vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-07 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account — Transaction was not authorized
Company: Paypal Holdings, Inc
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
XXXX has been proven to use bots in skilled games that is suppose to be human vs human Ive deputed with PayPal over and over and been denied appealed and been denied provided prove and still denyed. Below are the 25 transactions totaling to {$470.00} that Im requesting be refunded. XXXX currently has a class action lawsuit against them in the XXXX XXXX XXXX. In another case {$49.00} XXXX dollar was awarded in judgement because company was committing fraud. Date : Amt : Transaction number : XX/XX/2026 {$15.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$20.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$15.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$8.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$5.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$10.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$30.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$15.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$20.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$50.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$40.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$35.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$10.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$10.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$10.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$15.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$15.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$10.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$30.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$20.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$10.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$30.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$20.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$15.00} XXXX XX/XX/2026 {$20.00} XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-07 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Private student loan
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem — Problem with personal statement of dispute
Company: MOHELA
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
During the federal student loan repayment transition period, my account was placed into the XXXX program, during which I understood that missed payments would not be reported as delinquent to credit bureaus. After the XXXX period ended, I did not immediately resume payments. This was due to confusion and lack of clarity around when payments were required to restart and what actions were needed to remain in good standing. As a result, my account was reported as delinquent, and negative information was added to my credit report. I have since taken steps to address my financial situation and am working to bring the account current and remain in good standing moving forward. However, I believe the transition out of the XXXX period was not clearly communicated, and I did not receive sufficient guidance or notification regarding the resumption of required payments and the consequences for my credit reporting. I am requesting : A review of how the transition from XXXX to active repayment was communicated Consideration of a goodwill adjustment or other relief to remove or reduce the negative credit reporting associated with this transition period Confirmation of any actions taken and updated reporting to the credit bureaus I am attempting to resolve this responsibly and would appreciate assistance in mitigating the credit impact tied to this transition period.

Company response to consumer: Untimely response
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-07 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem when making payments — Problem during payment process
Company: Bread Financial Holdings, Inc.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
The Comentiy Bank credit online auto payment processing system did not make the auto pay as requested resulting in misapplication of other payments and finance charges. Upon discovering that the auto pay was not made and having been assessed additional charges I made a payment to cover the specified balance due. The bank indicates that it applies payments to the lowest interest rate balance outstanding available instead of the oldest balance due by date. This application of the lowest APR outstanding debt was represented to me in through the message system, but I would not have had this happen if the system had made my monthly auto payment as properly set up. The message center made note that the auto pay was set up on XX/XX/XXXX, but that was only because I went into the system to double check that it was in place, which it was. Their response speaks to their systems inaccuracy and as have noticed through my research a pattern of errors in this regard. It would appear that Comenity 's systems regularly fail to authorize payments that have been scheduled by its customers. At best this is a system failure, at worst this is a systematic fraud committed against the consumers to earn additional fees and interest. I have provided an email acknowledgement indicating that the autopay scheduled for XX/XX/XXXX was properly scheduled on XX/XX/2026.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-07 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Gurstel Law Firm, P.C.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting a complaint regarding a collection account reported under my name that I do not recognize and have no knowledge of. This alleged debt is unverified and does not belong to me, yet I have been subjected to repeated and unwanted communications through multiple channels, including threats of legal action. This conduct is unacceptable, violates my rights as a consumer, and is causing significant emotional XXXX and disruption to my daily life.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-07 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem caused by your funds being low — Overdrafts and overdraft fees
Company: PNC Bank N.A.
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
While I was going through my transactions, I kept noticing that they were not in chronological order or posting in ( real time ) like my other accounts. I was made aware it was because I was opted in for overdraft protection, which only really activates when my gym membership hits my account usually on the first. That alone I could handle, as XXXX of the XXXX reoccurring transactions on this debit card. I decided to opt out of overdraft protection for my everyday one-time debit transactions because Id rather they decline so Ill pay them manually instead. Even though I opted out, my every day transactions are still getting processed high-to-low instead of real time, constantly putting me in overdraft. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received around {$65.00} from family to travel back home for the holiday. Today, XX/XX/XXXX XXXX am - {$14.00} in the negative from XXXX time debit card transactions from XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX. It feels predatory. When I went to PNC online banking to get clarification, they confirmed that I was opt-ed out of overdraft protection but told me that there is no way to opt out of high-to-low bank processing.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-07 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Communication tactics — You told them to stop contacting you, but they keep trying
Company: Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a complaint against Portfolio Recovery Associates ( PRA ) for inaccurate, misleading, and unlawful credit reporting in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). PRA previously reported this collection account as Closed, indicating they were no longer collecting and no longer furnishing updates. After the account was closed, PRA later furnished new activity to the credit bureaus that made the account appear reopened, reactivated, or updated in a way that is inconsistent with the prior closure. Under the FCRA, furnishers must report information that is accurate and not materially misleading. Courts have held : XXXX v. XXXX & XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ) Furnishers violate the FCRA when they report information that is incomplete or materially misleading. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ) Even technically accurate information can violate the FCRA if it creates a misleading impression. XXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ) Debt XXXX must have competent, reliable evidence before furnishing information to credit bureaus. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ) Furnishers and bureaus must conduct meaningful investigations and can not simply re-report inaccurate information. Once PRA marked the account Closed, they can not legally : change the status back to Open resume monthly reporting update balances or dates re-age the account furnish new derogatory information Doing so is inaccurate, misleading, and violates 15 U.S.C. 1681s2 ( a ). If PRA furnished new information after closing the account, this also constitutes a deceptive practice under the FDCPA : 15 U.S.C. 1692e prohibits false, deceptive, or misleading representations. 15 U.S.C. 1692f prohibits unfair or unconscionable collection practices. Reopening or updating a closed account creates the false impression that : the debt is active collection efforts have resumed the consumer made a new payment the delinquency date changed the account is currently being pursued This is misleading and unlawful. Requested CFPB Action I am requesting that the CFPB require PRA to : 1. Provide a full explanation of why a closed account was updated or appeared reopened. 2. Provide documentation showing the basis for any postclosure updates. 3. Correct or delete any inaccurate or misleading information. 4. Cease furnishing any further updates on this account. 5. Confirm compliance with FCRA 1681s2 and FDCPA 1692e and 1692f. I am requesting full deletion of the tradeline if PRA can not demonstrate lawful authority and accurate reporting. -- -

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-07 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: SOFI TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a complaint regarding SoFi Banks handling of a debit card fraud dispute involving phishing impersonation and subsequent reversal of provisional credit before a proper review was completed. On XX/XX/year>, I was the victim of a phishing scam impersonating XXXX account verification using XXXX XXXX. I believed I was completing account verification and did not intend to make any purchase or buy XXXX. XXXX debit card transactions were processed without my informed consent : {$980.00} ( XXXX ) and {$390.00} ( XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ). I reported the activity immediately, including confirming fraud in real time when prompted by SoFi, and contacted the bank within minutes. I also filed an FTC report ( Report # XXXX ). SoFi initially issued provisional credit for both transactions. On XX/XX/year>, SoFi denied the {$390.00} claim, stating that services were rendered. I requested documentation supporting this decision on XX/XX/XXXX and again on XX/XX/XXXX. I was told it would be provided within 1 to 2 business days, but it was not provided within that timeframe. On XX/XX/year>, SoFi both : Finally provided the requested documentation, and Reversed the provisional credit of {$390.00} from my account This occurred before I had a meaningful opportunity to review the evidence and respond. After reviewing the documentation, I submitted additional information explaining that this transaction resulted from phishing impersonation and was not knowingly authorized. The merchant evidence provided only confirms that cryptocurrency was delivered and does not address lack of intent, deception, or fraud. On XX/XX/year>, SoFi acknowledged my new information and reopened the claim for further investigation. This creates a procedural issue where : The claim was denied and funds were removed Documentation was delayed beyond the promised timeframe The case was reopened only after the funds were already taken The dispute has been treated as both closed and under active investigation Additionally, the merchant documentation references an email address that is not mine, which raises further concerns about authorization and identity. I am requesting that SoFi : Reevaluate this claim under fraud and phishing criteria rather than services rendered Address the failure to provide timely documentation before reversing funds Clarify how a claim can be both denied and under active investigation Restore the disputed funds while the investigation is ongoing This transaction was not a legitimate purchase but the result of deception through phishing impersonation, and the handling of this dispute has not followed a fair or consistent process.

Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-07 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Federal student loan servicing
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Problem with customer service
Company: MOHELA
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
I applied for XXXX XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX, in response to XXXX XXXX and its predatory practices. I also have never been able to get my transcripts or use my degree in a form of employment that would utilize the degree. Being guided by resources at the time I paid off my student loans in full, there are XXXX of them, originated as XXXX XXXX, currently XXXX, by or around XX/XX/XXXX. I have waited for the resolution of XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX until XXXX, I was never communicated about consolidation of the loan, never recieved information about the possible reimbursement/discharge of the loan. My XXXX XXXX XXXX from XXXX is still processing with no updates. I contacted XXXX/Mohela in these matters over the last week. I am recieving notifications that im not entitled to a refund, however, in my personal opinion, these actions go against the will of XXXX XXXX XXXX, in addition I was supposed to have recieved something from XXXX before the loans went to Mohela regarding the CFPB V NAVIENT case.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-07 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — Store credit card
Issue: Other features, terms, or problems — Other problem
Company: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL
State: WA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint regarding CareCredits failure to return an overpayment of {$730.00}. On XX/XX/year>, I was informed that a refund check for {$730.00} had been issued by mail. I did not receive that check. After waiting beyond the expected delivery timeframe, I contacted CareCredit and was told the check would be canceled and reissued. This process has now occurred multiple times. As of XX/XX/year>, more than 30 days after the initial issuance, I still had not received any refund. CareCredit representatives confirmed the check had been sent but were unable to provide tracking information and stated that refunds can only be sent through regular mail. I have now experienced XXXX failed refund attempts over a period exceeding 60 days. Each time, I was told to wait again, with no alternative solution offered. CareCredit has refused to provide a secure or trackable delivery method, and they have also stated they can not issue refunds electronically or provide confirmation documentation. Despite repeated requests, I have not received clear information regarding the status of the previously issued checks, including whether they were cashed or properly voided. This ongoing failure to return my funds in a reliable and timely manner is unacceptable.

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 2026-04-07 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Escrow, taxes, or insurance
Company: ARVEST BANK GROUP, INC.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
My father passed away in 2019. My family and I have been paying on the mortgage in his name since then. Our family is owed over {$3000.00} in escrow. My XXXX brother is a Successor of Interest on the account. I have jumped through hoops to become a Successor of Interest on the account, too. I now am but they are now stating since I was not the first Successor of Interest on the account they can not reissue the check in my name. I have had several calls with the company and absolutely feel they are dragging their feet to reissue a check in my name instead of my father 's. At one point, they stated they received my W9 and another call later they stated they hadn't received it yet. I am growing frustrated because every time I complete steps with them, something else comes up. Multiple times I was told I completed what was needed and now received a call that I was not the first Successor of Interest and now can not be issued the check in my name. Name of Company : Arvest Mortgage XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-07 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Fees or interest — Charged too much interest
Company: NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
I paid off my Navy Federal XXXX XXXX credit the previous month before the credit card was due and was charged {$10.00} of interest on the next bill. I was expecting a {$0.00} balance. I called Navy Federal on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX to resolve this issue. The representative ( XXXX? ) told me that since this was interest from a balance transfer, interest is accrued daily. I was not aware of this and this may have been some disclosure in the fine print online. I requested for a courtesy credit. She asked a manager and the request was denied. I then asked to speak with someone in executive leadership and I was transferred to XXXX XXXX not sure if he was an executive leader ). When I asked if he could assist with this issue as I had a hardship as a XXXX of a XXXX Veteran and could use the funds to help pay for gas, he seemed unconcerned and had no empathy for my situation. He said that Navy Federal had hardship programs for Veteran and their families. When I as if they had a program to assist with waiving, crediting or some type of relief to remove the interest, he said, " No ''. I am very disappointed in Navy Federal. Their customer support staff are not empathetic or truly care about their customers. It's all about money. I am also concerned if this interest was totally from the balance transfer as I also made purchases with this credit card. Please investigate to ensure I was not over charged in interest. Thank you!

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-07 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Closing an account — Funds not received from closed account
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I had a previous case here that was closed once Citibank answered a month ago XXXX. A lot of things have changed since, I was able to get in touch with an executive response unit agent case is XXXX. They reached out to me with a letter I will attach- saying I needed my fiance who was receiving direct deposits to reach out to his bank to submit a uniform indemnity agreement from bank to bank to pull the funds. My partner only had XXXX in the card pending direct deposit. The rest of the funds were mine. Including a FEDERAL tax refund under my name. Once his payroll bank attempted to submit the request Citibank asked for the received a message saying they could not honor it because account is closed. I will also attach that message that was sent to XXXX. Yesterday I received a letter In mail. Closing statement for XXXX, it shows my XXXX funds being withdrawn on XX/XX/XXXX and also his direct deposit shows withdrawn on same day as well XX/XX/XXXX. I will attach that. It has been impossible to get ahold of them now customer service says they cant see anything because account is closed and cant help. Havent heard back from Citi executives response unit either. Despite his payroll bank cooperating Citibank has been impossible to work with. And now the funds have been withdrawn and I have received no check nor any explanation. Its been 18 days since withdrawal.

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 2026-04-07 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Repossession — Account reinstatement or redemption after repossession
Company: BMW Financial Services NA, LLC
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/year> at approximately XXXXXXXX XXXX on XXXX XXXX, my vehicle was repossessed from a private residence within a private XXXX XXXX living community by XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX dispatched by XXXX XXXX XXXX on behalf of BMW Financial Services XXXX During the repossession, agents drove over grass and landscaped areas causing documented physical damage to the property of an uninvolved third party who has no connection to my loan. Agents engaged in aggressive and disruptive conduct including yelling at residents and using inappropriate language in the presence of at least four neighbors whose statements were recorded by responding police officers. Local police responded and filed a report. The property owner independently filed a separate police report for trespass and property damage. Video footage of the incident is preserved. A payment had been made just XXXX days prior to the repossession. When I contacted BMW Financial Services the following business day, I was told the decision to redeem rather than reinstate had been made, that it could not be appealed or reversed, and no explanation was provided. The payoff statement includes {$920.00} in charges I am disputing as fees arising from an unlawful repossession. A formal written dispute was sent to BMW Financial Services via XXXX Priority Overnight citing breach of the peace under UCC Section 9-609.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-07 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Getting a credit card — Card opened without my consent or knowledge
Company: FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF OMAHA
State: IN

Complaint narrative:
My information was heisted and this accounts are fraudulent and do not belong to me. I would like these accounts completely removed from all three credit bureaus on my credit report.

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