vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2025-12-01 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: U.S. BANCORP
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
Flight Date : XX/XX/year> Amount Paid : {$510.00} + XXXX points ( US Bank Rewards ) Transaction Details : Purchase of XXXX full fare international tickets for XXXX adults and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. 

Issue : Called customer of US Bank Travel Center on XX/XX/year>, and they refused to issue a ticket with a seat for my child, despite the fact that I purchased three full-price tickets. Although I have called customer service, the issue remains unresolved.

Detailed issue : I purchased international flights via the US Bank Travel Center using a combination of rewards points and cash. I specifically bought XXXX adult seats and XXXX child seat, paying XXXX full fares. My confirmation email clearly indicates payment for three passengers ( Base fare x3 and Taxes/Fees x3 see Attachment XXXX  ). 

However, the customer service representative refused to assign a seat for my child, incorrectly stating that the ticket was booked for two adults only. When I asked the agent to check the current price for three adults on that same flight to verify the cost, he claimed he could not find the flight. I subsequently booked a dummy reservation for three adults to prove to him that the price I paid matches the cost of three seats ( see Attachment XXXX XXXX. 

The booking website was unclear regarding whether the XXXX would be assigned a seat or classified as a XXXX XXXX However, since we were charged the full adult fare, we proceeded with the understanding that a seat was reserved for our child.

I have contacted the airline directly, and they confirmed that a full-fare ticket entitles the passenger to a seat. They also noted that if a child is traveling on a lap, the charge is typically only 10 % of the full ticket price. The airline indicated that the US Bank Center failed to request a ticket with a seat assignment, despite charging us the full amount.

Customer service stated they would escalate this issue and return my call within two days, but I have not received a response.

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 2025-12-01 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Information belongs to someone else
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
My name is XXXX XXXX XXXX this complaint is not made in error neither is it being made by a third party

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2025-12-01 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Information belongs to someone else
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I recently received a copy of my credit report, and I noticed some accounts on my consumer report that should not be on there. Please help me to validate the misreporting on my credit report and remove the inaccurate information found in my credit file.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2025-12-01 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Information belongs to someone else
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I recently received a copy of my credit report, and I noticed some accounts on my consumer report that should not be on there. Please help me to validate the misreporting on my credit report and remove the inaccurate information found in my credit file.

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 2025-12-01 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Business Processing Solutions, LLC
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  issued a ticket to a vehicle that I do not own anymore. Release of liability was already sent to DMV before ticket from XXXX XXXX  issued a ticket.

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 2025-12-01 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: MD

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint because Bank of America did not properly investigate my debit card dispute for a {$150.00} transaction with XXXX. My claim number is XXXX. 
I provided extensive documentation showing that the flowers delivered were not as described, of very poor quality, and did not match the advertised product I paid for. The merchant refused to provide a refund or resolution. I submitted photos, screenshots, written communications, and examples of similar complaints from other customers. 
Despite this, Bank of America denied my dispute and stated that the transaction is valid because the merchant provided documentation. The documentation the merchant submitted contained only policies, general explanations, and a single photo of the poor-quality bouquet. None of it proved that the product matched what I ordered. 
Bank of America did not review my evidence, did not compare the advertised bouquet to the delivered bouquet, and did not evaluate the misrepresentation or quality issues. The denial decision relied entirely on the merchants self-written explanation and policies, which are not proof of proper fulfillment and do not address the misrepresentation. 
Additional information about the banks denial : The denial package provided by Bank of America shows that the bank accepted the merchants explanation without question. The packet contained no comparison photos, no proof the product matched what I paid for, and no analysis of my evidence. Instead, it included substitution policies and boilerplate terms that do not resolve the issue. This does not meet federal requirements for a proper, good-faith investigation of a product-not-as-described 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 monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2025-12-01 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: Law Office of Michael J. Scott, PC
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint because Scott & Associates violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) and the California Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act after I submitted a timely written dispute and request for validation. 

On XX/XX/year>, Scott & Associates sent me an initial debt collection notice regarding XXXX XXXX. XXXX, stating that I had until XX/XX/year> to dispute the alleged debt. The letter explicitly stated that I could dispute by mail or electronically at XXXX. 

On XX/XX/year>, I submitted a written dispute and debt validation request to the email address they provided. This request included a formal validation demand under FDCPA 1692g ( b ) and the Rosenthal Act. I have documentation of this email. 

Under federal and state law, once a collector receives a written dispute, they must cease all collection activity until they provide validation. 

Instead of providing validation, Scott & Associates sent me another letter dated XX/XX/year>, stating that their office is in the process of preparing a lawsuit against me. This is continued collection activity after a dispute, which is prohibited. No validation was ever provided. 

These actions violate : FDCPA 1692g ( b ) continuing collection activity during a dispute FDCPA 1692e ( 5 ) threatening legal action without validating the debt Rosenthal Act ( Cal. Civ. Code 1788.17, 1788.14 ) mirroring FDCPA requirements and prohibiting false threats Failure to honor their own written dispute instructions, despite offering email dispute as an official channel I am requesting that the CFPB investigate these violations and require Scott & Associates and XXXX XXXX XXXX to : 1. Cease all collection activity until proper validation is provided 2. Provide full and complete validation as required by law 3. Cease sending misleading or threatening letters 4. Correct any adverse reporting, if applicable 5. Confirm compliance with federal and state collection laws I am attaching : The XX/XX/year> initial notice My XX/XX/year> dispute email The XX/XX/year> threat letter My follow-up violation notice Thank you for your assistance.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-12-01 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
I reviewed my XXXX credit report dated XX/XX/year> and found multiple accounts reporting inaccurate, incomplete, or conflicting information. I disputed these items with XXXX, but the accounts remain without proper correction or verification. 

The following issues occurred : Experian continued reporting several charge-offs and collections without providing any method of verification after my disputes. 
Balances, status dates, and past-due amounts are inconsistent, and some accounts appear to have been re-aged, which is prohibited under the FCRA. 
Some accounts show conflicting dates of first delinquency, status update dates, and last payment dates, making the reporting unreliable. 
Several accounts continue to show negative information even after prior disputes, which means Experian did not conduct a reasonable reinvestigation. 
Some accounts were previously marked as disputed, yet Experian continued reporting them without resolving the inaccuracies. 

The accounts with issues include : XXXX ( charged-off, inconsistent dates, and unverifiable balance of {$2200.00} ) XXXX XXXX XXXX ( {$3600.00}, conflicting dates and early charge-off reporting ) XXXX XXXX XXXX ( marked charged-off XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$0.00} and inconsistent status dates ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( multiple conflicting dates, past-due listed as {$28000.00}, and apparent re-aging ) WFBNA/Wells Fargo Card ( inconsistent reporting across several years ) XXXX XXXX XXXX ( collection account added in XXXX with inconsistent date reporting ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX separate accounts with conflicting update dates and unverifiable balances of {$3000.00} and {$4000.00} ) XXXX XXXX ( collection account continued to report negative information after dispute ) I am asking the CFPB to require XXXX and the data furnishers to properly verify each account with original documentation. If they can not verify all details accurately, the accounts should be removed as required under the FCRA. 

These inaccuracies are harming my credit, and the reporting companies have not corrected the errors despite disputes.

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 2025-12-01 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Other features, terms, or problems — Problem with cash advances
Company: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint regarding Chase, the issuer of my Ink Unlimited credit card. Chase incorrectly processed XXXX online retail purchases as cash advances, resulting in improper cash-advance fees being charged to my account. 

I was charged : {$15.00} on XX/XX/year> {$15.00} on XX/XX/year> {$15.00} on XX/XX/year> ( XXXX separate fees on this date ) These purchases were standard online transactions, not cash advances. After discovering the issue, I contacted Chase and informed them that the transactions were coded incorrectly. Despite this, Chase refused to reverse the fees, correct the transaction coding, or conduct a proper investigation into why normal purchases were processed as cash advances. 

As a result, I have been unfairly charged {$60.00} in cash-advance fees that should not apply. I am requesting that the CFPB review this matter and require Chase to : Refund all improper fees, Correct the transaction coding, and Ensure this issue does not continue to occur. 

Thank you for your assistance.

Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2025-12-01 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Improper use of your report — Credit inquiries on your report that you don't recognize
Company: UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION
State: DE

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint to dispute all unauthorized and improper hard inquiries placed on my credit report I did not apply for credit or authorize a hard pull or soft pull of my credit report with the companies listed below on the dates provided. These unauthorized hard inquiries violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) by constituting an improper use of my consumer report. 

The specific unauthorized inquiries I am disputing are : XXXX. XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX  XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX  on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX  XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX  XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX on XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX & XXXX XXXX  on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX  on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX  on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX On XX/XX/XXXX I formally request that the companies listed above investigate this matter, confirm that I did not authorize these credit applications, and immediately notify all three Credit Reporting Agencies ( XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX  to delete these hard inquiries from my credit file.

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 2025-12-01 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Improper use of your report — Credit inquiries on your report that you don't recognize
Company: Bread Financial Holdings, Inc.
State: DE

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint to dispute all unauthorized and improper hard inquiries placed on my credit report I did not apply for credit or authorize a hard pull or soft pull of my credit report with the companies listed below on the dates provided. These unauthorized hard inquiries violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) by constituting an improper use of my consumer report. 

The specific unauthorized inquiries I am disputing are : XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX  XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX  XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX  on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX on XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX On XX/XX/XXXX I formally request that the companies listed above investigate this matter, confirm that I did not authorize these credit applications, and immediately notify all three Credit Reporting Agencies ( XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX  to delete these hard inquiries from my credit file.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2025-12-01 00:00:00
Product: Prepaid card — Payroll card
Issue: Problem with a purchase or transfer — Charged for a purchase or transfer you did not make with the card
Company: U.S. BANCORP
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
The purchase was made on XX/XX/year> for XXXX at XXXX and I have contacted their supervisor when it charged on two of my cards.

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 2025-12-01 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: SC

Complaint narrative:
Hello, I am following up regarding my previous dispute, as the inaccurate information remains on my credit report. I am requesting once again that the necessary corrections be made in compliance with the FCRA. The credit bureau is legally required to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation and ensure maximum possible accuracy. Please provide confirmation of the correction and an updated credit report once the issue has been resolved. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance Owed : {$0.00} XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance Owed : {$15000.00} XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance Owed : {$0.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance Owed : {$0.00} XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance Owed : {$13000.00}

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 2025-12-01 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Improper use of your report — Reporting company used your report improperly
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
To Whom It May Concern I am submitting this complaint because my credit report still contains inaccurate and unverified items even after disputes. These errors violate my rights under the FCRA and continue to harm me. I am requesting CFPB intervention to enforce compliance and require full verification or deletion. 

ACCOUNT XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$140.00} Late Payment This account reflects an inaccurate late payment that has never been verified with documentation. Reporting unproven delinquency violates FCRA 607 ( B ), FCRA 602 ( A ), and FCRA 611 ( A ). I request immediate correction.

LAWS : FCRA 602 ( A ), FCRA 607 ( B ), FCRA 611 ( A ), FCRA 609 ( A ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$1000.00} Late Payment The late payment information listed for this account is inaccurate because I have never been late. No evidence has been provided to support the derogatory data, violating FCRA 602 ( A ), 607 ( B ), 609 ( A ) ( 1 ) ( A ), and 611 ( A ). I request correction of the payment history.

LAWS : FCRA 602 ( A ), FCRA 607 ( B ), FCRA 611 ( A ), FCRA 609 ( A ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX * * Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$150.00} Collection I have no knowledge of this account and no proof of any contractual obligation has been produced. Reporting a debt without proper validation violates FCRA 609 ( A ) ( 1 ) ( A ), 602 ( A ), 607 ( B ), and 611 ( A ). This item must be deleted.

LAWS : FCRA 602 ( A ), FCRA 607 ( B ), FCRA 611 ( A ), FCRA 609 ( A ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) INQUIRY XXXX  XX/XX/XXXX This inquiry is unauthorized and unverifiable under FCRA 604 ( A ) ( 2 ). Remove immediately.

LAWS : FCRA 604 ( A ) ( 2 ), FCRA 607 ( B ) XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX This inquiry is unauthorized and unverifiable. Remove immediately. 
LAWS : FCRA 604 ( A ) ( 2 ), FCRA 607 ( B ).

I request full investigation and removal of any item that can not be verified with documented proof. Thank you for your attention.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2025-12-01 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — Foreclosure
Company: Fay Servicing, LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
We submitted multiple complete loss-mitigation applications. The servicer denied the first one without providing a written explanation, violating 12 CFR 1024.41 ( d ). After we corrected and resubmitted our income, the servicer denied the second application, then instructed us to submit a third application, which we did.

While our third application was still under review, the servicer filed foreclosure on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX issuing any written decision. This violates 12 CFR 1024.41 ( f ) ( 2 ) and 1024.41 ( g ) ( dual-tracking prohibition ). 

We then received the written loss-mitigation decision on XX/XX/XXXX, which offered only a Deed-in-Lieu. That letter gave us until XX/XX/XXXX to respond, yet foreclosure had already been filed 11 days earlier. This contradicts both federal law and the servicers own written timeline. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, our account XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ) confirmed that foreclosure had been filed on XX/XX/XXXX. Shortly after, our mortgage statement showed foreclosure attorney fees, foreclosure inspection fees, and a property inspection fee dated XX/XX/XXXX, although no inspection was ever performed. 

The servicer then told us we are no longer eligible for a modification because the loan is already in foreclosureeven though they caused the foreclosure by violating Regulation X. This removed our ability to receive the assistance we otherwise qualified for. 

Because of these violations, we were forced to list the property for sale on XX/XX/year>. We request that CFPB require the servicer to pause or reverse the foreclosure, and either provide a proper modification review or allow us time to complete the sale.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-12-01 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account status incorrect
Company: Self Financial Inc.
State: AL

Complaint narrative:
In accordance with the fair credit reporting act this creditor has violated my rights under 15 USC 1681 section 602. States I have the right to privacy 15 USC 1681 section 604 a section 2 it also states a consumer reporting agency can not furnish an account without my written instructions under 15 USC 1666B a creditor may not treat a payment on a credit card account under an open end consumer credit plan as late for any purpose this account is closed

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2025-12-01 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Improper use of your report — Reporting company used your report improperly
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
You have reported inaccurate and unauthorized accounts on my credit report, which is a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S. Code 1681i ) requiring a proper reinvestigation of disputed items, and 1681e ( b ), which mandates maximum possible accuracy. These false entries are damaging and unjust, especially since Ive never opened or authorized these accounts. If you fail to investigate and correct this, I may pursue legal action under the FCRA and FDCPA ( 15 U.S. Code 1692e ) for deceptive and misleading reporting.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief