT

Complaint narrative:
XX/XX/year> I manually recertified my XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Received email stating they cancelled my XXXX XXXX called XXXX -Spent and excessive time trying to get help because they claimed my account number was wrong. It had been changed without my knowledge. I was forced to give my social security number to receive help. I was told never to give that, but felt I had no choice. XXXX said I had not sent " income verification ''. There was no prompt at all to do so. -So, I sent the income verification to XXXX as instructed. XXXX also reapplied for manual recert. as instructed on XX/XX/XXXX. ( XXXX time ) XX/XX/XXXX Through email, I was denied and cancelled again. XXXX called. They said I had checked yes on XXXX questions. " Income had changed '' was the nature of both questions. This is a flat out lie. I did not check yes on either question. -As requested, I refiled a third time. XX/XX/XXXX I received an email saying my IDR had been cancelled again. I was advised to file a complaint here.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-16 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage — Delays in the application process
Company: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
State: MA

Complaint narrative:
I have been in a mortgage assumption with Chase Bank process for 5 months. Chase has requested the same documentation repeatedly which I have sent immediately upon each request. The process involves the applicant to submit documentation, loan processors review the information and ask for any remaining information before sending to underwriting. My application was in processing for over 3 months before then being sent to underwriting on XX/XX/year> where it sat for over 3 weeks before they sent a request for more information, but the information they requested was already submitted by me on XX/XX/year>. Each time I have submitted documentation over the past 4 months, I have sequentially called Chase to confirm all documents were received and there was no more information needed at that time, which they have confirmed. Today, I contacted customer service and they confirmed the documentation that they requested for the second time, today, XX/XX/year>, was received on XX/XX/XXXX. The employee also told me that " underwriting does not always read through all of the information and documents as they don't have time. '' This is unacceptable as I am up against a timeline and their negligence and redundancy is holding up the completion of this assumption request.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-16 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Mobile or digital wallet
Issue: Unauthorized transactions or other transaction problem — 
Company: Block, Inc.
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
A fraudulent transaction of {$100.00} was taken from my account using Cash app and even more had my bank account had more money in it and they were unable to reverse the charge. Ive already reported it to my bank as well. Its not enough protections on the app for such cases.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-16 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Virtual currency
Issue: Money was not available when promised — 
Company: Relay Financial (US), Corp.
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
Relay Financial placed my account on hold and I can not access approximately {$2500.00}. Outbound transfers to my linked external bank are blocked and my balance shows as restricted. On XX/XX/2026, Relays Account Protection Team requested documentation about my business profile and certain transactions. I provided all requested information and supporting receipts the same day, and they confirmed receipt and stated they were reviewing. Since then, I have not received a timeline, and the hold remains in place. I need access to my funds for time-sensitive tax and operating obligations. The hold has prevented me from paying routine operating expenses and has disrupted normal business operations for the week.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-16 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — Store credit card
Issue: Fees or interest — Problem with fees
Company: TD BANK US HOLDING COMPANY
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
I am writing to file a formal complaint against TD Bank regarding a XXXX XXXX XXXX store credit account. I believe the bank has engaged in predatory fee practices that have caused ongoing harm to my credit. I made a purchase for {$820.00} on XX/XX/XXXX using the TD account. I received my first bill on XX/XX/XXXX ( see attachment ). On XX/XX/XXXX, I paid the full account balance of {$820.00} ( see attachment ), understanding this to fully satisfy the account. I acknowledge that my XXXX payment was late, which triggered an initial {$29.00} fee. However, TD Bank never notified me that a late fee had been assessed, no email or alert was sent indicating a missed payment or resulting charge. The next statement arrived appearing as a new bill, with no clear explanation that it represented a fee balance on an otherwise paid account. My dispute is not about the initial late fee, it is about fees that continued to accumulate after that payoff, which I was never clearly informed would occur. The following day, XX/XX/XXXX, I received a notice of a {$29.00} charge. I initially believed this was a processing delay, as my payment had been submitted just the day before. However, I subsequently received a demand letter in the mail indicating the fee was being treated as a new outstanding balance. In XX/XX/XXXX, I received notice that TD Bank and XXXX XXXX XXXX had ended their relationship, and that my account would be closed upon full payment. Despite this, TD Bank has continued to assess fees on my account, even though my underlying debt was fully satisfied in XX/XX/XXXX. I have contacted TD Bank on multiple occasions seeking clarification and resolution. During my most recent call, a representative offered only two options : settling the balance or paying it in full. Both options would result in a negative mark on my credit report, which I believe is unjust given that my original debt was paid in full. In the meantime, TD Bank has reported late payments to the credit bureaus, causing active and ongoing damage to my credit score. The total now demanded, {$200.00}, consists entirely of fees that accrued after my balance was paid to zero. I am requesting that the Bureau investigate TD Bank 's practice of continuing to assess fees after a balance has been paid in full, its failure to clearly disclose fee assessments to the account holder, and its policy of offering only credit-damaging resolution options to consumers who dispute such fees. I believe this pattern may affect other consumers and warrants regulatory scrutiny.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation