vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-03 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was result of identity theft
Company: Velocity Portfolio Group
State: OR

Complaint narrative:
I am the victim of identity theft involving an alleged XXXX XXXX lease-to-own account ( Account No. XXXX ). I timely disputed this account directly with XXXX XXXX and provided formal identity-theft documentation, including a Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) Identity Theft Report and a Police Report, clearly establishing that this account was opened fraudulently and does not belong to me. 

Despite receiving this documentation, XXXX XXXX failed to comply with the law. They ignored my identity-theft reports and repeatedly failed to provide the documentation I lawfully requested to substantiate the alleged debt. Specifically, XXXX XXXX never produced : A signed or executed lease agreement Any valid proof of identity verification Any proof of delivery or possession of leased goods Any sworn or notarized custodian-of-records affidavit Any documentation showing I authorized, used, or benefited from the alleged lease Instead, Progressive Leasing improperly relied on internal system logs and emails, which do not constitute lawful verification of a debt arising from identity theft. 

On or about XX/XX/year>, I received notice that XXXX XXXX sold or assigned this disputed, fraudulent account to Velocity Investments , LLC, a third-party debt collector. This transfer occurred after XXXX XXXX had actual notice that the account was identity theft and unresolved. 

Velocity Investments is now attempting to service or collect on an account that was already disputed as identity theft prior to assignment. As a result, Velocity Investments is on actual notice of fraud and can not lawfully treat this account as valid. 

Any attempt by Velocity Investments to collect, sell, assign, or report this account to consumer reporting agencies without first resolving the identity-theft dispute constitutes willful and knowing violations of federal consumer protection laws, including the FDCPA and FCRA. 

This complaint is submitted to place Velocity Investments on record that the burden is entirely on them to prove this account is not identity theft before taking any action. Silence, boilerplate responses, or reliance on XXXX XXXX defective records are legally insufficient.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-03 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
State: OH

Complaint narrative:
On or about XX/XX/year>, I reported unauthorized debit card transactions on my checking account with Navy Federal Credit Union. I did not authorize, initiate, or participate in the disputed transactions and retained possession of my debit card at all times. 

XXXX XXXX investigated the claims and denied them. I appealed the decision and requested second review. On XX/XX/year>, XXXX XXXX issued multiple written denial letters for separate portions of the disputed activity, including claim amounts of {$10000.00}, {$8400.00}, {$7600.00}, and {$6800.00}. Each denial letter used identical language stating that no error occurred and that I was responsible for the transactions, without providing individualized transaction-level findings or evidence supporting authorization. 

XXXX XXXX later stated that the claims were denied because it determined that I authorized and/or participated in the activity. However, XXXX XXXX has not provided transaction-specific evidence demonstrating authorization, such as confirmation of PIN usage, device or IP matching, merchant affidavits, or other documentation explaining how authorization was established for each disputed transaction. 

I also requested copies of my own secure-message communications submitted during the dispute and appeal process. XXXX XXXX responded in writing that secure messages are automatically purged after XXXX days and are permanently unavailable. As a result, XXXX XXXX can not provide my dispute communications that were relied upon during the investigation and decision-making process. 

I am concerned that XXXX XXXX denied multiple debit card fraud claims using a broad authorization determination, failed to preserve or provide member dispute communications, and did not conduct or document an individualized investigation for unauthorized electronic fund transfer claims. I am requesting regulatory review and appropriate corrective action.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-03 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Lease
Issue: Managing the loan or lease — Billing problem
Company: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint against Mazda Financial Services for inaccurate and improper credit reporting related to my 2023 XXXX XXXX lease. 

My lease payment was due on XX/XX/XXXX. Due to documented family health issues, I contacted Mazda Financial Services and requested a three-month lease extension. On XX/XX/XXXX, Mazda Financial Services approved and accepted this extension. 

My payment was processed and accepted on the XXXX day, which was a business day. Prior to submitting payment, I was explicitly assured by a Mazda Financial Services representative that my account was in good standing and that no late payment would be reported. 

Despite accepting both the payment and the lease extension, Mazda Financial Services later reported my account as late to the credit bureaus. As a direct result, my XXXX XXXX dropped by XXXX points. 

It is unreasonable and inaccurate for Mazda Financial Services to approve an extension, accept a payment within the allowable timeframe, and then report the account as delinquent. This reporting does not reflect the true status of the account and has caused measurable harm to my credit.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-03 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.
State: DE

Complaint narrative:
A debt collection company has been repeatedly contacting me by phone regarding an alleged debt that is several years old. The company calls twice daily, typically each morning around XXXX a.m., often from XXXX different phone numbers. The callers do not leave voicemail messages. 

The frequency, timing, and pattern of these calls appear designed to pressure and harass rather than to provide lawful notice. 

On or around XX/XX/year>, I requested written validation of the alleged debt pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). To date, the company has not provided documentation verifying the amount of the debt, the original creditor, proof of legal authority to collect, or confirmation that the debt is within the applicable statute of limitations. 

Despite the lack of validation, the company continues to place repeated phone calls. I am requesting that the company be required to comply with federal law, cease unlawful collection practices, and provide proper written validation of the alleged debt.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-03 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was result of identity theft
Company: ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
XXXX XXXX is falsely reporting on my credit. I have never had any accounts with them. Per my research XXXX XXXX is a debt collector. They are falsely reporting on my credit!! Account number is XXXX is falsely reporting to my credit file and is against my rights and fair credit act. Under XXXX XXXX XXXX - XXXX of investigation consumer report ; you are in violation.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-03 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Escrow, taxes, or insurance
Company: SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I am disputing an inaccurate payoff balance for my refinance. The servicer ( SPS ) is failing to credit a {$11000.00} escrow balance transferred from my previous lender ( XXXX XXXX ). SPS falsely claims {$9800.00} was paid to the county in XX/XX/year>, but my official XXXX XXXX tax records prove zero dollars were paid on that date. SPS is now charging me interest on an 'advance ' that resulted from their own accounting error.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-03 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: CL Holdings LLC
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
Jefferson Capital Systems LLC is reporting inaccurate and unverifiable information on my credit report. The company is incorrectly reporting itself as the original creditor, even though it is a debt buyer and not the original creditor.

The account is being reported without proper validation, including proof of ownership, proof of assignment, a complete itemized accounting of the balance, and the correct date of first delinquency.

Because the information being furnished is inaccurate and unverifiable, this constitutes a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), which requires data furnishers to report information that is accurate, complete, and verifiable.

I am requesting that Jefferson Capital Systems LLC delete this account from my credit report.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-03 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Escrow, taxes, or insurance
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: ME

Complaint narrative:
Every year my escrow account is in shortage. Even tho this is set up as an automated payment

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 2026-02-03 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Other features, terms, or problems — Problem with customer service
Company: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
My wife and I got married last year and opened our first joint credit card in 2026. We are both existing Capital One clients with excellent XXXX credit scores and existing credit cards and bank accounts. 

I am unable to access the Capital One online banking website to manage this card. My wife is also unable to add me as an account manager, as Capital One is prohibiting this access to our joint account.

For customer support, Capital One provides only a phone number and an AI agent. We've called over five times to resolve this issue, but it remains unresolved. The company claims that my information is unable to be verified, even though my name, email and social security number are present in their customer database. 

I have the credit card and can use it, but I can not access the account online alongside my other Capital One accounts. 

I am requesting the CFPB to reach out to Capital One to resolve this issue. I simply want to use my card responsibly and view it online with my other banking accounts. 

This is regarding card ending in XXXX.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-03 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was result of identity theft
Company: T.S. Holdings
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
IQ DATA is falsely reporting on my credit. I have never had any accounts with them. Per my research IQ DATA is a debt collector. They are falsely reporting on my credit!! Account number is IQD0P is falsely reporting to my credit file and is against my rights and fair credit act. Under U.S Code 1618d - Disclosure of investigation consumer report ; you are in violation.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-03 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was result of identity theft
Company: Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
PORTFOLIO RC is falsely reporting on my credit. I have never had any accounts with them. Per my research PORTFOLIO RC is a debt collector. They are falsely reporting on my credit!! Account number is XXXX is falsely reporting to my credit file and is against my rights and fair credit act. Under U.S Code 1618d - Disclosure of investigation consumer report ; you are in violation.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-03 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Impersonated attorney, law enforcement, or government official
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
Was contacted by a firm XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX allegedly on the behalf of The Home Depot for a debt amount of {$160.00}. After researching this firm and their attempts to collect other debts, they appear to be fraudulent and are not accredited by the XXXX. The other thing that makes this claim of a debt collection is they failed to use my legal name which would be attached to any legal contract or account that would have been open. They sent trying to collect against a XXXX XXXX instead of my legal name of XXXX XXXX, no such account could exist given all my legal identification and applications for credits or purchases would have needed to be made by XXXX XXXX. I will not be replying to this alleged debt collector, in fear of engaging with them would allow them to acquire my actual information for what ever scam they appear to be running.

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 2026-02-03 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Fees or interest — Problem with fees
Company: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint regarding improper interest charges applied by Synchrony Bank on my credit card account. 

A purchase in the amount of {$5300.00} posted on XX/XX/XXXX. This was a standard ( non-promotional ) purchase. The statement due date associated with this balance was XX/XX/XXXX. 

I began making payments shortly after the purchase. The full purchase amount of {$5300.00} was paid in full through multiple payments completed by XX/XX/XXXX : {$1000.00} on XX/XX/XXXX {$1000.00} on XX/XX/XXXX {$3300.00} on XX/XX/XXXX All payments were posted, accepted, and reflected on my account by Synchrony well before the XX/XX/XXXX due date. 

Despite the balance being paid in full before the due date, Synchrony charged interest. When I contacted customer service, the representative acknowledged the payments and informed me that the interest would be reversed and that the adjustment process had been initiated. 

After waiting and not receiving the credit, I contacted Synchrony again and was then informed that the interest would not be reversed and that nothing further could be done.

Synchrony later stated that payments are automatically allocated according to internal rules and that customers may request manual reallocation after the fact. However, at no point prior to payment does Synchrony clearly disclose that an additional step is required to ensure payments are applied in a way that avoids interest charges.

The account interface does not provide any option to direct or allocate payments at the time payments are made, nor does it disclose that automatic payment allocation could result in interest charges even when the full purchase amount is paid before the due date. 

Charging interest based on undisclosed payment allocation requirements, combined with providing inconsistent and contradictory information from customer service representatives, constitutes a failure to clearly disclose material terms and an improper billing practice under the Truth in Lending Act and the Fair Credit Billing Act. 

The disputed interest charge is continuing to accrue additional interest each billing cycle. These subsequent charges are directly caused by the original interest charge that is under dispute. 

I am requesting a full reversal of all interest charges related to this purchase and correction of my account.

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 2026-02-03 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Mobile or digital wallet
Issue: Unauthorized transactions or other transaction problem — 
Company: Block, Inc.
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
I disputed a transaction on my Cash App account and have attempted to appeal the dispute multiple times over the course of approximately a year and a half. During each appeal and follow-up, I specifically asked whether I would receive provisional credit while the dispute was pending. At no point was provisional credit ever issued to my account. 
Throughout this process, Cash App representatives repeatedly made it seem as though some form of credit or resolution would be provided, but no provisional credit was ever applied, and no clear written explanation was given explaining why provisional credit was not issued under Regulation E. 
I have asked multiple times for documentation or confirmation regarding provisional credit. I was told on several occasions that I would receive this information by email, but no email or written explanation was ever sent to me. I provided full details of what happened with the transaction each time I appealed, but the dispute was denied without provisional credit being issued at any point while the case was pending. After waiting nearly a year and a half for resolution on the same transaction, I am now requesting either the provisional credit that should have been addressed during the investigation or reimbursement of the disputed amount, as well as a clear written explanation of Cash Apps handling of my dispute under Regulation E.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-03 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Closing your account — Can't close your account
Company: Self Financial Inc.
State: TN

Complaint narrative:
Self credit card my wallet was stolen back i cancel all my cards and self keep buying thing on my credit u want it close all ways them fix my credit u can't talk to areas live person to help never close my account for I sue them

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-03 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — VA mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Payment process
Company: CARRINGTON MORTGAGE SERVICES, LLC
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
My mortgage from XXXX was sold to Carrington LLC. On the first payment due with Carrington they took a double payment. I called Carrington and they kept requesting more and more specific documents to prove the error. Eventually I couldn't provide them so they told me good luck.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-03 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
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-03 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — FHA mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Escrow, taxes, or insurance
Company: Rocket Mortgage, LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I have an FHA-insured mortgage serviced by Rocket Mortgage that includes an escrow account for property taxes. I purchased my home in XX/XX/XXXX, and Rocket Mortgage has been responsible for collecting and disbursing escrow funds for property taxes. 
Property taxes for Tax Year XXXX became due XX/XX/XXXX. My escrow account was active and funded for these taxes. However, Rocket Mortgage failed to properly disburse escrow funds. I later learned that Rocket Mortgage paid approximately {$190.00} toward school district taxes and paid no county property taxes for XXXX. These amounts were significantly lower than the normal recurring property tax obligations for my property. 

Despite these unpaid tax obligations, Rocket Mortgage issued an escrow surplus refund during XXXX without verifying that all property taxes had been paid. Rocket Mortgage did not investigate the abnormal tax disbursements or verify tax obligations before issuing the refund. 

After a homestead exemption adjustment occurred, corrected property tax bills were issued by the taxing authorities. The taxes later became delinquent and accumulated penalties and interest. In XX/XX/XXXX, Rocket Mortgage made several large lump-sum tax payments, including delinquent taxes, penalties, and interest. 

In XX/XX/XXXX, Rocket Mortgage issued an escrow analysis showing an escrow shortage of approximately {$11000.00} and increased my monthly mortgage payment from approximately {$2100.00} to approximately {$3300.00}. This payment increase is directly tied to Rocket Mortgages failure to properly administer escrow funds, failure to monitor property tax obligations, and issuance of an escrow refund while taxes remained unpaid.

I contacted Rocket Mortgage multiple times and submitted a formal Notice of Error under RESPA disputing escrow servicing failures, penalties, interest, escrow shortage calculations, and the resulting payment increase. Rocket Mortgage acknowledged reviewing penalties and interest but has not provided a full escrow audit, detailed tax disbursement ledger, or complete explanation of escrow administration. Rocket Mortgage also declined to provide investigation reference numbers.

Because this is an FHA-insured mortgage loan, I believe Rocket Mortgage failed to meet FHA servicing and escrow administration requirements, including timely tax payment monitoring and proper escrow management designed to prevent borrower hardship and tax delinquency. 

I am requesting a full escrow audit, removal of penalties and interest caused by escrow servicing failures, correction of escrow shortage calculations, and reevaluation of the payment increase caused by these servicing errors.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation