vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-26 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Other features, terms, or problems — Problem with rewards from credit card
Company: AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY
State: WA

Complaint narrative:
Deceptive Benefit Practices : Amex Inconsistently Denies Airline Credit for Identical Transactions Complaint Narrative : " I am filing this formal complaint against American Express for Unfair and Deceptive Acts or Practices ( UDAAP ) regarding the arbitrary denial of the Airline Incidental Fee Credit benefit on my Platinum account.

The Core Issue : Inconsistent Application of Benefits I made two sets of identical transactions with the same airline for 'Seat Assignment ' fees. Amex 's handling of these identical charges was contradictory and misleading.

1. The Precedent ( Amex Confirmed Eligibility ) : Transaction Date : XX/XX/XXXX Outcome : Amex successfully reimbursed these charges on XX/XX/XXXX. 
Consumer Impact : This reimbursement served as a confirmation from Amex that this specific transaction type was eligible for the benefit. Relying on this precedent, I proceeded with further transactions.

2. The Violation ( Amex Denied Identical Charges ) : Transaction Date : XX/XX/XXXX Amounts : {$100.00} and {$100.00} ( Total : {$200.00} ) Outcome : Amex refused to reimburse these identical charges.

3. Amex 's Unfair Justification & Delay Tactics : When I contacted Amex support ( Chat transcripts attached ), they acknowledged the transactions were for the same service but blamed 'internal airline coding ' for the denial.

Information Asymmetry : As a consumer, I can not see or control backend merchant codes. I can only rely on the transaction description and Amex 's prior conduct. Penalizing a consumer for backend coding inconsistencies is an unfair practice.

Unreasonable Delay : Despite acknowledging my loyalty since XXXX, the supervisor refused to manually correct this obvious system error and told me to 'wait until XX/XX/XXXX ' for a potential review. This is an unacceptable delay for a simple error correction.

Conclusion : By reimbursing the first set of charges, Amex established a precedent. Denying the second set of identical charges constitutes a 'bait and switch ' tactic. I request Amex to honor the standard they set on XX/XX/XXXX and immediately issue a manual credit of {$200.00} for the charges on XX/XX/XXXX. ''

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-26 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Getting a credit card — Application denied
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: AL

Complaint narrative:
At the time of the credit application, my credit score was XXXX and utilizing under a 1 %. XXXX  prompted several pre-approval cards. Wells Fargo XXXX XXXX was one of them. Below is the reason why Wells Fargo DENIED credit. 

On XXXX XXXX  credit card application # XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, We are writing to inform you we are unable to approve the credit card account application for the following reasons : 1. Ratio of credit bureau trades with a balance greater than XXXX XXXX. Number of revolving bakcards reported by the credit bureau XX/XX/year>XXXX  We're resopnding to your concerns, Wells Fargo Case XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Aplication # ending in XXXX, After a thorough review of our records, we confirm our Underwriting Department has properly reviewed your credit application on XX/XX/year>. We have carefully reviewed the information provided to us and confirm our decision remain the same.

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 2026-01-26 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Opening an account — Unable to open an account
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
I am a victim of identity theft and am formally disputing the account from Bank Of America listed on my XXXX  report that I requested recently. I did NOT authorize or initiate this account. Pursuant to FCRA Section 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ), consumer reporting agencies must block information identified as resulting from identity theft within four business days of receipt. I have attached my official Identity Theft Report and proof of identity. I demand the immediate removal of this fraudulent information from my 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 2026-01-26 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive enough information to verify debt
Company: Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this second CFPB complaint against Portfolio Recovery Associates ( PRA ) because the company has failed to provide lawful validation or correct inaccurate reporting after multiple disputes. The statutory reinvestigation clock has expired. 
I disputed this account because PRA is reporting the same alleged {$730.00} debt under multiple account numbers and name variations, which is inaccurate, misleading, and prohibited under the Fair Credit Reporting Act and XXXX XXXX standards. One alleged debt can not legally be reported as multiple tradelines. 
PRA responded to my prior complaint by claiming it verified one account and attempting to shift responsibility to the credit bureaus. PRA failed to address the duplicative reporting and failed to provide competent validation. PRA also relied on generic business records and a form letter rather than lawful verification.

Under FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ), once a dispute is submitted through a credit bureau , PRA is required to conduct a reasonable investigation and provide accurate verification. PRA has still not produced : Proof of ownership and chain of assignment Itemized billing and payment history Reconciliation of multiple account numbers for the same debt Evidence that the balance is accurate and legally enforceable Under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), disputes must be resolved within 30 days. That period has expired. The clock does not reset simply because PRA chooses to issue incomplete responses or generic letters. 
Reporting the same alleged debt multiple times without proper validation is not a clerical error it is willful noncompliance with FCRA 607 ( b ), 611 ( a ), and 1681s-2 ( b ) and a violation of XXXX XXXX  reporting standards.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-26 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Threatened or suggested your credit would be damaged
Company: CL Holdings LLC
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
XX/XX/year>XXXX  Jefferson Capital System placed a collection of {$250.00} on my consumer report. i have looked into and have notice that the aren't the original collector i have reached out to them and know response. 



Help my rights are being violated, 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ) of the FDCPA requires debt collectors to cease collection activities and provide proper validation of the debt when requested in writing within 30 days of initial contact. The accounts Ive referenced are not 100 % accurate. Until you provide competent evidence that validates the debt including a signed agreement, full account history, and verification of your authority to collect you must cease all collection efforts and remove the information from my credit report.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-26 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem accessing account
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: SC

Complaint narrative:
I filed a dispute for fraud on my card of XXXX and so my card was cancelled and replaced. The 4-6 day period was giving to me to wait for my card but not that I would have ZERO access to my account! I called BOA and they told me that theres nothing the can do! They told me to drive to a local branch to draw it so I drove to 3 branchs that were all closed to the snow so I have no access to over {$1000.00} in my account. Wasnt informed this was a process, they had no fix for my REAL LIFE EMERGENCY! Im the head of my household so my wife doesnt have access either! I feel scammed by my own bank! BOA has now kept me and my wife home bound due to this issue during my PTO! I will be going all over social media about this issue as me and my family are now at the mercy of BOA to access my funds and that if absolutely UNACCEPTABLE! I thought Bank of America would be my best option which is why Ive been with them for years but this has shown how they treat loyal customers during an emergency! That is my money a they have 0 right to withhold it from me without preparation of the process or my approval- the fraud charges totaled XXXX and Im being stopped from drawing over XXXX.

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 2026-01-26 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Mobile or digital wallet
Issue: Trouble accessing funds in your mobile or digital wallet — 
Company: Paypal Holdings, Inc
State: OH

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint on behalf of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, a registered nonprofit, regarding our PayPal business account. 

Our nonprofit PayPal account is listed in good standing and can receive donations, but all attempts to withdraw funds electronically fail. When attempting withdrawals to our verified bank account or linked debit card, the accounts are automatically unlinked and transfers do not occur. 

PayPal representatives repeatedly stated that our bank was denying the ACH transfers, but our bank confirmed no ACH attempts were received and PayPal confirmed no trace IDs exist, meaning PayPal never transmitted the withdrawals. 

We requested an explanation for why electronic withdrawals are blocked, an ACH trace ID for failed transfers, and a formal internal review of our withdrawal eligibility. PayPal did not provide any of this information, and a previous representative who promised to submit a ticket never did so. The current support team stated there is no escalation path. 

These actions ( or inactions ) prevent access to our nonprofit funds while donations continue to be received, and there is no internal process offered to resolve the issue. 

The only resolution PayPal has suggested is to open a new bank account, which is not feasible for a small nonprofit and would likely not resolve the issue, as this appears to be an account-level restriction on PayPals backend.

I spoke with representatives twice in XX/XX/year> and four times in XX/XX/year>XXXX  regarding this issue. On XX/XX/year>, I was promised escalation, a ticket submission, a formal review, and that I would hear back within about 72 hours, but when I called back on XX/XX/year>, the representative said no ticket exists and refused to escalate the matter.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-26 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was already discharged in bankruptcy and is no longer owed
Company: Designed Receivable Solutions, Inc.
State: AL

Complaint narrative:
THANK YOU FOR RESPONDING BUT YOU FURTHER VALIDATED MY COMPLAINT IN YOUR RESPONSE WHICH YOU CLOSED SO I HAD TO OPEN A NEW COMPLAINT AGAINST YOUR COMPANY. THE DEBT YOU ARE TRYING TO COLLECT IS FROM XX/XX/2019. MEDICAL DEBT HAS A STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS OF 6 YEARS IN THE STATE OF ALABAMA WHICH YOU FAILED TO GIVE ME THE LEGAL DISCLAIMER THAT BECAUSE OF THE AGE OF THE DEBT I AM NO LONGER RESPONSIBLE BY LAW TO MAKE A PAYMENT. PLEASE CEASE ALL COLLECTION ACTIVITES INCLUDING CREDIT REPORTING FOR THIS UNLAW DEBT YOU ARE TRYING TO COLLECT. PLEASE SEE 1006.26 Collection of time-barred debts.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-26 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — Store credit card
Issue: Advertising and marketing, including promotional offers — Confusing or misleading advertising about the credit card
Company: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL
State: OK

Complaint narrative:
XXXX Bank XXXX Ashley Furniture XXXX Credit card XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX I'm writing to formally lodge a complaint against XXXX bank regarding what I believe to be predatory and deceptive lending practices involving their deferred interest promotions. 

I opened a credit account with Synchrony Bank/Ashley Furniture under the assumption that I would be able to pay off the balance within the promotional period to avoid interest.

I had been paying them an amount of {$200.00} per month prior to the end of the promotional period and only had a balance remaining of {$1700.00}.

Unfortunately, due to unforeseen circumstances, I missed the deadline of the period by a few days. As a result, Synchrony retroactively applied an exorbitant interest rate of 34.99 % on the ORIGINAL balance. When they did this, my balance went from {$1700.00} to {$4500.00}. Shocked and sickened by the amount of interest they charged literally overnight, I contacted them and asked them for help with this they said there was nothing they could do.

This rate is far higher than typical market standards, and I believe this practice borders on abusive. It is especially concerning that many consumers, like myself, may not fully understand the consequences of deferred interest terms until it's too late. I also believe the magnitude of the interest applied was not clearly disclosed in a accessible or transparent manner since they are charging interest on the interest they've already charged me. 

The financial hardship caused by this kind of retroactive interest application is significant and disproportionate.

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 2026-01-26 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Other features, terms, or problems — Add-on products and services
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint due to ongoing unreasonable delay and an impossible documentation requirement imposed by XXXX in connection with a covered claim. 
My XXXX XXXX television stopped working in XX/XX/year>. The TV powers on but has no picture/backlight and is non-functional. I promptly filed a claim and have complied with every request made by XXXX. 
XXXX initially indicated that a remote or limited assessment would be sufficient. After I complied, XXXX changed its requirements and began demanding a hands-on written repair estimate from a XXXX-authorized repair provider. 
I have now had a XXXX repair provider come to my home. The authorized technician performed a hands-on, in-home inspection and confirmed that the television does not work. 
However, XXXX is now insisting on a written repair estimate that can only be produced if : The XXXX wall-mounted TV is removed from the wall, Transported over 30 minutes away to a service facility, and Subjected to additional off-site diagnostic testing. 
This requirement is unreasonable and unnecessary. The television is already confirmed to be non-functional by a XXXX service provider. The only reason XXXX is demanding off-site transport is to determine whether repair or replacement is cheaper, despite the fact that the TV does not function at all. 
Requiring removal, transport, and off-site diagnosis places me under undue financial hardship. I am currently on XXXX leave from work with no income, and I can not afford the cost to remove, transport, and test this television. XXXX is effectively requiring me to spend significant out-of-pocket funds to prove a failure that has already been confirmed. 
I have now been without a working television since XXXX, and XXXX continues to delay payment by imposing requirements that are financially impossible for me to meet. I am not refusing cooperation I have provided the maximum reasonable cooperation, including an authorized in-home inspection. 
XXXX  continued insistence on additional paid services constitutes a constructive denial of my claim. I am requesting CFPB assistance to require XXXX to either : Resolve the claim immediately based on the authorized in-home inspection already completed, or Issue a formal written denial instead of continuing to delay resolution through unattainable demands. 
This matter requires immediate action, as the delay has now extended for months and continues to cause financial and personal hardship.

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 2026-01-26 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX, at approximately XXXX XXXX., I attempted to withdraw {$500.00} from an ATM located at XXXX XXXX in Oklahoma. The transaction was declined due to exceeding the withdrawal limit. A subsequent attempt at XXXXXXXX XXXX  to withdraw {$300.00} was also unsuccessful for the same reason. Because both transactions were declined, these funds should be reinstated under the billing error category, as the ATM failed to dispense the funds. However, my bank statements show that the {$500.00} withdrawal was deducted, while the {$300.00} transaction does not appear. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, I filed a dispute under claim number XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received an email stating that the disputed transaction involved a temporary deposit, which would be removed following an internal investigation. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, Capital One also denied my dispute regarding multiple charges resulting from an ATM dispense error. The underlying transaction occurred on XX/XX/XXXX, when the ATM at the casino failed to dispense cash for a one-time transaction. Despite the ATMs failure to dispense funds, my account was charged for multiple transactions dated XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX. 
Capital One applied a provisional credit on XX/XX/XXXX, but removed this credit on XX/XX/XXXX. I contacted Capital One to dispute these erroneous charges and requested a thorough investigation into the ATM malfunction, including a refund of all amounts withdrawn from my account without cash being dispensed. I provided detailed information about the incidents and explained that no cash was received. Nonetheless, Capital One declined my dispute, asserting that their investigation found the transactions to be valid. They also claimed that the requested additional information was not received, despite my having sent the documentation to XXXX on XXXX separate occasions.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-26 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account status incorrect
Company: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
JPMorgan Chase Bank , N.A . reported my credit card account as charged-off to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX I dispute this reporting because the company has not provided verifiable documentation supporting the charge-off status. 
I contacted the company in writing and requested proof, including billing statements and evidence of compliance with federal reporting and notice requirements. No verifiable documentation was provided, and the inaccurate charge-off information remains on my credit reports.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-26 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Domestic (US) money transfer
Issue: Other service problem — 
Company: Block, Inc.
State: ND

Complaint narrative:
Money sent to inactive account just sitting with no access

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-26 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Telecommunications debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: Harris & Harris, Ltd.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I RECENTLY SUBMITTED A COMPLAINT AGAINST THIS COMPANY AND ALL THEY PRESENTED ME WITH WERE 2 BILLING STATEMENTS AND A DEMAND FOR PAYMENT THROUGH A LETTER ON THEIR LETTERHEAD. NO TERMS AND CONDITIONS WERE PRESENTED TO ME WHICH THEY CLAIMED TO HAVE HAD IN THE CLOSING OF THEIR LAST COMPLAINT. THEY FAILED TO PRESENT ME WITH A CONTRACT BETWEEN ME AND COX WHERE I AGREED TO SERVICE AT THIS ADDRESS AND SIGNED OFF ON IT. THE INFORMATION THEY GAVE DOES NOT LEGALLY PROVE THEY SHOULD BE REQUESTING PAYMENT FROM ME. PLEASE SEE XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 2015. THIS IS NOT A DUPLICATE COMPLAINT BUT A NEW COMPLAINT AGAINST THIS COMPANY AS THEY DO NOT HAVE ALL ORIGINAL ACCOUNT LEVEL DOCUMENTAION FROM THE ORIGINAL CREDITOR.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-26 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Mobile or digital wallet
Issue: Fraud or scam — 
Company: Paypal Holdings, Inc
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
CFPB Complaint Description of What Happened I am filing this complaint regarding PayPals handling of a fraudulent transaction and its decision to hold me financially responsible despite clear evidence of a scam. 

On XX/XX/year>, I placed an order with an online merchant, XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  and paid through PayPal using my XXXX credit card. 

After more than one month with no delivery, the merchant claimed that the item had been delivered and provided the following tracking numbers : XXXX and XXXX. 

No delivery was ever made to my home. No postal worker visited my address, and my mailbox was empty. I contacted USPS directly, and USPS confirmed that these tracking numbers are not valid USPS tracking numbers and that no package was ever delivered to my address. 

Despite this confirmation, PayPal denied my dispute, relying solely on the sellers claim of delivery and ignoring the fact that the tracking numbers are invalid and not associated with USPS.

I then disputed the charge through my credit card issuer, XXXX, which reviewed the evidence and approved the chargeback, recognizing that this was a fraudulent transaction. 

After XXXX refunded the charge, PayPal placed a limitation on my account and is now demanding that I repay PayPal in order to remove the account lock. This effectively shifts the financial loss from a fraudulent merchant onto the consumer, even though there is no proof of delivery and USPS has confirmed that the tracking numbers are invalid.

I believe PayPal failed to properly investigate a clear case of seller fraud, disregarded evidence from USPS, and is unfairly pressuring me to repay funds by restricting access to my digital wallet account.

I am requesting that PayPal remove the account limitation, stop attempting to collect funds related to this fraudulent transaction, and review its dispute handling process in cases involving fake or invalid tracking numbers.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation