vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — FHA mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue related to modification, forbearance, short sale, deed-in-lieu, bankruptcy, or foreclosure
Company: Rocket Mortgage, LLC
State: CO

Complaint narrative:
* * * XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX HAVE REPEATEDLY VIOLATED DUAL TRACKING LAWS AND XXXX LOSS MITIGATION PROCEDURES * * * * * * XX/XX/XXXX * * * ++ XXXX XXXX, without my consent, switched my homeowners insurance policy even after I authorized renewal of my existing policy. They paid BOTH THE existing policy and the new policy and charged my escrow for both. I was caring for a sick parent and now on my home so I was unaware of this due to my statements being mailed to my home. I was shocked that my escrow, and therefore my monthly payments almost doubled. That is what began a downward spiral with this process. * * * XXXX XXXX XXXX * * * REPEATED FAILED ATTEMPTS to get XXXX XXXX to work with me on a loan modification. They kept " losing my file '' or claiming they had had no idea why my file just paused instead of moving through the loan modification approval process. They cost me hours of work time and countless work opportunities as I fought through the chaos and confusion. * * * XX/XX/XXXX * * * I qualify for a * * XXXX of XXXX Mortgage Assistance Program * * but XXXX XXXX wouldn't work with me while my modification application was being worked. By the time they processed it the XXXX of XXXX program closed the program until XXXX. * * * XX/XX/XXXX * * * I intimate another modification application based on the offer letter of my new job opportunity. I'm told the modification request was for an XX/XX/XXXX start date. With less than a weeks notice I was informed it was a XXXX start date. I explain that with the shortened month of XXXX I wouldn't receive my first paycheck in time. I repeatedly requested that someone review the file to see that they changed the date. No one would engage. * * * XX/XX/XXXX * * * XXXX XXXX claims they won't talk to me. Won't review modification applications because my loan is set for foreclosure auction on XX/XX/XXXX. HOWEVER THE XXXX XXXX XXXX informed me that I am legally considered in a " modification '' and that there is no auction date. XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX posts a letter within the online portal informing me that my loan is now owned by rocket mortgage as of XX/XX/XXXX. I AM UNABLE TO 1. PAY MY REINSTATEMENT ( DONT KNOW WHICH ACCOUNT TO WIRE THE MONEY TOO ). 2. GET ANY EYES ON A POSSIBLE Modification 3. I DONT HAVE A LEGAL VERIFIED DATE TO SEND AN INTENT TO CURE. * * * COUNTLESS FEDERAL, STATE, FHA LAWS HAVE BEEN VIOLATED * * *

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Fees or interest — Problem with fees
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: CT

Complaint narrative:
XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX program will transfer to Citibank on XX/XX/year>. XXXX annual fee is {$48.00}. Citibank fee is about {$110.00}. I have a XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX card. Citibank does not have XXXX customer service. XXXX bank does. Citibank rarely answers letters. Written correspondence. If the do reply, it takes forever. I have been a loyal customer for many years and never missed a payment. XXXX is a much better bank. Citibank interest rates and fees are higher than XXXX. Please immediately execute an injunction to stop the transfer. Many Americans will be hurt if this transfer is allowed. Thank you and hour help is appreciated. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CT 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 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Getting a credit card — Card opened without my consent or knowledge
Company: Paypal Holdings, Inc
State: IN

Complaint narrative:
Paypal opened a line of credit without clearly stating it and then closed that line of credit through XXXX XXXX. It is definitely a shady practice and damaged my credit history/score.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Federal student loan servicing
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Received bad information about your loan
Company: ECMC GROUP, INC.
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
Education Credit Management Corporation was the guarantor of my student loan. XXXX servicing was the servicer. XXXX servicing claims I defaulted and ECMC purchased the loan. I am contesting the default based on the official default date and based on misrepresentation of the loan by XXXX XXXX. ECMC did not do due diligence to ensure XXXX XXXX had provided me with accurate information about the loan before they completed their purchase. I will attach the screenshot taken in XX/XX/year> showing that my balance was XXXX and I will attach the letter from ECMC referring to the default date of XX/XX/year>, which is also the date on studentaid.gov. They have tried to say that the loan defaulted before the default date, but I was not notified if this is the case and it seems like the loan can't default before the default date. So the servicer provided false information, leading me to believe my loan was forgiven, and ECMC will not acknowledge this nor work with XXXX to remove the loan from default. ECMC, again, did not do their due diligence when purchasing the loan from the servicer. They have also failed to provide me with assignment documentation because they say it's internal and they will not give me the complete correspondence history. They have, however, given me company-made data lists, which precedent has shown is self-serving.

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 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — Store credit card
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account information incorrect
Company: Bread Financial Holdings, Inc.
State: MO

Complaint narrative:
Subject ( if needed ) : Failure to Process Payment / Wrongful Delinquency / Credit Damage Risk Complaint : I am filing a formal complaint against Comenity Capital Bank regarding my XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX account. I submitted a payment by check, and I have tracking documentation confirming that the payment was successfully delivered to the companys payment processing center. Despite this, the company has failed to process and apply my payment in a timely manner. As a result of their failure : My account has been wrongfully marked as delinquent My account has been suspended I have received written notice ( dated XX/XX/year> ) stating my account is restricted due to recent delinquency I am now at risk of negative credit reporting and financial harm This situation is entirely due to the companys failure to properly process a payment that is already in their possession. I have attempted to resolve this issue directly with the company, but they have not corrected the error or provided a resolution. I am requesting the following : Immediate application of my payment Removal of any delinquency or late status Confirmation that no negative reporting will occur Investigation into the companys payment processing practices This matter is urgent, as it directly impacts my credit and financial standing.

Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Getting a credit card — Card opened without my consent or knowledge
Company: Experian Information Solutions Inc.
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
I noticed a fraudulent account on my credit report while I was reviewing it. The account reads XXXX XXXX XXXX opened on XX/XX/year>. I need this account blocked and 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 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem making or receiving payments
Company: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
Fraud Claim Denied XXXX XXXX ( Impersonation of Bank ) Complaint : On XX/XX/2026, I was the victim of a bank impersonation scam. I received a phone call from a number that appeared to be associated with XXXX Bank ( XXXX ). The caller claimed to be from XXXX and stated that my account was at risk of fraud. I was then transferred to what I was told was the XXXX department. Under pressure and fear, I was instructed to take actions to protect my accounts. As a result of this deception, I sent money that I believed was securing my funds. This resulted in the loss of : {$1200.00} from Capital One I reported the fraud immediately. However, Capital One have denied my claims and refused reimbursement. This was not an authorized transaction in the true sense. I was manipulated under false pretenses by individuals impersonating my bank. This is a clear case of fraud. I am requesting : * A full reinvestigation of my claims * Reimbursement of the stolen funds * Copies of all documentation used in the denial decisions This situation has caused significant financial and emotional distress, and I am seeking a fair resolution.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Mobile or digital wallet
Issue: Unauthorized transactions or other transaction problem — 
Company: Skrill USA, Inc.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
Skrill USA , Inc. ( owned by Paysafe XXXX ) * Amount : {$13000.00} * Date ( s ) : XX/XX/year> I am filing a complaint regarding unauthorized transactions totaling {$13000.00} from my Skrill account. My account was compromised and used without my authorization. I did not approve these transactions and did not knowingly share my login credentials. This was an account takeover. The stolen funds were transferred to another Skrill account, meaning the recipient is fully identifiable within Skrills system. Despite this, Skrill has refused reimbursement, claiming that password reuse constitutes user liability. However : * Skrill has not provided evidence that the transactions were authorized * Skrill has not provided IP logs, device data, or authentication records * Skrill has not demonstrated that proper fraud detection or intervention occurred * Skrill has not explained what actions were taken regarding the recipient account This is an unauthorized electronic funds transfer and should be treated as such under applicable consumer protection laws.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed
Company: NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting a complaint regarding the handling and denial of my fraud claim by Navy Federal Credit Union involving a {$600.00} XXXX transaction connected to a scam. I sent {$600.00} through XXXX after responding to a XXXX listing for a piano. The piano delivery company claimed that the piano would be delivered after payment was sent. After payment was made, no item was delivered, communication stopped, and the phone number associated with the seller was disconnected. I promptly reported the matter to Navy Federal and explained that I was the victim of a scam. My claim was denied on the basis that I authorized and/or participated in the activity. I then requested reconsideration and submitted additional information showing that the payment was induced through deception. After a second review, the denial was upheld. My concern is that the transaction appears to have been treated solely as an authorized payment without adequate consideration of the fraudulent inducement and scam circumstances. While I physically initiated the transfer, I did so based on intentional misrepresentations by the recipient. I would not have sent funds had the facts been truthful. I am requesting the following resolution : - Reversal or reimbursement of the {$600.00} sent through XXXX as a result of this scam transaction - A fair and thorough re-review of my claim considering the scam/deception circumstances - A detailed explanation of the facts, evidence, and policy relied upon to deny the claim - Copies of documentation used in the decision-making process, where available - Clarification of Navy Federals policy for scams involving authorized payments induced by fraud I have supporting documentation available, including communications with the seller, transaction records, and evidence that the seller became unreachable after payment. Thank you for your review and assistance.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint against XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX regarding an alleged credit card debt originally associated with Capital One. I have disputed this account multiple times in writing and requested full debt validation, including a complete chain of title, a bill of sale identifying my specific account, a signed agreement or contract, and documentation from the original creditor verifying the amount. In response, the company provided only an internally generated account summary and a generic ownership history. These documents explicitly state they are not statements from the original creditor and do not constitute competent evidence of a legally enforceable debt. The company has failed to provide : * A bill of sale or assignment identifying my specific account * A complete chain of title linking the original creditor to XXXX XXXX XXXX * Any signed agreement or contract showing my legal obligation * Any documentation from the original creditor verifying the balance Despite failing to provide proper validation, the company continues to report this account to consumer reporting agencies as verified and continues collection efforts. This indicates that no reasonable investigation was conducted, which is a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ). Additionally, their failure to provide proper validation violates the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. As a New York consumer, I also note that under 23 NYCRR 1.4, debt collectors are required to maintain and provide documentation establishing a complete chain of title. The company has failed to comply with this requirement. I have made good faith efforts to resolve this issue directly with the company, including prior disputes and a previous CFPB complaint, but they have failed to correct the issue. I am requesting regulatory intervention due to their continued failure to validate the debt and continued reporting of unverified and potentially inaccurate information.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Getting a credit card — Card opened without my consent or knowledge
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: AZ

Complaint narrative:
Complaint number XXXX I made a mistake and listed Experian on the fraudulent accounts that are reporting. the accounts are on TransUnion The accounts are XX/XX/XXXXXXXX opened XX/XX/XXXX {$1100.00}, XX/XX/XXXX {$31000.00}. I sent in documents to support this in XX/XX/XXXX. FTC, notarized affidavit, and police report.

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 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Private student loan
Issue: Struggling to repay your loan — Problem lowering your monthly payments
Company: Climb Credit Inc.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint regarding a loan issued through Climb Credit for a program provided by Devslopes. Climb Credits response to my prior complaint stated that course materials remain available and that I had access to live instruction today on XX/XX/year>. However, this does not reflect the full program that was originally offered and financed. Devslopes explicitly marketed the program as a mentorship-based experience that included daily live mentor calls, ongoing guidance, career development support, and paid opportunities. These were presented as core components of the programnot optional features. At this time, these components are no longer available. The program has effectively been reduced to static, self-paced content, which represents a significant and material change from what was originally sold. This constitutes a partial non-delivery of services and misrepresentation of the programs structure and value. Additionally, Climb Credit has stated that refunds must be initiated by Devslopes. However, Devslopes is currently unresponsive, making it impossible to pursue a refund through the school. This leaves me in a position where I am being required to continue paying for a program that has fundamentally changed, without any viable resolution path. I have provided documentation, including course progress and program descriptions, showing how the program was advertised and how its core components are no longer available.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Managing the loan or lease — Problem with fees charged
Company: SANTANDER HOLDINGS USA, INC.
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
What Happened My auto loan payment with Chrysler Capital is normally scheduled to be automatically drafted on the XXXX of each month. I have a consistent history of on-time payments and rely on automatic withdrawal to ensure payments are made as scheduled. On XX/XX/year>, Chrysler Capital attempted a payment of {$1200.00}, which was declined from account ending in XXXX. This was not my primary account, and I did not receive any notification that this attempt had occurred or that it had failed. On XX/XX/year>, Chrysler Capital attempted the regular scheduled payment of {$1200.00} from my primary checking account ending in XXXX, which was also declined. Again, I did not receive any email, phone call, or other notification that this payment had failed. I did not receive any notification from Chrysler Capital advising that my payment had failed or that my account was past due until after late fees had already been assessed, totaling {$80.00}. Upon receiving notice that my account was past due, I contacted Chrysler Capital customer service on XX/XX/year> to resolve the issue immediately and make payment in full. During this call, I spoke with a representative identified as XXXX, and later with supervisor XXXX ( XXXX ID XXXX ). During this conversation, I explained that : I have a strong history of on-time payments. I did not receive timely notification of the failed payment attempts. I was willing to make the full payment immediately upon learning of the issue. Chrysler Capital advised that they would waive {$50.00} of the late fees but would still require payment of {$30.00} in remaining fees. Additionally, they stated that as a result of this incident, I would be required to make payments using a debit card for the next XXXX months, and that each debit card payment would incur an additional fee of {$3.00} per transaction. Despite disputing these charges and requirements, I made a payment on XX/XX/year> to bring the account current. The payment was made using Debit Card ending in XXXX in the amount of {$1200.00}, which included a {$3.00} debit card processing fee. I objected to both the remaining late fee and the mandatory debit card payment requirement with additional transaction fees, as I was not notified of the failed payment attempts in a timely manner and was not given the opportunity to correct the issue before fees were applied.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Getting a credit card — Application denied
Company: AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint against American Express because I have applied for an American Express card multiple times and have been denied each time based on a reason that is factually incorrect. American Express has told me that my applications are being denied because my prior bankruptcy filing caused them financial harm. That reason is not accurate. I previously held an American Express account, and I paid that account off in full before I ever filed for bankruptcy. American Express was not a creditor in my bankruptcy filing, no balance owed to American Express was ever discharged in my bankruptcy, and American Express did not absorb any loss, write-off, or charge-off related to my account. Because there was no outstanding balance at the time of filing, American Express suffered XXXX financial harm from my bankruptcy, and their stated basis for repeatedly denying my applications is simply wrong on the facts. I am not disputing American Express 's general right to evaluate applicants based on their credit history. What I am disputing is being permanently denied based on a false premise, specifically that I caused the company a financial loss when no such loss ever occurred. I would like American Express to review their internal records, confirm that my previous account was paid in full and closed in good standing prior to any bankruptcy filing, and reconsider my application on accurate information rather than an incorrect assumption tied to the mere fact of a bankruptcy filing.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation