vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Closing an account — Company closed your account
Company: SOFI TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
State: WA

Complaint narrative:
Recently, SoFi closed my account without providing clear, specific evidence to support their claim that fraudulent activity occurred. I was not given a meaningful opportunity to respond to or resolve the issue before my account was shut down. This has caused significant inconvenience and concern, as I relied on this account for managing my finances. I firmly deny engaging in any fraudulent activity. I have made good-faith efforts to comply with all account terms and conditions and have not been provided with any documentation or explanation that would justify such a serious action. Additionally, the lack of transparency in SoFis communication has made it difficult for me to understand what led to this decision or how I can correct any potential misunderstanding. I respectfully request that the CFPB : Investigate SoFis actions and the basis for the fraud allegation Require SoFi to provide clear documentation supporting their decision Assist in facilitating the reopening of my checking account, or at minimum, provide a fair opportunity for review and reinstatement I am seeking a resolution that restores my access to banking services and ensures that proper procedures are followed in handling such claims.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — FHA mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Loan sold or transferred to another company
Company: CrossCountry Mortgage LLC
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint regarding the mishandling, delay, and potential bad faith handling of insurance claim proceeds by my current mortgage servicer, CrossCountry Mortgage, following a fire loss to my home. My home was severely damaged by fire on XX/XX/year>, and an insurance claim was approved to fund the full restoration of the property. Since that time, my mortgage has been transferred among three servicers, with CrossCountry Mortgage now the third company to service this loan during the active rebuild process. Under the prior servicer, XXXX XXXX XXXX, I experienced significant delays and repeated attempts to stall the disbursement process. After months of delayplacing my family at serious risk of housing instabilitythey ultimately released approximately {$140000.00} in insurance proceeds after confirming and approving that the property had reached approximately 50 % completion. Following the transfer of my loan to CrossCountry Mortgage, additional delays occurred because the company was initially unaware that the property was under active reconstruction at the time they acquired the loan. As a result, they had to request and locate the insurance funds internally, causing unnecessary delays of over a month before even initiating the inspection process. Once an inspection was finally conducted, CrossCountry Mortgage reported that the property is only 30 % complete, which is inaccurate and directly contradicts : Prior verified documentation from the previous servicer confirming 50 % completion Current independent contractor and inspector assessments indicating the property is approximately 90 % complete At this stage, the home is substantially finished, with only : Flooring installation Final bathroom fixtures Completion of countertops remaining before full completion. Despite this, CrossCountry Mortgage is currently withholding approximately {$110000.00} in remaining insurance funds, which are necessary to complete the restoration of my home. This conduct demonstrates : A failure to properly review the transferred loan documentation Reliance on an inaccurate and unreliable inspection Unreasonable delay in releasing insurance proceeds Potential bad faith handling of loss draft funds I have already complied with all requirements and submitted all documentation through the proper channels. These records should have transferred with the loan and should be readily accessible to the current servicer. As a direct result of these repeated delays and errors : The completion of my home has been unnecessarily stalled My family has experienced significant financial strain and housing instability The prolonged delay has compounded the hardship caused by the original fire loss

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was result of identity theft
Company: CCS Financial Services, Inc.
State: MS

Complaint narrative:
CREDIT COLL is falsely reporting on my credit. I have never had any accounts with them. Per my research CREDIT COLL 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 public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was result of identity theft
Company: CAINE & WEINER COMPANY, INC.
State: LA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a complaint against several debt collection agencies for what appears to be ongoing violations of federal consumer protection laws. After formally disputing the alleged debts and requesting proper validation, the companies did not provide sufficient proof that I am legally responsible for these accounts. They failed to produce key documents such as original agreements, ownership records, account histories, or evidence of their authority to collect. Despite this, collection efforts and credit reporting activity may have continued without proper verification. This raises concerns about potential violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, including failure to validate debts and use of misleading or unfair practices, as well as the Fair Credit Reporting Act, particularly regarding the accuracy and investigation of reported information. Overall, the behavior described suggests these companies may be attempting to collect unverified debts and reporting potentially inaccurate information, which could indicate broader noncompliance with federal regulations.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive enough information to verify debt
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ] Re : Demand for Deletion Violation of XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( b ) Account/Reference Number : [ XXXX XXXX ] To Whom It May Concern, This letter serves as formal legal demand regarding your violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, specifically 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ). XXXX. On [ XX/XX/XXXX ], I filed a formal dispute with [ Equifax ] regarding the above account. Confirmation XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX and XXXX. XXXX. The credit bureau forwarded notice of my dispute to your company, triggering your mandatory duties under XXXX ( b ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) - ( XXXX ). XXXX. On [ XXXX XXXX ], I received notice that your company 'verified ' the account. My updated credit report reflects NO meaningful change. YOUR VIOLATIONS : [ ] Failed to conduct a reasonable investigation under XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ), matching internal records does not constitute a reasonable investigation. [ ] Failed to review documentation I submitted with my dispute under XXXX ( b ) ( XXXX ) ( B ). [ ] Failed to delete unverifiable information under XXXX ( b ) ( XXXX ) ( XXXX ). [ XXXX Failed to report corrections to all nationwide CRAs under XXXX ( b ) ( XXXX ) ( D ). DEMAND : Within XXXX ( XXXX ) days of your receipt of this letter, I demand that you : XXXX. Permanently delete the above account from all consumer reporting agencies. XXXX. Provide written confirmation of deletion. XXXX. Immediately cease all collection activity. If you fail to comply, I intend to file a civil action in United States XXXX XXXX seeking : - Statutory damages ( $ XXXX {$1000.00} per violation ) under XXXX. - Actual damages including emotional distress ( XXXX v. XXXX & XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX Cir. XXXX ). - Punitive damages for willful noncompliance. - Attorney fees and costs. I have preserved all documentation. This matter can be resolved without litigation if you act within the timeframe stated above.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home 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: IL

Complaint narrative:
I finnaly was able to recieve the required monthly amount due. They tried to tell me l was'nt entitiled to it, and actually told me on a recorded line l was quote " Banned from recieving it ''. Ony upon telling them l would bring this to the attention of the CFPD was l able to recieve it. In addition the lenders counsel ia constantly throwing confusion itto the case ; including dis obeying a direct requet by the court to have the lender end me a mitigation packet, which l finnally recievd at great length. The confusion is Still ongoing, and is taking up a lot of time from me as l try to both the court, the lender and the counsel. this case is a textbook picture of how to not proceed smoothly.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: National Credit Adjusters, LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint against National Credit Adjusters regarding an unverified collection account being reported on my credit file. This account is being reported without any verified contractual obligation between myself and National Credit Adjusters. I have no direct agreement with this company, and I have not been provided with proper validation of this alleged debt as required under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). Additionally, I have identified serious discrepancies in the reporting of this account : The Date of Last Activity is listed as XX/XX/XXXX, while the account is reported as opened in XXXX This raises concerns of improper re-aging, which is prohibited under the Fair Credit Reporting Act The account is only being reported on XXXX and not on XXXX or XXXX, raising concerns about the reliability of the information No documentation has been provided to validate the debt, including proof of ownership or a signed agreement Under the FDCPA, a debt collector must provide full validation of the alleged debt, including proof of ownership and the original contract. Failure to do so constitutes a violation of federal law. Furthermore, re-aging a debt to make it appear more recent is a serious violation that directly impacts my credit standing.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Private student loan
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Problem with customer service
Company: MOHELA
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint regarding private student loans originated by XXXX and currently serviced by MOHELA. I requested a School Misconduct Discharge for my private loans and provided documentation and a detailed explanation of school misconduct and deception that caused me to take on these loans, including misrepresentations about program outcomes and costs. MOHELA responded that my loans are not eligible for its School Misconduct discharge program solely because the schools I attended ( XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX ) are nonprofit, and MOHELA provided no substantive analysis of my evidence. MOHELAs communications reflect what appears to be a blanket denial policy rather than a goodfaith, individualized review. In writing, MOHELA stated it confirmed my loans are not eligible due to the nonprofit status of the schools since the loans were originated, without addressing the misconduct facts presented, without identifying what evidence was reviewed, and without providing a reasoned explanation for denying relief on a misconduct claim. Unfair ( U ) : MOHELAs handling of my request is unfair because it appears to deny meaningful consideration of a misconductbased dispute and relies on a categorical eligibility rule ( nonprofit vs. forprofit ) that is not explained or disclosed in a transparent way to consumers. A process presented as a School Misconduct discharge program is effectively nonfunctional if misconduct evidence is not evaluated and denials provide no substantive basis. This causes substantial consumer injury ( continued collection on loans induced by misconduct ) that I can not reasonably avoid, and there is no countervailing benefit to consumers from denying individualized review. Deceptive ( D ) : MOHELAs written responses are deceptive or misleading because they imply a review ( Upon review, we confirmed ) while providing no details about what was reviewed, what standards were applied, or why the misconduct evidence is irrelevant. Representing that a School Misconduct discharge option exists while denying claims on a categorical basis without transparent criteria can mislead borrowers into believing there is a fair relief pathway when there may not be one in practice. Abusive ( A ) : This conduct may be abusive because MOHELA ( and XXXX as loan owner ) holds superior knowledge about eligibility criteria and internal decisioning, while borrowers can not access those standards. Denying relief without explaining the basis or the evidence considered prevents borrowers from understanding how to correct or supplement submissions and can materially interfere with the ability to exercise consumer rights ( including disputing debts and seeking misconductbased remedies ).

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint against Midland Credit Management regarding the reporting and collection of an alleged debt that has not been properly validated. Midland Credit Management is reporting one or more collection accounts on my credit reports without providing any verified contractual obligation between myself and their company. I have no direct contract or agreement with Midland Credit Management. As a third-party debt buyer, they are required to provide full validation of the debt, including proof of ownership and the original agreement. The following issues have been identified : Multiple collection entries are being reported, which may indicate duplicate or split reporting of the same alleged debt The Date of Last Activity and reporting timelines are inconsistent ( including dates ranging from XXXX to XXXX ), raising concerns of possible re-aging No documentation has been provided showing a valid chain of title from the original creditor to Midland Credit Management No signed contract or agreement exists between myself and this collection agency The account is being reported as a collection with derogatory status without proper validation Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), a debt collector must provide proper validation of the debt. This includes proof of ownership, the original contract, and complete account history. Additionally, under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), all information reported must be accurate and consistent. The discrepancies in dates and multiple account entries clearly indicate that the information is unreliable.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 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: Winklevoss Exchange LLC
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
Dear Gemini Support, I am writing to formally request immediate resolution regarding the restriction and closure of my account and my continued inability to withdraw cleared funds. Please reference Ticket # XXXX. Timeline of events : On XX/XX/year>, I initiated a deposit of {$5000.00}. On XX/XX/year>, I initiated a second deposit of {$5000.00}. On XX/XX/year>, I contacted support after my account was restricted due to the second deposit being returned by my bank. On XX/XX/year>, I received confirmation that the first {$5000.00} deposit had successfully cleared and was available for withdrawal. Following the restriction, I was required by Gemini ( Gemini ) to complete identity and account verification procedures. I fully complied with all requested verification requirements and submitted all necessary documentation. Since that time, I have made repeated attempts to withdraw the cleared {$5000.00} balance. I have been informed multiple times that my account would be temporarily reopened for seven ( 7 ) days to allow me to withdraw my remaining balance. However, during these access periods, I have been unable to complete a withdrawal due to platform limitations, including a blurred or inaccessible balance display and the absence of a Withdraw option. Yesterday morning it was reopened after I sent in another email last week and later in the evening I tried to withdraw the money but its locked back again. Clarification regarding the returned transaction : The second {$5000.00} deposit that was returned by my bank has been fully resolved directly with my financial institution and plan has been made for it. Formal request : The first {$5000.00} deposit was successfully cleared and remains my property. I request that Gemini take immediate action to resolve this matter by : Restoring full account functionality so I can complete the withdrawal ; or Enabling withdrawal of the cleared {$5000.00} balance to my active, verified linked bank account currently on file. The balance must go back to the account that it was drawn off of routing number : XXXX, account number XXXX. This money does not belong to me. It belongs to XXXX XXXX XXXX and they will not release it. They sent me instructions on what to do to release it. I did what they said, but they failed to release the money now theyve completely frozen the account again. Notice of escalation : If this matter is not resolved within seven ( 7 ) business days of this notice, I will proceed with filing formal complaints with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Department of Financial Services, and the XXXX Department of Financial and Professional Regulation. I request prompt attention to this matter and a clear timeline for resolution. Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Telecommunications debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: Kriya Capital, LLC
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
I am reporting Credence Resource Management and Experian for a coordinated violation of the FCRA and FDCPA. A collection account from XXXX Receivables Management was previously deleted from my Experian credit report after a dispute process because it could not be verified. Now, this same debt has been re-inserted under a different name : Credence Resource Management. Under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ), Experian is required to provide written notice within 5 business days of re-inserting a previously deleted item. No such notice was provided. Furthermore, Credence is re-aging the debt by reporting a 'Date Opened ' of XX/XX/year>, which is a false representation of the account 's history and a violation of the FDCPA. I spoke with an Experian supervisor today who confirmed the previous deletion but refused to suppress this illegal re-insertion.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Money order, traveler's check or cashier's check
Issue: Lost or stolen money order — 
Company: NY Community Financial, LLC
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I purchased {$1000.00} money order on XXXX and other {$1000.00} on XXXX the company name is CFSC - COMMUNITY FINANCIAL SERVICE CENTERS I bought two money order to pay my credit bill and mailed out on XXXX. Recently, i got text message from my credit card bank, they didn't get my payment. I went to CFSC and the staff checked system and these two money orders were cashed on XXXX. I suspect they were fraudulently used by someone else. I fill out the claim form and get no feedback.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was result of identity theft
Company: Retail Merchants Associates
State: LA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a complaint against several debt collection agencies for what appears to be ongoing violations of federal consumer protection laws. After formally disputing the alleged debts and requesting proper validation, the companies did not provide sufficient proof that I am legally responsible for these accounts. They failed to produce key documents such as original agreements, ownership records, account histories, or evidence of their authority to collect. Despite this, collection efforts and credit reporting activity may have continued without proper verification. This raises concerns about potential violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, including failure to validate debts and use of misleading or unfair practices, as well as the Fair Credit Reporting Act, particularly regarding the accuracy and investigation of reported information. Overall, the behavior described suggests these companies may be attempting to collect unverified debts and reporting potentially inaccurate information, which could indicate broader noncompliance with federal regulations.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Mobile or digital wallet
Issue: Fraud or scam — 
Company: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
State: NV

Complaint narrative:
Hello, Im requesting a reconsideration of my denied XXXX XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX I sent {$700.00} through XXXX for XXXX tickets that were represented to me as valid and working. The seller assured me the tickets were legitimate. When I arrived at the event, the tickets did not work and I was denied entry. After that, the seller blocked me and stopped responding. This transaction was induced by fraud and misrepresentation. I would not have sent the payment if I had known the tickets were fake/invalid. I have supporting evidence including messages with the seller, proof of payment, and evidence they blocked communication afterward. Im asking Chase to reopen and reconsider this claim based on the fraudulent circumstances of the transaction. Please review all available evidence and advise on any additional documentation needed. Thank you.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation