vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was result of identity theft
Company: Aldous & Associates, PLLC
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
Im filing a complaint against " ALDOUS AND ASSOCIATES " because they are reporting a collection account ( original creditor listed as Original CreditoXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) that is completely unverified. I never gave permission for them to report anything to the credit bureaus. After I was notified of this collection, I immediately requested proper validation. But they didnt provide anything, no signed agreement, no breakdown of the amount theyre claiming I owe, and no proof they have the legal right to collect this debt. Thats a direct violation of 12 CFR1006.34 ( b ) ( 5 ) of Regulation F, which says collectors must provide full debt verification when the consumer requests it. They also failed to give me a fair opportunity to dispute it, violating 12 CFR1006.34 ( c ) ( 4 ) ( i ). Even though they didnt validate the debt, they still went ahead and reported it to the credit reporting agencies. That is both deceptive and illegal under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, specifically 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 7 ) ( A ), which says they cant furnish information to credit bureaus without giving the proper disclosures and the chance to dispute it. They also violated 15U.S.C. 1681b, which says only accounts with a permissible purpose can be included in a consumer report. This account never had my permission or involvement, so theres no valid reason it should be reported under my name. This has caused serious and unnecessary harm to my credit and reputation. Im asking the CFPB to investigate this company and require them to : Stop all credit reporting related to this unverified account. Delete this tradeline from all consumer reporting agencies ; Provide full documentation proving the debt is real, including a contract with my signature, proof of the original creditor, and proof theyre legally authorized to collect it. If this matter is not resolved, Im prepared to pursue legal action under 15 U.S.C.1681n and 1681o for willful and negligent noncompliance with the FCRA . Their refusal to follow federal law should not be ignored. Please help get this account removed from my report and make sure theyre held accountable for these violations.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 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: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX, I paid {$1400.00} to XXXX XXXX XXXX for professional private investigative services. The merchant failed to deliver services as contracted- they possessed critical investigative findings ( a death record for the subject I hired them to locate ) but never communicated this information to me. I only discovered this when the subject 's widow contacted me directly. I filed a chargeback dispute with Capital One in XX/XX/XXXX and provided extensive documentation proving service failure : - The merchant 's own report showing " DATES OF DEATH : XX/XX/XXXX '' in a clearly labeled section - Email and text message correspondence showing the merchant ignored multiple requests for refund - Evidence that my assigned contact was unlicensed and unaware of findings in her own report - Admission from merchant 's supervisor that findings were never communicated Capital One requested " Proof of Return/Cancellation '' and closed my dispute on XX/XX/XXXX when I could not provide this documentation. THIS IS THE WRONG DISPUTE CATEGORY. This was not a return of physical goods- this was a SERVICE DISPUTE for services not delivered as described. Capital One misclassified my dispute and applied requirements for product returns to a professional services failure case. When I spoke with a supervisor to explain this was a services dispute ( not a return ), they refused to reopen under the correct category. The correct dispute reason should have been " Services Not as Described '' or " Defective Services '' - NOT " Return/Cancellation. '' I provided overwhelming evidence that services were paid for but not properly delivered, the merchant had critical information and failed to communicate it, and the merchant ignored contractual obligations and multiple refund requests. Capital One closed the dispute on a technicality that doesn't apply to service disputes, effectively denying me the fraud protection I'm entitled to as a cardholder. I have been a customer for over 10 years and cancelled my account due to this mishandling. I am requesting that Capital One reopen my dispute under the correct category and review the evidence I provided showing the merchant 's failure to deliver contracted services.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Telecommunications debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: I.C. System, Inc.
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
I.C. System, Inc. is reporting a collection account as a new XXXX tradeline, despite documentation they provided showing the debt originated from a XXXX account in XXXX. The same debt was previously reported in XXXX under a different account number and has now reappeared with the same creditor and balance, without any clear linkage or explanation of continuity. I.C. System has not provided documentation supporting the current reporting as a new account or reconciling the prior reporting history. This creates a misleading representation of the debts timeline. I am requesting full documentation establishing continuity or deletion of the account due to inability to verify accurate reporting. When I called, they stated they only h ave the XXXX information on file and no other information is on file. ______________________________ I disputed a collection account reported by I.C. System, Inc. and provided documentation showing the debt was previously reported in XXXX and is now being reported again in XXXX as a new tradeline with the same creditor and balance. This creates a clear inconsistency in the reporting timeline. I have disputed 3 separate times, submitting evidence of these discrepancies. Despite this, XXXX verified the account without addressing or reconciling the conflicting history. XXXX has failed to conduct a reasonable investigation. I am requesting a proper reinvestigation or deletion due to failure to verify consistent and accurate reporting.

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 2026-04-23 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: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
Citi XXXX Account Number : XXXX I cancelled two device orders from the merchant Redmagic after purchasing with my Citi XXXX credit card ( see Exhibit C ). In both instances, the merchandise was returned, and the merchant has explicitly stated in writing that they will accept the chargebacks. However, Citibank has denied my dispute for one device ( Dispute Reference XXXX, see Exhibit C ) and are still processing the second dispute ( Dispute Reference XXXX ). I want Citibank to honor the chargebacks just as the merchant said they would in their correspondence to me. Claim 1 ( Appeal of Denied Dispute ) : {$840.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Order # XXXX ) Transaction Date : XX/XX/year> Dispute Reference : XXXX The Error : Citibank improperly reversed the conditional credit. The Evidence : See EXHIBIT A, B - Per the merchant 's explicit instructions, I refused the parcel on XX/XX/year> and the merchant confirmed it was in transit back to their original warehouse on XX/XX/year>. This is proof that I am no longer in possession of the merchandise, which was the reason stated for the denial of my dispute by Citibank. On XX/XX/year>, XXXX stated in writing : " Please rest assured that XXXX will not contest your bank-initiated chargeback, and we will accurately confirm the full sequence of events to your bank as you outlined. '' Claim 2 ( Statutory Notice for Pending Dispute ) : {$610.00} XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX ( Order # XXXX ) Transaction Date : XX/XX/year> Dispute Reference : XXXX The Error : I am invoking my 60-day FCBA right to withhold payment on this canceled and returned order. The Evidence : See EXHIBIT A - Per the merchants explicit instructions, I returned the parcel to their authorized facility in XXXX, TX on XX/XX/year>. See EXHIBIT B - The parcel arrived at their facility on XX/XX/year>. See EXHIBIT A - On XX/XX/year>, XXXX confirmed in writing : " We confirm that you have initiated a chargeback for the full amount for your order ( # XXXX ), and we have accepted it. ''

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 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: Electronic communications — Frequent or repeated messages
Company: CCS Financial Services, Inc.
State: NV

Complaint narrative:
I am receiving repeated and unwanted text messages from credit collection collection services regarding an alleged debt that I do not recognize. This account does not appear on my credit report, and I have not received any formal written notice or proper validation of the debt as required by law. Credit collection services has failed to provide documentation identifying the original creditor or proof that I am legally responsible for this debt. Despite this, they continue to contact me via text message, which I consider harassment.

Company public response: Company can't verify or dispute the facts in the complaint
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: Communication tactics — Frequent or repeated calls
Company: OneMain Finance Corporation
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
One Main has called me repeatedly ( typically XXXX times per week ). This is excessive, intrusive, and harassing. The most recent week of calls are : Date # of Calls XX/XX/year> ( XXXX ) XX/XX/year> ( XXXX ) XX/XX/year> ( XXXX ) XX/XX/year> ( XXXX ) XX/XX/year> ( XXXX ) XX/XX/year> ( XXXX ) XXXX phone calls in 7 days is beyond excessive and is harassment.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement — Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card
Company: AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
In XX/XX/year> I was contacted by a man claiming to be with XXXX XXXX and selling a stay at the hotel. I provided information including my credit card and driver 's license, being told I would not be charged until I agreed to everything. The man sent me an email from a suspicious email address, using a different company name, and terms which I did not like. At that time I told him I did not want to go through with the purchase and he was not authorized to charge my card ( this conversation was recorded ). He charged my credit card anyway. I disputed this, but Amex ruled against the dispute because the fraudster provided an unsigned paper receipt, and nothing more. Amex refused to listen to the recording or consider my evidence. I disputed this against, and the fraudster provided the same receipt, but with my signature forged. Amex did not provide an explanation or allow me to comment, but ruled in the fraudsters ' favor. At this time Amex was unable to provide a company name or address for the fraudster. I submitted a different kind of dispute because I had never received any kind of service for the fraudulent charge. Amex declined to review any of my evidence or listen to the recording. In XXXX this year, Amex ruled in the fraudsters ' favor, not providing me any evidence. Amex continues to be unable to provide a business name or address for this fraudster, has not provided the most recent evidence the fraudster provided, and refuses to look at my evidence. Amex acknowledged on the phone the account and charge looks like fraud, but has continued to allow this fraudster to charge Amex Cards and has continued to facilitate this fraud.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: I.C. System, Inc.
State: IA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint regarding inaccurate credit reporting and failure to properly investigate a disputed account. I disputed an account reported by IC System Inc on my credit report. During the investigation, the account was marked as verified, however the reporting contains clear inaccuracies and system errors. Specifically, the account includes multiple entries showing invalid date in the reporting history. Despite these obvious data integrity issues, the account continues to be reported as accurate and verified. Additionally, the account shows continuous monthly collection reporting from XXXX through XXXX with no payment activity or supporting documentation. The account status has not been meaningfully updated since XXXX, yet the balance continues to update in XXXX, which is inconsistent and misleading. This demonstrates that the account is not being properly maintained or validated.

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 2026-04-23 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: Klarna AB
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/year>, a transaction was made at XXXX totaling approximately XXXX using a Klarna XXXX XXXX card. On XX/XX/XXXX, a return for two items was initiated. The merchant ( XXXX ) received the items and issued two separate refunds on XX/XX/XXXX in the amounts of XXXX and XXXX ( totaling XXXX ). These funds were credited to the Klarna account on XX/XX/XXXX. As of XX/XX/year>, the XXXX credit has not been applied to the account balance, nor has it been returned to the original payment method. The following attempts were made to resolve this directly with the company : XX/XX/XXXX : Contacted support and opened an escalation. No follow-up or update was provided. XX/XX/XXXX : Followed up and was advised to file a formal complaint. No contact has been received since. XX/XX/XXXX : Requested a manager escalation. No contact has been received. Despite multiple calls and messages, the company has failed to release merchant-refunded funds that have been in their possession for nearly three weeks. The company has failed to provide any assistance, case updates, or a timeline for the resolution of this missing credit. Most importantly, Klarna 's own internal records ( as seen in my provided evidence ) confirm they received the funds but failed to apply them to the original payment source ( XXXX ending in XXXX ). Instead, Klarna diverted both refunds ( {$84.00} and {$93.00} ) to an unauthorized and unknown account ending in XXXX. I do not own an account ending in XXXX, and it was not used for this transaction. Klarnas interface explicitly admits they 'could n't match ' the refund to the original purchase, yet they proceeded to send my funds to this unknown account rather than contacting me or returning the funds to the source.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Debt or credit management — Debt settlement
Issue: Confusing or missing disclosures — 
Company: FREEDOM FINANCIAL NETWORK
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I said Im with freedom debt relief almost 2 years ago. They told me that at any time if I wasnt happy with the program, I can withdraw when I called to try to withdraw. They told me that they were gon na charge me fees, even though balances of credit debts had not been charged I have then removed any debt that was accredited there that I could but I still had an account that was already in use, but it told me that Ill be done paying it in a year when I called back, they told me I still had a year left because I had {$7000.00} in fees on a {$9000.00} balance.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive enough information to verify debt
Company: ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/year>, I contacted Midland Credit Management ( MCM ) to settle an account. MCM representatives stated the account had been referred to the law firm XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. However, upon contacting that law firm, they confirmed they have no record of the account and no active legal file. I returned to MCM to resolve the discrepancy and offered a good-faith settlement. MCM supervisors refused to accept payment or recall the file from the law firm that does not have it, effectively obstructing my ability to resolve the debt. During the escalation, the supervisor 's phone line became intentionally distorted and muted, preventing a professional resolution. Because MCM has failed to provide accurate information regarding who is currently servicing the debt and has refused a voluntary payment to settle the account, I am now withdrawing my previous offer. I am requesting that MCM recall any purported legal referral and settle this account in full for {$300.00} to resolve this administrative failure and the unprofessional conduct of their staff.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Telecommunications debt
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive enough information to verify debt
Company: Kriya Capital, LLC
State: MA

Complaint narrative:
On start XX/XX/XXXX I got a letter from Credence collecting company about debt {$1700.00} from XXXX I sent dispute ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX from Credence, reference ID XXXX ; they didnt give full informations about : for what that amount, which one services was counted, how long was provides that, the principal amount, interest, and any fees. I confirmed them it was from XXXX XXXX fraud and cramming charges.I reported XXXX police XXXX about that, I dispute and demand letter a lot of times to Credence & XXXX XXXX Executive Resolutions

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Problem with fraud alerts or security freezes — 
Company: LEXISNEXIS
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am writing to request a security freeze on my credit report in accordance with my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). This freeze is necessary as I am currently disputing inaccurate information on my credit file and want to ensure the security and accuracy of my report during this process.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 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: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: AZ

Complaint narrative:
CITI BANK DISPUTE TIMELINE CASE XXXX Account Ending : XXXX | Amount : {$4700.00} XX/XX/XXXX FAILED REPAIR XX/XX/XXXX : Vehicle repair performed by XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX : Vehicle returned ; charged {$4700.00} XX/XX/XXXX : Merchant notified repair failed ( P20EE code persists ) XX/XX/XXXX : Vehicle returned to merchant for unresolved issue XX/XX/XXXX TIMELY DISPUTE FILED XX/XX/XXXX : Charge posts to Citi statement XX/XX/XXXX : Dispute opened with Citi ( within required timeframe ) XX/XX/XXXX : Conditional credit issued XX/XX/XXXX : Filed complaint with Attorney General against merchant ( in attachment ) XX/XX/XXXX : Citi requests additional documentation XXXX - XX/XX/XXXX DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED Documentation submitted via Citi portal and email XX/XX/XXXX : Citi reverses conditional credit without explanation or merchant evidence XX/XX/XXXX : Citi requests same documentation ( duplicate request ) XX/XX/XXXX REPEATED SUBMISSIONS XX/XX/XXXX : Citi closes dispute citing insufficient documentation XX/XX/XXXX : Documentation re-submitted via email ( per Citi instructions ) XX/XX/XXXX : Full documentation re-submitted again after several phone calls requesting status or reason for duplicative documentation requests XX/XX/XXXX : Citi requests additional information already provided XX/XX/XXXX CONTRADICTORY HANDLING & DENIAL XXXX XXXX : Documentation re-submitted again ; templates completed XXXX XXXX : Citi denies dispute as untimely XXXX XXXX : Formal escalation submitted by me XXXX XXXX : Citi claims attachments can not be opened Current Status : Dispute marked closed in app despite ongoing requests for documentation KEY ISSUE SUMMARY Dispute was opened and acknowledged within required timeframe ( XX/XX/XXXX ) Documentation was submitted multiple times in full Citi issued repeated duplicate requests without confirming review Citi failed to provide merchant evidence or investigation findings Dispute was ultimately denied due to timing caused by Citis own delays CONCLUSION This record demonstrates continuous, timely compliance by the cardholder and a failure by Citi to properly process and evaluate submitted documentation before the dispute deadline expired.

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