vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-08 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: AL

Complaint narrative:
ALL REPORTED DATA MUST BE COMPLETE, CORRECT, AND PROVEN IF CHALLENGED. I DO NOT GRANT YOUR AUTHORITY TO REPORT VERSUS ME WITHOUT ADEQUATE COMPLIANCE OF STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS BEING APPLICABLE THROUGHOUT. AS SUCH I DEMAND DELETION IMMEDIATELY OF YOUR DECLARED CLAIMS AGAINST ME. PER COMMON LAW, YOU ARE DEMANDED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT YOU CAN AND HAVE WILLINGNESS TO ABSOLUTELY VERIFY AND VALIDATE ( OR JUST SAY " CERTIFICATE '' EVERY AND ONE EVEN EACH ANY AND OR ALL ALLEGATIONS YET PHYSICALLY DEFICIENT OR ALL ALLEGATIONS YET PHYSICALLY DEFICIENT OR UNPROVEN MINE, CHALLENGED OR NOT.

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 2025-11-08 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account information incorrect
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
Product / Service : Payday loan / XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX / XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Type of Problem : Debt collection / False statements or representation Complaint Summary : I am disputing a loan account allegedly under my name, Loan ID XXXX, issued by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and serviced through XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. I did not sign this loan agreement ; the signature on the contract is not mine. Therefore, I did not authorize this loan and am not liable for any amounts claimed. 
Additionally, the loan and the way it is structured raise multiple concerns : 1. Predatory APR and deceptive fees : The loan discloses a 459.61 % APR and includes a {$1400.00} Credit Access Business ( CAB ) fee on a {$1000.00} principal. The CAB fee is treated inconsistently it is labeled not interest under Texas law yet counted in the finance charge under federal law which is misleading and potentially deceptive. 
2. Dual entity confusion : The loan is technically from XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, but all servicing, payments, and fees are through XXXX. This structure can mislead consumers about the lender and is potentially used to evade state interest rate limits. 
3. Unauthorized XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX  ) authorization : The loan grants them permission to initiate electronic withdrawals from my bank account. Since I never signed the contract, any XXXX withdrawals would be unauthorized and violate the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ). 
4. Improper furnishing to credit bureaus : The account maXXXX be reported under XXXX  rather than the actual lender, XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Since I did not enter into this loan, any reporting is inaccurate and violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ).

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 2025-11-08 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: MD

Complaint narrative:
DESPITE MY PRIOR DISPUTES AND FORMAL NOTICE, THE REPORTING AGENCY FAILED TO CONDUCT A LAWFUL REINVESTIGATION AS REQUIRED UNDER 15 U.S.C. 1681I OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT ( FCRA ). THE AGENCY WAS EXPLICITLY NOTIFIED OF INACCURACIES AND PROVIDED SUFFICIENT DETAIL TO TRIGGER A DUTY OF REASONABLE INVESTIGATION. HOWEVER, THEIR RESPONSE CLEARLY SHOWS NONCOMPLIANCE : NO VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE, DOCUMENTATION, OR CERTIFICATION OF DATA ACCURACY WAS EVER PRODUCED. INSTEAD, THE SAME ERRONEOUS INFORMATION CONTINUES TO BE REPORTED A DIRECT VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW.

BY LAW, CONSUMER REPORTING AGENCIES MUST : XXXX. CONDUCT A REASONABLE REINVESTIGATION WITHIN THE STATUTORY TIME FRAME, XXXX. DELETE OR CORRECT ANY UNVERIFIABLE OR INACCURATE INFORMATION, AND XXXX. PROVIDE WRITTEN VERIFICATION OF THEIR FINDINGS AND THE SOURCES RELIED UPON. 

NONE OF THESE REQUIREMENTS WERE MET. THEIR INVESTIGATION WAS CONCLUSORY, UNSUPPORTED BY PRIMARY EVIDENCE, AND FAILED TO PROVIDE ANY PROOF OF VERIFICATION OR CHAIN OF CUSTODY OF THE DATA IN QUESTION. THIS CONSTITUTES BOTH PROCEDURAL NEGLIGENCE AND WILLFUL DISREGARD OF FEDERAL OBLIGATIONS.

ADDITIONALLY, UNDER 15 U.S.C. 1681E ( B ), THE AGENCY HAS A CONTINUING DUTY TO FOLLOW REASONABLE PROCEDURES TO ASSURE MAXIMUM POSSIBLE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION IT REPORTS. RETAINING OR RE-REPORTING UNVERIFIABLE DATA BREACHES THIS DUTY AND CAUSES TANGIBLE CONSUMER HARM, REPUTATIONAL DAMAGE, AND DENIAL OF FAIR CREDIT OPPORTUNITIES. 

THEIR FAILURE TO ACT LAWFULLY AFTER NOTICE TRANSFORMS THIS MATTER FROM SIMPLE NEGLIGENCE INTO RECKLESS NONCOMPLIANCE AND BAD FAITH 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 non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-08 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Mobile or digital wallet
Issue: Confusing or missing disclosures — 
Company: Paypal Holdings, Inc
State: OH

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint against PayPal for deceptive advertising regarding its

" Purchase Protection '' program. I used PayPal to pay a contractor {$1200.00} for a home renovation including flooring installation, drywall repair, and countertop installation, specifically selecting the " Goods and services '' option because the interface advertised protection for my purchase. This " protection '' gave me the false confidence to use PayPal for the transaction. The contractor failed to complete the job, not finishing the flooring or starting on the drywall or counters and damaged a portion of the flooring that was installed. I filed a dispute, but the process itself is fundamentally broken for non-physical items. All dispute options are geared towards tangible goods ( e.g., " item not received, '' " item damaged '' ), making it impossible to file an accurate claim for " services '' that were incomplete or performed improperly. I provided indisputable proof, including photos of the damage and screenshots of the contractor admitting the work was not finished. PayPal ignored this evidence and denied my claim with a nonsensical reason : " This decision was made because if an item is materially similar to the seller 's description, we do not consider it to be significantly not as described. '' This proves they reviewed my " service '' claim as if it were a physical " item, '' which is absurd because I wrote detailed explainations of the services I was not provided, the damaged flooring, and unfinished areas that expose subflooring. Regardless of this PayPal sided with the seller. This denial exposes PayPal 's deceptive bait/switch, false advertising, and substandard terms for their protection. PayPal advertises protection for " Goods and Services, '' but its entire system, from the dispute options to the policy terms and final denial logic, is exclusively built for physical " Goods. '' The policy terms are equally deceptive using vague terminology geared towards physical items. The policy fails to define these terms or outline any parameters for protecting the " services '' they claim to cover. This combination of a misleading interface, an item-only dispute process, and vague exclusions makes it impossible for consumers to actually protect " services '' as advertised. Because of this I do not have the protection I was advertised and relied on. I would like a full refund of what I paid.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-08 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account information incorrect
Company: NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
Navy Federal Credit Union is reporting incorrect charge-off and delinquency dates on my credit file. The Date of First Delinquency is XX/XX/XXXX, however NFCU is reporting the charge-off and major derogatory status in XXXX, which is a re-aging of the account. This is a violation of FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 5 ) and XXXX XXXX guidelines. 

Navy Federal has also assigned multiple third-party collectors after failing to provide proper validation. I am requesting a full investigation and correction or deletion of the tradeline.

I am requesting CFPB oversight to require Navy Federal to produce the original delinquency and charge-off records or remove the inaccurate tradeline.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-08 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: Experian Information Solutions Inc.
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
THE REPORTING AGENCY IS RETAINING, RESELLING, AND REDISTRIBUTING DATA THAT IS UNVERIFIED, INCOMPLETE, AND POTENTIALLY FALSE IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF 15 U.S.C. 1681E ( B ) AND 1681A ( D ) ( 2 ), AS WELL AS THE GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACTS DATA ACCURACY AND CONFIDENTIALITY REQUIREMENTS. THIS CONDUCT SHOWS A DISREGARD FOR DATA INTEGRITY AND CONSUMER PRIVACY PROTECTIONS. 
EVEN AFTER NOTICE OF DISPUTE, THE AGENCY CONTINUES TO REPORT THE SAME ERRONEOUS INFORMATION TO THIRD PARTIES AND AFFILIATES, KNOWING THAT IT LACKS DOCUMENTED PROOF OR VERIFIABLE SOURCE RECORDS. THIS CONSTITUTES A PATTERN OF WILLFUL NONCOMPLIANCE AND UNLAWFUL PROFITEERING FROM DEFECTIVE DATA. 
BY RESELLING OR REISSUING DATA THAT HAS BEEN DISPUTED AND NOT VERIFIED, THE AGENCY IS KNOWINGLY PARTICIPATING IN THE TRANSMISSION OF FALSE CONSUMER INFORMATION. THIS VIOLATES THE DUTY TO ASSURE MAXIMUM POSSIBLE ACCURACY AND UNDERMINES THE CONSUMERS RIGHTS TO FAIR AND TRUTHFUL CREDIT REPORTING. 
THIS IS NOT AN ISOLATED ERROR IT IS SYSTEMIC MISCONDUCT THAT DAMAGES CONSUMER CREDIT STANDING AND ENABLES OTHER ENTITIES TO CONTINUE RELYING ON INCORRECT INFORMATION THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PURGED IMMEDIATELY AFTER DISPUTE.

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 2025-11-08 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account information incorrect
Company: MOHELA
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
see attached. I have disputed this in the past this is not theorigianla creditor and you can not go from deferred to 90 days lat the next month. what am I missing?

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-08 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: Experian Information Solutions Inc.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
THE REPORTING AGENCY IS RETAINING, RESELLING, AND REDISTRIBUTING DATA THAT IS UNVERIFIED, INCOMPLETE, AND POTENTIALLY FALSE IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF 15 U.S.C. 1681E ( B ) AND 1681A ( D ) ( 2 ), AS WELL AS THE GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACTS DATA ACCURACY AND CONFIDENTIALITY REQUIREMENTS. THIS CONDUCT SHOWS A DISREGARD FOR DATA INTEGRITY AND CONSUMER PRIVACY PROTECTIONS. 

EVEN AFTER NOTICE OF DISPUTE, THE AGENCY CONTINUES TO REPORT THE SAME ERRONEOUS INFORMATION TO THIRD PARTIES AND AFFILIATES, KNOWING THAT IT LACKS DOCUMENTED PROOF OR VERIFIABLE SOURCE RECORDS. THIS CONSTITUTES A PATTERN OF WILLFUL NONCOMPLIANCE AND UNLAWFUL PROFITEERING FROM DEFECTIVE DATA. 

BY RESELLING OR REISSUING DATA THAT HAS BEEN DISPUTED AND NOT VERIFIED, THE AGENCY IS KNOWINGLY PARTICIPATING IN THE TRANSMISSION OF FALSE CONSUMER INFORMATION. THIS VIOLATES THE DUTY TO ASSURE MAXIMUM POSSIBLE ACCURACY AND UNDERMINES THE CONSUMERS RIGHTS TO FAIR AND TRUTHFUL CREDIT REPORTING. 

THIS IS NOT AN ISOLATED ERROR IT IS SYSTEMIC MISCONDUCT THAT DAMAGES CONSUMER CREDIT STANDING AND ENABLES OTHER ENTITIES TO CONTINUE RELYING ON INCORRECT INFORMATION THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PURGED IMMEDIATELY AFTER DISPUTE.

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 2025-11-08 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account information incorrect
Company: Bounce AI, Inc.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
This account is reporting inaccurately and unfairly as a charge-off. The balance is {$0.00}, the account is closed, and its marked both paid profit and loss and charge-off. A loan can not simultaneously be paid in full and charged off. 

Additionally, I recently received emails from a company called Bounce AI stating that the XXXX  account had a {$0.00} balance, then later sent another message claiming that was an error and that I still owe them. This demonstrates that the account has been sold or reassigned, and there is confusion about who, if anyone, owns it. 

Because of this conflicting information between XXXX  and Bounce AI, the reporting is inconsistent, unverifiable, and misleading under FCRA 607 ( b ) and 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ).

Im requesting permanent deletion of this tradeline from all credit bureaus ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and confirmation that it will not be re-reported by any subsequent company, since the ownership and balance are disputed and unverified.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-08 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Repossession — Account reinstatement or redemption after repossession
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
I was part of the Wells Fargo XXXX lawsuit, I had my car repossessed and i was never compensated. They tried sending me a couple check avlbout XXXX yrs ago XXXX like XXXX dollars then XXXX something and last XXXX something dollars which i never cashed cause they owe me for illegal repossession and they cashed on on my XXXX insurance. I looked on NC treasure for unclaimed money and seen they were trying to give a unclaimed payout of XXXX dollars with a weird name in address.Years ago when it all happened and i foumd out my car had been illegally repossessed and all the damage it had caused to my credit i tried to call them and got a run around. I even tried to contact the attorney general. I had been picked up by XXXX of the law firms when it was all happening but my email address and all email contact got breached. Please help me get to the bottom of this and the compensation i am owed. I havent been right credit or financially stable since.

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 2025-11-08 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC.
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
QWR and DVR to provide itemized description how {$10000.00} were calculated. Please provide exact amounts of unpaid past dues principal and interest and exact amounts of unpaid escrow past dues. Which months and years will be paid from {$10000.00}

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-08 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account information incorrect
Company: GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA
State: MO

Complaint narrative:
For several months, Goldman Sachs Bank USA XXXX Apple Card ) has been furnishing inaccurate credit information to the credit bureaus for my Apple Card account. Each time I contact them or file a dispute about a reporting error, they update my tradeline using my current balance instead of my closing statement balance. 

For example, my XX/XX/year> statement clearly shows a {$0.00} balance and {$0.00} minimum due, but on or about XX/XX/year>, Goldman Sachs reported a {$110.00} balance to Experian. This same issue has occurred repeatedly over multiple months, where they continue to report mid-cycle or current balances instead of accurate statement data. 

This pattern of incorrect furnishing has damaged my credit utilization ratios and overall score, despite my account being in good standing and fully paid by the statement closing date each month. 

I have provided Apple Card support with screenshots and documentation proving my statements were paid in full. Their representatives admit that Goldman Sachs handles bureau reporting, yet no correction has been made. Instead, Goldman Sachs keeps re-transmitting incorrect data, disregarding their obligations under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) and 1681s-2 ( b ) to maintain and correct accurate information.

The company was notified and failed to correct the record, violating its FCRA obligations for accuracy and reinvestigation. I am requesting immediate correction and confirmation of bureau updates.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-08 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Communication tactics — Frequent or repeated calls
Company: Williams & Fudge, Inc
State: AZ

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX voicemails were left but there was no mini Miranda read. There was no indication that this was an attempt to collect a debt.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-08 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: Experian Information Solutions Inc.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am addressing the issue with regarding the noncompliance. This is a violation of my privacy with my consumer report, since I control what is listed and what is not, that is considered identity theft. As per the Fair Credit Reporting Act, particularly under 15 U.S.C. 1681n, there exists statutory civil liability for willful noncompliance. This provision stipulates that any person who willfully fails to comply with consumer protection requirements may be liable to the affected consumer for damages, including potential punitive measures and reimbursement of legal costs. This underscores the importance of addressing and rectifying this matter promptly and responsibly.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-08 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Public record information inaccurate
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: HI

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint against Experian Information Solutions , Inc. for willful violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ) involving the unlawful reporting and verification of a public record.

Experian continues to report a public record on my consumer file US BKPT CT XXXX XXXX REF # XXXX claiming that it was verified with the data furnisher. This is a false and deceptive statement. The U.S. Bankruptcy Court does not furnish or verify consumer data to any credit reporting agency and has publicly stated that it does not participate in consumer reporting.

Experians so-called verification process is performed through third-party vendors such as XXXX XXXX XXXX Retrieval and other automated sources, not the original court. This practice has been ruled unlawful in multiple federal cases, including : Childress v. Experian Info. Sols., 790 F.3d 745 ( 7th Cir. 2015 ) Taylor v. Experian Info. Sols., 2015 WL 4254032 ( N.D. Cal. 2015 ) Henderson v. Experian Info. Sols., 2019 WL 3947627 ( E.D . La. 2019 ) By relying on an unauthorized vendor instead of the original source, Experian has violated : 1681e ( b ) Failure to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy ; 1681i ( a ) Failure to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation of disputed information ; and 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 2 ) Obtaining and reporting information from an entity that is not a data furnisher.

Experian was formally notified via certified mail of its violations in a Notice of Intent to Sue, yet it continues to publish the inaccurate record. This conduct is part of a documented pattern of Experians misuse of automated verification systems for public records, for which it has been sued and sanctioned repeatedly.

I request that the CFPB open an enforcement investigation into Experians handling of public-record data and compel the company to : Delete the unverifiable public record immediately ; Cease using third-party vendors to verify court data ; and Provide written confirmation of compliance within 10 business days.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-11-08 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: Paypal Holdings, Inc
State: AZ

Complaint narrative:
I had my phone and XXXX XXXX stolen from my home while I was out of the country. The thieves used my information to drain my PayPal of about {$5000.00}. I disputed the transactions and provided proof that I was not in XXXX. It was denied. I appealed. Denied again. Appealed again. Denied yet again. This has taken a long time and I have not received adequate support. They say because the money was in the account the transactions were not unauthorized. Im tired of going round and round with them.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation