Consumer complaint received 2025-12-01 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Struggling to pay your bill — Credit card company won't work with you while you're going through financial hardship
Company: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a new complaint because my previous CFPB complaint against Chase was marked closed after Chase responded, but the underlying problem has not been resolved and my situation is now more urgent.I am providing an urgent update following my call today to Chase XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) as directed by Chase 's executive office response to my original complaint.Refer to closed complaint XXXX. 
I called XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. provided complete details about XXXXXXXX XXXX approved hardship program that reduced my monthly payment. 

This directly contradicts the outdated credit bureau data Chase is using for their DTI calculation. The XXXX agent acknowledged receiving this information but provided no response and did not explain how this evidence factored into their decision. 
Unlike my original XX/XX/XXXX denial letter that cited " obligations too high relative to income, '' XXXX provided no written or verbal explanation for their denial, making it impossible for me to understand or address their specific concerns.When I requested to speak with a supervisor, the agent stated : " A supervisor will call you back '' " Supervisors don't have direct extensions '' " They don't do manual review '' If XXXX supervisors " don't do manual review, '' what authority do they possess that differs from front-line agents? How can Chase 's " XXXX XXXX  XXXX '' be considered " specialized '' if they explicitly state they can not manually assess individual circumstances? 
CHASE HAS MISREPRESENTED THEIR PROCESS TO CFPB : Chase 's executive office told CFPB that XXXX provides " specialized review '' for complex hardship situations. Today, XXXX explicitly stated they " don't do manual review. '' These statements are fundamentally contradictory and demonstrate that Chase has misled both me and the CFPB about their actual review capabilities and processes.I clearly stated that my current monthly debt obligations are significantly lower than what appears on credit reports : XXXX validation : Another major bank has already assessed my identical financial information and approved a hardship payment reduction Current budget : After essential expenses and my NEW ( reduced ) XXXX  payment, I have $ XXXX monthly discretionary income Recent payment : I made a {$350.00} payment to Chase to try and remain current while seeking resolution. 
THE URGENT TIMELINE PROBLEM : My full Chase payment was due XX/XX/XXXX and I wasn't able to make it.I can not sustain the full minimum payment long-term, which is precisely why I need the temporary hardship accommodation.Without immediate resolution, Chase is forcing me to choose between : Making an unsustainable payment that depletes resources needed for essential medical and living expenses. 
Becoming delinquent despite my ability to maintain $ XXXX monthly payments and good faith efforts to arrange reasonable accommodation. 
EVIDENCE OF BAD FAITH BY CHASE : False promises : Represented that XXXX provides " specialized review '' when they admittedly use identical automated processes Ignored material evidence : Refused to consider changed circumstances ( XXXX hardship approval ) No meaningful escalation : Supervisors allegedly can not conduct the manual review that specialized situations require. I was promised a call back within 48 hours, I didn't receive a call.

Discriminatory impact : Inflexible automated system effectively discriminates against elderly customers on fixed incomes whose circumstances don't fit standard DTI models. 
XXXX, using identical financial information, determined that : My hardship circumstances are legitimate and documented A reduced payment plan is appropriate and sustainable I qualify for temporary payment accommodation.Chase refuses to consider this validation from another major creditor and insists on using outdated automated calculations.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation