vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-14 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue while managing or servicing your loan
Company: LAKEVIEW LOAN SERVICING, LLC
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
Background : I fell behind on my mortgage payments after losing my job in XXXX. I made a large payment ( approx. {$9000.00} ) on or about XX/XX/XXXX. Later that day I called XXXX and spoke with a representative who informed me that ( XXXX ) congratulations on getting current on your loan and ( XXXX ) that your next payment would be XX/XX/XXXX in the amount of aprox. {$1300.00}. Relying on that information, I logged into the portal on or about XX/XX/XXXX to make the XXXX payment as agreed only to discover that ( XXXX ) the portal showed a payment due XX/XX/XXXX and not in the amount agreed to but instead the full monthly amount of approx. {$2100.00} + a late fee of approx. {$60.00}. Fearing damage to my credit report, I immediately paid the full amount plus the late fee. 

After multiple attempts to confer with the mortgage servicer, they continue -- to date -- to deny that false and incorrect information was given to me on XX/XX/XXXX by their company representative. The servicer continues to maintain that IF a mistake was made, that employee would receive " coaching. '' Problem : However, I relied on that servicer representative 's assurance to my detriment. On XXXX separate calls on XX/XX/XXXX, multiple representatives confirmed that the online portal does not recognize partial payments and that any agreements or assurances made with the default team would not be shown on the portal. As such, there is no way for me to confirm the accuracy of what was told to me on XX/XX/XXXX. 

Now, I am past-due again, having relied on information from the servicer. 

I have asked that the " credit '' in the approx. amount of {$700.00} be applied to the XXXX payment and that the payment schedule be put back on track based on the information was told to me. 

XXXX. My second XXXX {$2100.00} payment should be applied to XXXX. 
XXXX. The late status removed. 
XXXX. The next payment due should be XXXX XXXX in the approx. amount of {$1300.00} -- in line with what the servicer representative assured me and what I relied on. 

In summary, it is woefully unfair that a consumer be expected to " double pay '' because a servicer representative stated the wrong or incorrect information on XX/XX/XXXX. Furthermore, rather than simply accept responsibility for providing the incorrect information to the consumer and finding a good faith resolution to resolve the company 's error -- the servicer maintains that there is nothing it can do to resolve the now altered and incorrect payment schedule -- that the company is 100 % at fault for creating. 

The third representative I spoke with at XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, was unbelievably rude, combative, and hostile and interrupted me multiple times and refused to assist.

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 2026-01-14 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Private student loan
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Trouble with how payments are being handled
Company: AES/PHEAA
State: MO

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint on behalf of my daughter, the borrower. The student loan was originated through her school and required school certification, and she was actively enrolled at the time the loan entered repayment. 

American Education Services ( AES ), the loan servicer, has stated that the loan was placed into immediate repayment based on the promissory note. However, neither my daughter nor our family was clearly informed that repayment would begin while she was still enrolled in school, nor was it reasonably expected given the school-certified nature of the loan. 

AES placed the loan into repayment during active enrollment and has refused to correct the status, stating they do not own the loan. As a result, my daughter was advised to take out a new high-interest loan to cover payments that should not have been required during school. 

We are requesting regulatory review of whether the loan was properly disclosed and serviced, and whether in-school deferment should have been applied given the borrowers enrollment status. We are requesting correction of the loan status, application of retroactive in-school deferment if applicable, and removal of any negative consequences resulting from this servicing issue. Proof of enrollment is available and can be provided. 

AES has stated that the borrower signed the loan agreement. We are not disputing that a promissory note exists. However, the issue is whether repayment during active enrollment was clearly disclosed and properly serviced for a school-certified student loan. 

My daughter was actively enrolled at the time the loan was placed into repayment. Given the school-certified nature of the loan, it was not reasonably expected that repayment would begin during enrollment, and this was not clearly explained to us at the time of signing. 

AES has refused to review the servicing decision and instead advised the borrower to take out an additional high-interest loan to cover payments that should not have been required during school. We are requesting regulatory review of whether the loan was properly disclosed and whether the servicing was accurate and fair given the borrowers enrollment status.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-14 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am reporting unauthorized fraudulent transactions on my Citibank debit account. I detected the fraud and contacted Citibank immediately to report the unauthorized activity. A formal fraud claim was opened, and I was assigned case number XXXX. During my call with a Citibank representative on Saturday, XX/XX/XXXX, I was informed that the fraudulent activity was related to a hacking incident originating from XXXX and that multiple customer accounts were affected. 

Despite promptly reporting the fraud, Citibank informed me that I must wait 10 days to receive a provisional credit while the investigation is ongoing. This delay has left me without access to funds that are necessary for basic living expenses and has caused significant financial hardship. 

I requested immediate provisional credit, confirmation that my account was secured, and clear information regarding the status of my claim. Citibank did not provide a timely resolution or issue the provisional credit. 

I am requesting that Citibank comply with Regulation E by issuing the provisional credit immediately and resolving this matter without further delay.

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 2026-01-14 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Managing the loan or lease — Billing problem
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT : This complaint is a corrected resubmission of a previously withdrawn filing. It provides a 10-count forensic audit of unauthorized withdrawals that were not fully detailed in the original submission. 
1. THE CONTRACTUAL BASELINE : On XX/XX/year>, I authorized a monthly payment of {$200.00} to resolve a deficiency balance. While I subsequently authorized Bank of America to transition this {$200.00} payment from a XXXX XXXX account ( ending in XXXX ) to my XXXX account ( ending in XXXX ), that authorization was strictly limited to the agreed-upon {$200.00} amount. 
2. REGULATION E VIOLATION ( 12 CFR 1005.10 ) : Bank of America initiated ten ( 10 ) separate unauthorized withdrawals of {$700.00} each from my XXXX account. These withdrawals violated Regulation E in two ways : Lack of Authorization : I never signed or authenticated a " writing '' for a {$700.00} monthly draw as required by 12 CFR 1005.10 ( b ). 
Failure of Notice for Varying Amounts : Under 12 CFR 1005.10 ( d ), BofA was required to provide a 10-day written notice if a preauthorized transfer varied from the authorized {$200.00} amount. No such notice was ever provided. 
3. SYSTEMIC " DOUBLE-DIPPING '' PATTERN : My forensic audit revealed a predatory pattern : BofA would process the authorized {$200.00} payment and then, within XXXX hours, initiate a second, unauthorized {$700.00} withdrawal. This happened ten ( 10 ) times, totaling {$7000.00} in unauthorized seizures. 
4. PROOF OF WILLFUL BAD FAITH : In XX/XX/year>, I requested a payment pause due to the government shutdown. BofAs systems successfully paused the authorized {$200.00} payment, yet simultaneously pushed through the unauthorized {$700.00} draw. This proves the bank had the technical capability to honor my stop-payment request but chose to bypass it for the larger, unauthorized amount. 
LEGAL DEMAND : I am demanding an immediate refund of {$7000.00} in unauthorized funds. I have attached a 14-page forensic audit ( Exhibit A ), which contains the original {$200.00} agreement and 10 specific transaction screenshots as proof.

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 2026-01-14 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Fees or interest — Charged too much interest
Company: AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY
State: CO

Complaint narrative:
I have an American Express XXXX card that Ive had since XXXX and they had upped my rates to 29 % without notification, but I was using it and then I had canceled my cards. I usually do it every year to keep people from charging it and they go ahead and allow people to charge four card numbers ago without my authorization and then they wont block them because I do that in case scammers or people that automatically charge stuff and dont tell you can be shut down, but not them and then when I would freeze my account, they would still allow charges to go through. Contacted him about it and they were no help and Im tired of it so I got alone paid off my car XX/XX/XXXX and then my bill just come out today and theyre charging me another {$190.00} when it was completely paid off with credit of interest after it was totally paid off so how do I ever get it paid off I could never pay it down because they kept allowing charges that I didnt notice because I would give my credit card to the Cpa and a lot of it went unnoticed and then I found out that they were allowing you know people to charge from four years ago credit card number tired of them the interest rate was atrocious when I needed their help they werent help so yeah not happy so I get my bill and now I owe another {$200.00} frozen my card and theyre still allowing charges through. I cant never get it paid completely off. I wan na close it, but they just keep allowing charges.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-14 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Virtual currency
Issue: Fraud or scam — 
Company: Block, Inc.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
My husband was the victim of an online scam that resulted in financial loss through Cash App, specifically involving XXXX transactions initiated under false pretenses. 

He was approached by individuals claiming he could earn money by completing online surveys and then cash out his earnings. He was instructed to upload funds through Cash App into XXXX as part of this process. After each payment, he was told that additional deposits were required in order to release or withdraw the supposed earnings. 

Despite multiple payments being made, no funds were ever released. Each attempt to cash out resulted in further demands for money. This pattern is consistent with a known advance-fee XXXX  scam. 

Once we realized this was fraudulent, all communication with the scammers stopped immediately. We reported the issue to Cash App, but recovery assistance has been limited despite the transactions being clearly scam-related and reported promptly. 

We are requesting that Cash App : Fully investigate these transactions as fraud Provide reimbursement for the funds lost due to this scam Improve safeguards and warnings related to cryptocurrency scams conducted through their platform This complaint is being filed because we believe Cash App failed to adequately protect the consumer or provide meaningful assistance after the fraud was discovered.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-14 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Medical debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Patient Accounting Service Center
State: WI

Complaint narrative:
I receive about XXXX calls a day about medical debt, but when I call, they tell me I don't have any debt with their company and that they'll let customer service know. Ive told them twice now to stop calling with no results.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-14 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Telecommunications debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS INC
State: CO

Complaint narrative:
I am disputing a debt that XXXX XXXX sent to Transworld Systems Inc. that I do not owe. The debt involves a sudden and extremely abnormal spike in data usage on one of our enterprise data lines ( ending in XXXX ) that XXXX own technical team acknowledged may have been caused by a device malfunction or compromise. Despite that, XXXX assigned full liability without explaining why. 

This line historically used near-zero data. One month showed more than 5 GB of unexpected usage, which is completely inconsistent with normal operation of the equipment. XXXX investigation only confirmed that its network delivered data to the SIM card, which was never in dispute. The question is whether the usage was legitimate. XXXX did not determine that and still held us responsible. 

Before XXXX sent the account to collections, we contacted XXXX dozens of times, spoke to multiple departments, and escalated through our business account representatives. We reported the issue immediately, yet the account was suspended and later sent to collections even though the dispute was still open and unresolved. This caused significant operational and financial harm to my business. 

XXXX also refused to provide documentation needed to validate the debt, including call logs, internal case notes, their fraud review findings, or details on why they decided the usage was legitimate. Their written response states that these records are proprietary or unavailable, which prevents me from being able to verify or understand how they reached their determination. 

I am requesting that this debt be removed from collections and that XXXX be required to properly address the dispute and provide the documents needed to validate or refute the charge.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-14 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account information incorrect
Company: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: AL

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint regarding inaccurate credit reporting by Capital One on my credit card account ending in XXXX. 

In XX/XX/year>, Capital One processed a duplicate automatic payment from my bank account without my authorization or consent. I immediately contacted Capital One to report the error. Capital One insisted the second payment was valid and initially refused to reverse it. My bank ( XXXX ) subsequently reversed the duplicate transaction as an unauthorized withdrawal. Once the reversal occurred, I immediately sent a replacement payment to ensure the account was paid. 

Despite this error being caused by Capital Ones duplicate autodraft, Capital One reported a late payment on my credit report. This late payment resulted solely from Capital Ones processing error and my banks reversal of an unauthorized transaction. I did not miss a payment due to neglect or inability to pay. 

I submitted a formal written dispute directly to Capital One via certified mail, including documentation of : - The duplicate autodraft - My immediate notice to Capital One - The bank reversal due to unauthorized withdrawal - My immediate repayment once the error was corrected Capital One responded by stating they verified the late payment but did not address or investigate the duplicate autodraft error, the unauthorized withdrawal, or the bank reversal. Their response only referenced the last payment date and did not engage with the substance of my dispute. 

I believe Capital One failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation as required under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and continues to report a late payment that resulted from a creditor processing error rather than consumer nonpayment.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-14 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am formally disputing the accuracy, completeness, and legal reporting of the following account appearing on my consumer credit report : Creditor : Midland Credit Management Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX. 
Account Number : XXXX Balance Reported : {$2400.00} Status : Collection Account This account is disputed in its entirety. I am requesting a strict Method of Verification pursuant to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, including 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ). I am not requesting assumptions, summaries, or boilerplate responses. 

To fully comply with federal law, you must provide all of the following : A copy of the original signed contract or application creating the alleged obligation If the account was opened electronically, documentation showing : The method of online application IP address Date and time of submission Authentication or identity verification procedures used If the account was opened in person, documentation identifying : The physical location The individual or entity that processed the application A complete account history from origination through charge-off, showing how the balance was calculated A complete chain of title, including : The bill of sale Assignment agreements Proof of lawful transfer from XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. to Midland Credit Management The name, address, and contact information of the person or entity that verified the account The specific documents reviewed during verification The date and manner in which the verification was conducted For clarity and to prevent improper responses : I am not asserting identity theft I am not admitting ownership of this account I am requesting validation and verification only I am not using a third party or credit repair organization Whether I use a third party is irrelevant and not a permissible basis to deny or delay verification I have previously received frivolous and non-responsive form letters, including : Generic statements that the account was verified Improper inquiries into XXXX-party representation Identity-theft language that I did not request Such responses do not satisfy the Fair Credit Reporting Act. 

If you can not produce the documentation listed above, then this account is unverifiable as a matter of law and must be deleted immediately from my credit file. Continued reporting without proper verification constitutes inaccurate reporting and willful noncompliance. 

Please provide written confirmation of deletion or full verification within the statutory timeframe.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-14 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Threatened to sue you for very old debt
Company: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX, I received documentation from XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX requesting payment for an alleged debt ( Capital One ) from XX/XX/XXXX. 

Based on the information provided by XXXX as of XX/XX/XXXX, the balanced owed was {$610.00}, interest charged from XX/XX/XXXX to now is XXXX making the total debt owed {$1900.00}. 

Clearly the statue of limitations makes this an illegal attempt to collect this debt. This alleged debt is over XXXX XXXX XXXX.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-14 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Closing an account — Company closed your account
Company: UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
USAA intentionally closed my account with a negative {$300.00} balance because I told them I was receiving a deposit to clear the balance. I have the chat history and the agent was aware my deposit was pending to clear the balance. So why cause harm and charge off the account with a pending deposit and cause further financial harm and stress? 

I was told by an agent on XX/XX/XXXX that my account was in good standing and that I just needed to order a new debit card. 

I had a pending dispute against charges USAA continued to let go unauthorized and on XX/XX/XXXX I was given the results of the dispute. How just less than XXXX days later the account is closed?! 

They received my deposit this morning then closed my account. The representative just confirmed that. That is illegal.

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 2026-01-14 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — International money transfer
Issue: Money was not available when promised — 
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.

Complaint narrative:
In XX/XX/XXXX, I attempted a global transfer of {$2300.00} from my XXXX XXXX account. The transfer was blocked due to alleged sanctions related to XXXX. I was instructed to apply for an OFAC license. 

In XX/XX/XXXX, the U.S. Department of the Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Control ( OFAC ) responded in writing stating that they could not locate any record of the funds being blocked and advised that the blocking institution should report the funds to OFAC Compliance if a license was required. 

Despite this, Citi Bank now confirms that it is holding the funds but refuses to release them unless I obtain an OFAC license. Citi Bank also refuses to contact OFAC directly to resolve the discrepancy. I am being repeatedly instructed to reapply for an OFAC license, which has already proven ineffective. 

This has resulted in a circular process and an unreasonable delay exceeding XXXX years, during which my funds have been withheld without regulatory clarification or resolution.

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 2026-01-14 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Repossession — Loan balance remaining after the vehicle is repossessed and sold
Company: VW Credit
State: LA

Complaint narrative:
I was in a car accident XX/XX/year>. At the time I was not aware my insurance had just lapsed. The car was totaled out and I was stuck with a payment on a car thats total and I dont have in my possession anymore.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation