vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-16 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was already discharged in bankruptcy and is no longer owed
Company: ASTA FUNDING INC.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
This company was granted a wage garnishment over 10 years ago. After taking money out of my check for about 4 checks. we went in front of a judge. The Judge ask can we settle this with the amount that has already been taken. Both sides agree. The judge dismissed the garnishment. Now 10 years later they did it again. The original debt is 26 years old

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 2026-02-16 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Medical debt
Issue: Electronic communications — Frequent or repeated messages
Company: Grant & Weber
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I have requested that the account be returned on XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX CST I emailed to XXXX Good morning, Im requesting my account be returned to the original creditor. 
Reference # XXXX For XXXX XXXX May I please get some assistance with this. 

On XX/XX/XXXX after not getting a response, I reached back out to XXXX on the email thread at XXXX XXXX  CST Hello I am messaging back because I have not received a response, Im looking for an update. Thank you. 

On XXXX XXXX at XXXX XXXX  I received a response stating, We can not just return the account. Prior emails are all below. You still havent sent in the insurance payment that was sent to you. 

On XXXX XXXX at XXXX XXXX CST I responded to XXXX Your previous response is unprofessional. I have said multiple times that Im disputing this. If you cant just send this back, then what are the steps for return? 

On XXXX XXXX at XXXX XXXX I received a response from XXXX as an encrypted message. 

I understand. Please note that an account being reported as disputed does not require that it be returned to our client. The account remains dispute in collections with our office. 
We can certainly arrange payment options if you would like to move forward. 

On XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX  CST I responded to the encrypted message from XXXX What are the steps to have the account returned * This was the last email I sent and I have yet to receive a response from Grant and Weber. 


The issue Im having is they are avoiding my request to return the account and ignoring my request and being unprofessional. The other issue is that they are wanting payment while my account is in dispute in their office. They have brought up a check from insurance as well as stating they can set up payment arrangements. 

Im reporting the company as being unprofessional, ignoring my request, and wanting payment while my account is in dispute.

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 2026-02-16 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Closing on a mortgage — Delays with the closing process
Company: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
My wife and I divorced in XXXX. I was fully awarded the home located at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, TX XXXX who JP Morgan Chase holds the 1st mortgage # XXXX and we are both listed on the mortgage. I contacted Chase and began the assumption process in summer of XXXX... it has been " in underwriting '' for months and to date is not completed. 

It is my belief that Chase has failed to act in good faith in the underwriting process and seek to string this along. They have inquired into my credit multiple time affecting my credit score, but we never proceed. Numerous follow-ups to them have resulted in only more requests for " additional information ''. The requested information is provided quickly and then they request more information, more statements, more documentation and even requesting information on liabilities not associated with me- to extend the timeline. Each additional request results in additional delays. 

I believe their " underwriting '' is simply a way to delay in an attempt to avoid the work required in assumption... this is not acting in good faith nor should be acceptable to regulators. 

To be clear... I am currently on the existing loan and making timely payments to Chase and only look to complete the paperwork required to complete the assumption. 

Thank you, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-16 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
To Whom It May Concern, I am submitting this complaint to formally dispute a debt that a collection agency is attempting to collect and/or report on my credit file. I am requesting debt validation pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692g. 

The collection agency has failed to provide proper verification that I am legally obligated to pay the alleged debt. I do not recognize this debt as valid. 

I am requesting that the collection agency be required to provide the following documentation : Proof that I am legally responsible for this debt The name and address of the original creditor The original account number A copy of the original signed agreement or contract bearing my signature A complete itemized payment history Proof that the collection agency has the legal authority to collect on this account Until proper validation is provided, the collection agency must cease all collection efforts, including reporting this account to any credit reporting agency. Reporting an unverified debt constitutes inaccurate reporting and is a violation of federal law. 

If the collection agency is unable to provide the requested documentation, I request that the account be deleted from my credit reports immediately. 

This letter is not an acknowledgment of the debt, nor a refusal to pay, but a request for verification as provided by law. 

Thank you for your assistance in resolving this matter. 

Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, New York

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-16 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Lease
Issue: Getting a loan or lease — Problem with signing the paperwork
Company: AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORP
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
Complainant : XXXX XXXX XXXX Vehicle : XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX VIN : XXXX Lender/Finance Company : XXXX XXXX XXXX Dealership : XXXX of XXXX, XXXX, NY Summary of Complaint : I am filing this complaint regarding a motor vehicle lease transaction that involves potential violations of the Truth in Lending Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq. ) and related federal consumer protection laws. 

At the time of executing the lease agreement, the obligor structure was not clearly or accurately disclosed. The final lease documentation identifies another individual as the Lessee and lists me as CoLessee. This designation was not clearly explained during the transaction process. 

The identity of the primary obligor is a material credit term. It directly impacts : Legal liability for the debt Credit reporting responsibility Financial obligation under the lease Arbitration standing Distribution of funds in the event of rescission or repurchase If I was led to believe I would be the primary lessee, but the submitted contract reflects otherwise, this constitutes material misrepresentation and potentially a violation of the Truth in Lending Acts requirement for clear and meaningful disclosure of credit terms. 

The obligor designation determines who is primarily liable and how the account is reported to credit bureaus. Failure to clearly disclose and explain this structure deprived me of the opportunity to make an informed credit decision. 

Additionally, the vehicle is currently subject to a substantial safety defect involving the highvoltage system and is pending arbitration under New York Lemon Law. The vehicle has been out of service for an extended period due to a critical component on national backorder. 

Requested Resolution : Investigation into potential TILA disclosure violations Review of whether obligor designation was properly disclosed Correction of any inaccurate credit reporting Consideration of contract rescission due to material misrepresentation Refund of all amounts paid if rescission is warranted This matter involves both federal credit disclosure compliance and consumer protection concerns. I respectfully request formal review and investigation. 

Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-16 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Repossession — Account reinstatement or redemption after repossession
Company: SANTANDER HOLDINGS USA, INC.
State: OH

Complaint narrative:
This complaint is filed against Santander XXXX USA for deceptive practices, breach of a signed reinstatement agreement, and failure to release a vehicle after payment. The vehicle was repossessed on XX/XX/year>. Locating the vehicle was difficult due to conflicting information from third-party vendor XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX OH ). 
On XX/XX/year>, a Santander reinstatement agent was contacted. The full amount required for reinstatement was paid. The vehicle was to be available for pickup on Thursday morning, XX/XX/XXXX. After paying for a 40-minute Lyft to the tow yard and signing release paperwork, the vehicle was not provided. An attendant confirmed that, despite the paid reinstatement and scheduled release, Santander sent an order to transfer the car to an auction lot. 
Violations & Damages : 1. Breach of Reinstatement Contract : Santander accepted funds but did not stop the auction transfer, denying access to the vehicle. 
2. Negligent Communication : Agents provided conflicting, misleading information regarding a 710 day delay. 
3. Financial Loss : A full week of work was missed, transport fees were incurred, and emotional distress resulted from these errors.

Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-16 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: Block, Inc.
State: OH

Complaint narrative:
I used CashApp to deposit nearly $ XXXX in XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX a merchant called XXXX XXXX charged my card for {$1200.00}, {$990.00}, {$740.00}, {$490.00}, {$390.00} and {$290.00} all back to back in a row. I did not make these purchases and after finding out my XXXX account had been hacked again I disputed the charges and charges on two other accounts of mine. In total I had four accounts hit for around {$20000.00} by four merchants between the XXXX and the XXXX of XXXX and I showed documentation of this. I received a refund from 2 accounts so far. I showed what documents I could that this happened but CashApp refused to do an investigation and quickly denied my disputes then denied my appeals with new documents submitted within about 30 minutes of submitting them. They are known for denying disputes and being complacent to fraud and at this point Im wondering if they are not involved in it.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-16 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed
Company: SOFI TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
XXXX XXXX initiated an ACH pull from my SoFi account ( i requested it through the XXXX XXXX app ). I canceled the transfer the same day and received confirmation, but the debit still posted at SoFi on XX/XX/XXXX. {$570.00} has been withdrawn from SoFi and has not been credited to XXXX XXXX or returned. I filed a claim with SOFI and they've rejected my claim and said XXXX XXXX needs to do a trace research. XXXX XXXX is refusing to initiate an ACH trace, stating the transfer was canceled so they dont have access on their end. Funds are missing from both accounts. I am requesting immediate ACH research and resolution.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-16 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Rental debt
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive enough information to verify debt
Company: Bounce AI, Inc.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I moved out from XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX ) on XX/XX/year>. I indicated this when I sent my intent to move out email on XXXX XXXX XXXX There was no person who met with us regarding a move out inspection, we where just told that we can move out on the indicated date and leave the key with their on site office. On XX/XX/year> I received an email from the managing company saying that I owed {$2500.00} in " damages '' to the property. The break down stemmed from a late rent charge of {$780.00} ( I moved out on the XXXX and gave the key on that day! ) various fees as well as {$840.00} for full paint and {$120.00} for Cleaning fees. Just to highlight some of the charges. Under Texas Normal Wear and tear I shouldn't have been charged for a full paint under normal wear and tear conditions. Mind you the damage they provided with a barely notable black residue left over in the wall. There where no damages to the walls, we did our best to maintain the apartment in the 2 years we lived there! As for the Carpet cleaning, My wife and I did our best to thoroughly clean the apartment before we moved out. They just decided to charge us whatever without proper proof. I tried my best to fight this on my own, I messaged them a few times by email but it ultimately proved fruitless. I could not properly contest this in person as I had moved to the RGV. The company issued bonds against my supposed late rent as well as the " damages '' to XXXX services. This led to a {$600.00} delinquency on my credit report, which has absolutely destroyed my credit score. The amount of harm and hardship this has caused me as been immeasurable. The company acted in bad faith and long since stopped responding to any of my emails.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-16 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive notice of right to dispute
Company: Solar Mosaic LLC
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
Solar was attempted to be transferred with Mosaic Solar Loan Financing to new homeowner before closing of escrow XXXX of XXXX. 

They would not allow it to be transferred, there was a freeze on transfers with Mosaic. 

House Sold XX/XX/year> Addendum was signed at closing for the transfer to be completed within 2 months ( in file ) Unable to fulfill since MOSAIC ended all transfers Mosaic filed for XXXX in XX/XX/year> XXXX XXXX emailed in XX/XX/year> regarding their take over of Mosaic called, Solar Loan Servicing, LLC. 

I called in XXXX to check on transfer process and was told we had to pay off the loan completely and it could not be transferred, which was not part of the original agreement. 

Every email is met with silence at requests for why they are not transferring the loan to current homeowner. 

Every phone call is met with we are not transferring at this time AND we are NOT escalating this matter and no upper management reachable, but you can pay it off $ XXXX for energy we do not use or benefit from since XXXX of 2025, however we are paying {$260.00} every month for this system they REFUSE to Transfer.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-16 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement — Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement
Company: GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I was under the impression I was booking airplane tickets to change the flight for my aunt/uncle from the original flight they made on XXXX. Reservation desk told me they were the branch of XXXX responsible for making flight changes. They informed me it was {$770.00} to make the change to the XXXX flight so they can fly out 1 week later and spend another week With family. Reservation Desk stated they would send me a confirmation email with the Confirmation code for the changed flights. 

I called them on XX/XX/year> to let them know I had not received the confirmation email yet. They said XXXX XXXX was not working and to call back on XX/XX/year>. 
I proceeded to spend 3 hours on the phone with them on XX/XX/year> and finally got A hold of XXXX XXXX who assured me the tickets were booked and to tell my aunt/uncle To go to the airport the next day. Something told me to call XXXX just to confirm what XXXX was stating was true as my aunt/uncle are elderly and do not speak XXXX so I Wanted to make sure they would be able to check in with no problem. 

I called XXXX on XX/XX/year> and they informed me they had NO such ticket for my aunt/uncle. I then proceeded to call XXXX XXXX again and he said it must be a mistake and that he would work on it. By this time, it was the evening of XX/XX/year>. Something in my gut made me start to think that XXXX XXXX was just giving Me false information, so I proceeded to book another ticket directly through XXXX for Both my aunt and uncle and paid another {$900.00} for these tickets. 

The next day after I made sure XXXX and XXXX got on their flight ok, I called XXXX back To ask for a refund. To my discovery THEIR PHONE NUMBER WAS DISCONNECTED!!! 

I proceeded to submit my dispute on XX/XX/year> to my Goldman Sachs Apple Card. 

On XX/XX/year> I received an email from Reservation desk stating their old number did not wok Anymore and to contact them using their new number. I tried to call the new number and it was already disconnected. I have tried and disputed this fraudulent charge 8x since XXXX  and each time it has been denied. This charge was supposed to be for 2 new airline tickets which I never received and had to therefore purchase 2 new tickets directly through the airline. Goldman Sachs has proved they don't even read through the notes I've sent in to try and understand the situation. Every customer support person I have spoken to in each of these 8 calls into customer service understands the dispute and does not understand why it keeps getting denied. Each customer service person has tried to write in their notes information on why this was a fraudulent charge and each time, the dispute is denied. It's been more than 18 months since I first disputed this and it is getting ridiculous.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-16 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: AL

Complaint narrative:
At XXXX XXXX  on XX/XX/year> a fraudulent transaction for {$1900.00} occurred at the XXXX, XXXX  Best Buy ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) utilizing my best buy Credit Card. This transaction included a XXXX XXXX XXXX '' Laptop with a SKU of XXXX and a model of XXXX. I further inquired about asset number, XXXX address number, or service number which could help police identify the device and the store was not able to provide these. Further included in this transaction were an air Duster and Monitor cleaning wipes. A second transaction was attempted at XXXX XXXX for {$100.00} which was declined and triggered an automated fraud alert. I did not authorize these purchases and was not aware I was not in possession of the card being used. I promptly contacted the fraud department for this credit card and they have cancelled the card as well as issued a new one and started an investigation. I am not in physically in XXXX and could not have possibly performed or approved these purchases.

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 2026-02-16 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account — Transaction was not authorized
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: DC

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a complaint regarding Bank XXXX XXXX handling of a debit card fraud claim ( Claim # XXXX ). 

I reported a series of unauthorized debit card transactions totaling approximately {$2400.00}. These were in-person transactions across multiple merchants over a short period of time. I did not make these transactions, did not authorize any person to use my card, and did not have possession of the card at the time the charges occurred. 

Bank of America initially denied my claim based on the passage of time. I requested reconsideration and explained the delayed discovery, including circumstances that disrupted my ability to conduct routine account review. Bank of America then changed its position and denied the claim on the basis that the transactions were conducted by me or by someone authorized to use my card. 

This conclusion is incorrect. I did not authorize these transactions, and the bank has provided no evidence supporting its determination.

I have formally requested documentation supporting the banks conclusion, including transaction authorization records, transaction method ( chip, swipe, or contactless ), signed receipts, and any proof that I or an authorized user conducted the transactions. To date, Bank of America has provided no supporting evidence. 

My concerns are : The bank determined transactions were authorized without providing evidence or explanation of its investigation. 
I did not possess the card at the time of the transactions and did not authorize any user. 
The transactions occurred across multiple merchants, which is consistent with unauthorized use. 
The bank appears to have relied on assumptions rather than a reasonable investigation. 
I reported the transactions promptly upon discovery and acted in good faith. 

I am requesting that Bank of America conduct a proper reinvestigation, provide the documentation supporting its determination, and reimburse the unauthorized transactions. 

I am also requesting review of whether Bank of America complied with its obligations under Regulation E in investigating and resolving this unauthorized electronic fund transfer claim.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief