vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-06-24 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Opening an account — Unable to open an account
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.

Complaint narrative:
To Whom It May Concern, I am writing again regarding my blocked Citibank account and the continued lack of resolution despite numerous attempts over the past several months. I have made repeated efforts to resolve this matter directly with Citibank and even asked my nephew, XXXX XXXX XXXX, to assist me. In response, Citibank sent me a letter stating that he is not an authorized person on my account. I understand this position ; however, we are currently in the process of establishing a Power of Attorney ( POA ) under Reference Number : XXXX. Citibank has repeatedly stated that a letter containing a verification code to unlock my account was mailed to me on XX/XX/2026. As of today, I have NOT received that letter. The only correspondence I have received from Citibank consists of the following : 1. A letter in Spanish requesting address verification for my address : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. A letter informing me that my nephew, XXXX XXXX XXXX, is not authorized to manage my account. Since I successfully received those letters, it confirms that Citibank has my correct mailing address. Therefore, I respectfully request an explanation as to why I never received the verification code letter that is required to restore access to my account. Today, XX/XX/2026 at approximately XXXX XXXX, I contacted Citibank Customer Service once again and informed them that I still had not received the verification letter. I was told another letter would be mailed on XX/XX/2026. At this point, this issue has been ongoing for approximately five months without resolution. This account restriction is causing me serious financial hardship, and I urgently need access restored. I have also emailed Citibank on XX/XX/2026 and again on XX/XX/2026, and have not received any response or assistance. I have attached the only two letters I have received from Citibank as supporting documentation. Throughout this process, I continue to be transferred from department to department without any clear answers or resolution. This situation can not continue. I respectfully request immediate review of my case and a clear explanation of what specific actions are required to restore access to my account. If alternative verification options are available ( email verification, secure message, branch verification, expedited re-mailing, or any other process ), I request that those options be offered immediately. Account Holder : XXXX XXXX Account Number : XXXX Thank you for your immediate attention to this urgent matter. Sincerely, XXXX 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 explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-06-24 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: Written notification about debt — Notification didn't disclose it was an attempt to collect a debt
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
There are collection accounts on my report that I believe contain inaccurate information. Under my rights pursuant to 15 USC 1681e ( b ) and 15 USC 1681i, I am entitled to an accurate credit report. I request a review of these entries, and if they can not be verified as accurate, I ask that they be removed.

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 2026-06-24 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Payment process
Company: TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION

Complaint narrative:
CFPB COMPLAINT NARRATIVE XX/XX/XXXX PAYMENT MISAPPLICATION ( TRUIST ) Company : Truist Bank Complainant : XXXX XXXX XXXX Loan Number : XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Property : XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, RI XXXX What Happened I am filing this complaint regarding the mischaracterization of a XX/XX/XXXX mortgage payment as missed or delinquent, when in fact the payment was received by Truist Bank and withheld from application to my account, in contrast to how an identical payment was handled the prior month. Beginning with the XX/XX/XXXX due date, my monthly payment increased from {$1800.00} to {$1900.00} due to an escrow adjustment. My automated payment continued to draft the prior amount of {$1800.00} in both XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. I acknowledge that Truist made attempts to notify me of the escrow-driven payment increase, including by phone and by mail, prior to the relevant payment cycles. My complaint is not about a failure of notice, but about the inconsistent treatment of two materially identical payments received in consecutive months. In XX/XX/XXXX, this {$1800.00} payment was received and applied to my account, as confirmed on my XXXX billing statement. In XX/XX/XXXX, an identical {$1800.00} payment, representing approximately 95.6 % of the full {$1900.00} payment then due, was received via the same automated method, but Truist instead placed the full amount into a suspense account and did not apply it to my loan. This is a gross mischaracterization of what actually occurred. My XX/XX/XXXX billing statement confirms an unapplied partial payment balance of {$1800.00} and a total amount due of {$3900.00}, reflecting the unapplied XXXX payment combined with the new XXXX payment as past due. Why This Characterization Is Inaccurate I am not disputing that proper notice procedures were generally followed regarding the escrow change. My concern is specific to how this event was characterized on my credit report and to the inconsistent treatment of materially identical payments. The same {$1800.00} amount was applied to my account in XX/XX/XXXX and withheld from application in XX/XX/XXXX. I did not fail to submit a payment. Reporting the XXXX event using the language of a missed payment or non-payment is inaccurate, since a payment was sent, received, and previously treated as a valid partial payment under the same circumstances the prior month. Prior Dispute History I disputed this directly with Truist and separately with XXXX. Both disputes were declined. To my knowledge, neither dispute addressed the inconsistency between how the XXXX and XXXX payments of identical amounts were each treated.

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 2026-06-24 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Auto debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was result of identity theft
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
TransUnion is reporting an automobile account from XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) on my credit file that contains inaccurate and internally contradictory information that misrepresents my credit history. First, the account contradicts itself. The account summary states that I was late 30, 60, and 90 plus days a total of six times, reported as XXXX / XXXX / XXXX. The payment history on the very same account shows continuous negative marks every month across XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and into XXXX, which is more than forty derogatory months. The same account can not show six total late marks and also show more than forty months of derogatory status. One of these figures is false, and the contradiction means the account is not being reported with maximum possible accuracy. Second, the account is reported as closed on XX/XX/XXXX, yet new derogatory marks continue to be added for XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, which is after the closure date. A closed account should not be generating new monthly delinquency status. Third, the account carries a profit and loss write off remark and reports a balance of {$19000.00} against a highest balance of {$63000.00}. For a charged off automobile account, the balance must reflect the true amount owed after any sale of the collateral. I am requesting validation that this balance is accurate. I have disputed this account before. The tradeline itself displays the remark Dispute resolved subscriber disagrees twice, which confirms that prior disputes occurred, yet the contradictions above were never corrected. The reinvestigations did not resolve the inaccuracy. They appear to have simply restated what the furnisher reported.

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 2026-06-24 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: Written notification about debt — Notification didn't disclose it was an attempt to collect a debt
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
There are collection accounts on my report that I believe contain inaccurate information. Under my rights pursuant to 15 USC 1681e ( b ) and 15 USC 1681i, I am entitled to an accurate credit report. I request a review of these entries, and if they can not be verified as accurate, I ask that they be removed.

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 2026-06-24 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Getting a loan or lease — Confusing or misleading advertising or marketing
Company: Car World Group
State: TN

Complaint narrative:
I respectfully disagree with Car World 's conclusion that this matter is fully resolved. While Car World states that the transaction documents disclosed a closed-end lease and that service was performed, several concerns remain unanswered : 1. Please explain why a 2017 XXXX XXXX with approximately XXXX miles resulted in a lease obligation totaling approximately {$29000.00} plus an end-of-lease purchase option. 2. Please provide the date title paperwork was submitted and explain why it took approximately three months for permanent tags and registration to be received. 3. Please provide a copy of the closing video referenced in the CFPB response, as Car World is relying on that video to support its position. 4. Please provide a copy of the exact Buyer 's Guide and window disclosure that was displayed on the vehicle at the time of the transaction. 5. Please provide all service records, technician notes, XXXX XXXX notes, repair authorizations, warranty claim records, and timing-related repair documentation associated with this vehicle. I continue to believe the overall transaction was confusing, financially burdensome, and involved a vehicle that began experiencing significant issues almost immediately after delivery.

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 2026-06-24 00:00:00
Product: Debt or credit management — Debt settlement
Issue: Confusing or missing disclosures — 
Company: Alperstein and Associates, LLC
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
To Whom It May Concern, I am filing a complaint against Alperstein regarding what I believe were misleading representations about its debt consolidation program, inadequate disclosure of the program 's impact on my credit, and improper handling of my cancellation request. On XX/XX/XXXX, I enrolled in Alperstein 's debt consolidation program to address my credit card debt. During the enrollment process, I explained that one of my primary goals was to improve my financial situation so that I could qualify for a mortgage and purchase a home. At no point was I adequately advised of the significant negative impact that the program could have on my credit scores. Had I been properly informed of the potential consequences, I would have made a different decision regarding enrollment. On XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted Alperstein to cancel my participation in the program and requested the return of the {$610.00} balance that remained in my dedicated account. I was informed that the cancellation would take between five and seven business days to process. I believe this delay was unreasonable and appears designed to allow additional payments to be collected before the cancellation became effective. As a result, I was forced to contact my bank and take the additional step of blocking future withdrawals from Alperstein. During the cancellation call, I was advised that I would receive written confirmation of the cancellation by email or mail. To date, I have not received any cancellation confirmation. Additionally, when I inquired about the funds remaining in my account, the representative appeared unaware of the balance. Based on the interaction, I am concerned that the remaining funds may not have been returned had I not specifically raised the issue and understood that the company 's negotiation fees had already been deducted. I believe I was misled regarding the nature of the program, its impact on my credit profile, and the cancellation process. I am also concerned about Alperstein 's handling of client funds and whether its business practices comply with applicable consumer protection regulations.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-06-24 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: Written notification about debt — Notification didn't disclose it was an attempt to collect a debt
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
There are collection accounts on my report that I believe contain inaccurate information. Under my rights pursuant to 15 USC 1681e ( b ) and 15 USC 1681i, I am entitled to an accurate credit report. I request a review of these entries, and if they can not be verified as accurate, I ask that they be removed.

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 2026-06-24 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Medical debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: Professional Finance Company, Inc.
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
Unjustly billed, with an inflated deductible amount not meeting the terms of my insurance plan. Objections to the Response Provided Professional Finance Company , Inc . XXXX dated XX/XX/year>. Based on your response to the CFPB, it is determined that I must pay the {$400.00} deductible balance. However, the size of the franchise is fixed in the contract- it can be expressed in a fixed amount of money ( absolute ) or as a percentage of the cost of the service or of the insured amount ( relative ). According to the bill for my treatment, the deductible is absolute and expressed in a fixed monetary amount, namely {$80.00} per procedure. In your response, you indicate : ( that an advance payment of {$50.00} is charged to cover the deductible and is not a surcharge or full payment. ) I consider this invoice unjustly issued, and the amount of the deductible does not meet the conditions of my insurance plan and is too high. Due to the fact that you have undertaken to recover the debt from me, I ask you to provide me with a copy of the contract between me and XXXX, according to which I am obliged to reimburse the franchise in a fixed amount of money, namely {$80.00}, signed by both parties. This contract will be a legally binding document for me to pay for the cost of my treatment In your response to the CFPB, you also indicate : ( XXXX billed XXXX XXXX XXXX insurance company XXXX, adjustments/discounts/were applied. ) Based on this, please provide me with copies of adjustments calculating my deductible in a fixed cash amount, namely {$80.00}. In addition to the above, and since you indicate that the advance payment of {$50.00} is charged to cover the deductible and is not a surcharge or full payment. ) I ask you to provide me with a written answer on what basis the payment of the deductible of {$80.00} was applied selectively in the treatment bill, namely, not at each of my visits, but at the days selected by XXXX. The full text of the complaint is set out below in the appendix

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 2026-06-24 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — Store credit card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement — Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/year> I opened a Home Depot credit card account, the physical card was delivered subsequently and has never been out of my possession. On XX/XX/year> a fraudulent in-store purchase was made in the amount of {$11000.00}, the charge, without any identification of the item purchased other than a numerical reference # was found upon a review of the account on XX/XX/year> On XX/XX/year> the Home Depot credit card servicer, XXXX, was notified and the card cancelled. On XX/XX/year> the store confirmed what item was purchased without the benefit of a physical card. and per Home Depot a fraud investigation initiated.

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 2026-06-24 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
Subject : Complaint Against Wells Fargo for Wrongful Dispute Denial and Reversal of Provisional Credit I am filing a complaint against Wells Fargo regarding the handling of my unauthorized transaction dispute. Wells Fargo provided me with a provisional credit of XXXX while investigating my claim. However, the bank later denied my dispute and is now attempting to take back the provisional credit based on inaccurate and false information. In its decision, Wells Fargo stated that there was no lost device associated with a digital wallet. This information is completely false. My dispute involved unauthorized transactions connected to a lost device that had access to my digital wallet. Wells Fargo either failed to properly investigate the facts of my claim or relied on incorrect information when making its determination. Because the denial was based on inaccurate information, I believe the investigation was not conducted reasonably or fairly as required under applicable consumer protection laws. The banks decision does not accurately reflect the circumstances I reported. The reversal of the XXXX provisional credit will create significant financial hardship for me. In addition to the financial burden, this situation has caused emotional distress due to the uncertainty and stress of being held responsible for transactions I did not authorize. I am prepared to provide documentation from my cell phone provider along with the official police report number, supporting my claim and request that Wells Fargo review this evidence before making any final determination and the official I am requesting that Wells Fargo : 1. Reopen and conduct a thorough and impartial investigation of my dispute. 2. Provide all documentation, evidence, and records relied upon in denying my claim. 3. Correct any inaccurate information contained in the investigation. 4. Restore the XXXX} provisional credit pending a proper review of the facts. Thank you for your assistance in reviewing this matter.

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 2026-06-24 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Rental debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: ProCollect, Inc.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
Told by XXXX XXXX that I would not have a debt if I gave them the key if I gave up the apartment I would not have an eviction on my record. I disputed this through XXXX XXXX my XXXX and it's still showing on my credit and the amount is as well.

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 2026-06-24 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Savings account
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account — Transaction was not authorized
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
Wells Fargo facilitated and approved 4 unauthorized transfers from my WF savings account to 4 separate banks on or around XXXX XXXX XXXX. They have acknowledged 3 of them as unauthorized transfers and redeposited the funds to my savings account however the first unauthorized transfer in the amount of {$5000.00} made to XXXX XXXX XXXX.on XX/XX/2026 they will not acknowdge as being unauthorized and have denied both my initial fraud claim and my appeal of that denial to refund/redeposit this {$5000.00} to me. See further details in the following section stating that my fair resolution to this issue is the full restoration of this {$5000.00} plus reimbursement of related fees plus any adjusted interest on the 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