vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Closing an account — Company closed your account
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
As of communication with Citibank they closed my account permanently and ended costumer relation with me due to high dispute filled, however they dont know that, this person have physical evidence like bank statements showing he spends XXXX in just two weeks with other bank chase, and due to his high spending, some merchant overcharge, some merchant didnt provide service and he had to file a dispute more often due to spending too much money in short period of time, as this checking account was a basic checking account not a premium relation banking for high balance deposits, also they unfairly hold the funds I have income XXXX $ monthly from rental property in XXXX my parents own, I transferred XXXX XXXX XXXX from XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Citi bank XXXX XX/XX/year>, next day the account was closed permanently and I didnt even do nothing illegal or violated any terms, but they flagged my account and closed it unfairly however they hold the funds also unfairly, 5 different costumer care negligently told me different things as they told me I can go to branch and get my fund back however they werent able to do so and one times they told me they going to send a cashiers check in 1-2 business days then they say it takes 60-90 days to account closure and to get your funds back. In conclusion they hold my money in their bank and refused to pay it. It caused monetary damages and mental anguish which it will be addressed in court, with filling small claim court for XXXX $ including additional damages and loss of time and wage. however I am filing this complaint to find a alternative solution.

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
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — Applying for or obtaining a modification, forbearance plan, short sale, or deed-in-lieu
Company: SERVICEMAC, LLC
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I have been trying to sell my house for over a year. In that time the market has dropped and we have dropped the pricing numerous times. I have paid my mortgage on time during all the time except during the GOV shutdown. I am a Federal employee and was not getting paid. I communicated that with ServiceMac who took forever to deal with that issue. They finally put me on a forebearance. In XX/XX/XXXX, i contacted them about a possible short sale on my home and they told me that once i receive an offer i am to submit it and they will take it from there. In XX/XX/XXXXXXXX  we received our first offer on the house, full asking price and cash. It was submitted to Service Mac via their email on XX/XX/XXXX by my real estate agent. I submitted it the next day on their portal. On XX/XX/XXXX, we received a confirmation email per the submitted documents and that they are having long waits per processing documents. From the XXXX until today both my real estate agent and i have called numerous times as the buyers needed an answer. WE have both been tossed around by their loan mitigation department. No answers except it takes time for documents to get reviewed and that a short sale isnt guaranteed. I am not permitted to speak with anyone in their short sale department i was told. This is the first offer we have gotten on the house in over a year and its full price and cash. We have now received a second offer and we submitted it. No one will tell us anything. I think they are dragging their feet so that i go into non payment status and they can foreclose on me though i have been doing all my due diligence with trying to get this resolved. We need help please.

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 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was already discharged in bankruptcy and is no longer owed
Company: Resurgent Capital Services L.P.
State: HI

Complaint narrative:
I do not have any record of this debt. It is not on my credit report. This attempt to collect this debt is unfair to me as a consumer and a senior citizen. I have paid off a debt with this company and I am in the process of paying another debt with them. But this debt is unsubstantiated. Thanks for taking care of it for me. Info : XXXX XXXX XXXX LVNV Funding listed as current creditor.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 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: U.S. BANCORP
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
What happened ( summary ) U.S. Bank mishandled and returned {$40000.00} in approved Texas Homeowner Assistance Fund ( TXHAF ) payments by inaccurately reporting that my loan had no delinquency, despite the fact that the delinquency had been resolved through FHA loss mitigation ( Partial Claim ). U.S. Bank failed to coordinate loss mitigation with TXHAF, returned federal assistance without my consent or proper escalation, and caused ongoing financial harm and foreclosure risk. 



Detailed explanation My mortgage is serviced by U.S. Bank Home Mortgage and is an FHA loan subject to HUD loss-mitigation requirements. 

I experienced mortgage delinquency that was resolved through FHA Partial Claims : XX/XX/XXXXXXXX  {$14000.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$32000.00} On XX/XX/XXXX, the Texas Homeowner Assistance Fund ( TXHAF ) guaranteed {$40000.00} toward my loan modification. These funds were later returned by U.S. Bank on the basis that there was no delinquency. 

U.S. Bank failed to disclose that the delinquency had been resolved through a subordinate FHA Partial Claim, which is a loss-mitigation instrument and not evidence that hardship or arrears never existed. By reporting no delinquency without context, U.S. Bank caused TXHAF to deny the case and return the funds.

U.S. Bank : did not coordinate with TXHAF before completing or relying on the Partial Claim, did not seek HUD or TXHAF guidance on whether approved funds could be applied to reduce or retire the Partial Claim, returned {$40000.00} in approved federal assistance without notifying me or obtaining my consent, and failed to inform me that completing the Partial Claim would make HAF funds unusable.

As a direct result of U.S. Banks loss-mitigation sequencing and reporting failures, approved federal assistance was rendered unusable and returned, and I now face ongoing foreclosure risk and financial harm. 

TXHAF has confirmed in writing that the case was denied solely due to the servicer-reported no delinquency status and that TXHAF relied on the information provided by U.S. Bank .

Why this is a problem U.S. Banks actions constitute : failure to properly apply and coordinate loss mitigation, inaccurate and misleading servicing information, improper return of federal assistance, and failure to act in the borrowers best interest during loss mitigation. 

These errors directly caused loss of {$40000.00} in approved assistance and materially worsened my housing stability.

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 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Federal student loan servicing
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Received bad information about your loan
Company: MOHELA
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
My student loans were originally managed by XXXX XXXX XXXX before being transferred to MOHELA in XXXX or XXXX. Following this transfer, I requested a breakdown of my loan balances, but MOHELA failed to respond to my inquiry. I also attempted to contact them via phone and mail regarding Public Service Loan Forgiveness ( PSLF ) and received no response. Furthermore, after applying for an Income-Driven Repayment ( IDR ) plan and receiving confirmation of my repayment terms, the payment amount was altered without explanation. Finally, despite receiving correspondence stating my account was merely transitioning to a new servicing platform and would not be transferred, the loans were moved anyway. I have since received notification that the Department of Education is now servicing my loans. I had multiple exchanges with Mohela which left me bewildered and without any of the answers to my inquiries.

Company response to consumer: Untimely response
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 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: BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I am a New York consumer disputing a financed credit card charge related to a vacation club membership sold under material misrepresentation. 

The merchant, XXXX XXXX XXXX, sold the membership during a high-pressure sales presentation while I was traveling. The salesperson promised unlimited discounted travel and guaranteed savings, which are not reflected in the written contract. The agreement is a long-term obligation with significant undisclosed limitations. 

After the initial purchase, the merchant contacted me again on XX/XX/year>, and sold an additional XXXX membership claiming it would reduce annual fees and improve benefits. This post-sale offer directly contradicts the original agreement and demonstrates deceptive sales practices. 

I sent written notice of cancellation, which the merchant acknowledged. I have not used any services. I disputed the charges with Barclays. Barclays completed an investigation ( Case # XXXX ) and denied permanent credit, relying primarily on the existence of a contract and not adequately considering evidence of misrepresentation, post-sale manipulation, and regulatory complaints. 

I have filed complaints with the Federal Trade Commission ( Report # XXXX ), the XXXX XXXX XXXX ( complaint closed unresolved ), and the New York Attorney General ( Intake # XXXX ). 

I am requesting executive-level review of Barclays handling of this dispute, confirmation that payments and interest remain frozen during review, assurance that no negative credit reporting occurs, and reconsideration of the disputed charge based on deceptive business practices.

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 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Federal student loan servicing
Issue: Struggling to repay your loan — Can't temporarily delay making payments
Company: MOHELA
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I filled for unemployment deferment on XX/XX/XXXX I became unemployed on XX/XX/XXXX. I submitted paperwork for my unemployment and they are reporting I am 60 days late.

Company response to consumer: Untimely response
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem when making payments — You never received your bill or did not know a payment was due
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
Intentional AutoPay Failure, Excessive Fund Holds, and Notice of Potential Litigation regarding Account ending in XXXX ( Credit ) & XXXX ( Checking ) Date : XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. Failure of AutoPay and Intentional Technical Default I am filing this complaint to document a deliberate " Technical Default '' engineered by Bank of America. My Credit Card account ending in XXXX had a Payment Due Date of XX/XX/XXXX. My account was explicitly set to " AutoPay : Pay Statement Balance on Due Date ''. Despite this active setting and sufficient funds in my linked XXXX account, Bank of Americas system willfully failed to execute the payment on the XXXX. I was forced to perform a manual payment today, XX/XX/XXXX, to prevent further damage. This is a clear attempt to create a false record of late payment. 
XXXX. Predatory Fund Holds to Restrict Liquidity Simultaneously, Bank of America is obstructing my liquidity by placing an unreasonable 6-day hold on a mobile check deposit of {$830.00} made on XX/XX/XXXX. These funds are being held until XX/XX/XXXX. This unjustified hold, combined with the AutoPay failure, demonstrates a coordinated effort to manipulate my account standing. 
XXXX. Breach of Consumer Protection ( Merchant Dispute ) Bank of America further refused to act on a legitimate dispute for a {$25.00} charge from XXXX XXXX Transaction Date : XX/XX/XXXX ), where the merchant breached a 5-year price guarantee. The bank 's refusal to follow the Fair Credit Billing Act protocols indicates a systemic disregard for consumer rights. 
XXXX. Notice of Intent to Sue Let this complaint serve as a formal " paper trail '' for future litigation. I am aware that banks often use these manufactured " glitches '' as a pretext to unilaterally reduce consumer credit limits ( Adverse Action ). 
Be advised : If Bank of America uses this XX/XX/XXXX system failure as a reason to lower my current credit limits ( including the {$11000.00} limit on account XXXX ) or to negatively impact my credit score, I will initiate a legal lawsuit against Bank of America for bad-faith business practices, breach of contract, and damages related to credit defamation. 
Required Immediate Remediation : Provide a written admission that the AutoPay failure on XX/XX/XXXX was a Bank of America system error. 
Ensure NO late fees, interest, or negative credit reporting occurs for this cycle. 
Immediate release of the {$830.00} hold. 
Permanent reversal of the {$25.00} Optimum charge. 
I am tracking every interaction and screenshotting every " error '' for my legal counsel. Fix your system immediately. 
Regards, 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 monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was result of identity theft
Company: T.S. Holdings
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
IQ Data XXXX XXXX XXXX is engaging in repeated and willful debt collection activity on accounts that are the direct result of identity theft, despite having actual prior knowledge of my identity-theft victim status. IQ Data previously attempted to collect a separate fraudulent account using my compromised identifiers, and that account was transmitted to them by the nationwide consumer reporting agencies as identity theft and permanently blocked and removed pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ( a ). That prior block and removal placed IQ Data on actual notice that my personal identifiers are compromised and can not be used to lawfully collect, process, or pursue debts. Notwithstanding that actual knowledge, IQ Data initiated new collection activity on a different alleged account purportedly owed to XXXX XXXX XXXX ( TX ), which is likewise the result of identity theft and derived from the same compromised identifiers. IQ Datas XX/XX/year> collection notice relies on an unauthorized name variant and multiple false address variants that do not match my verified identifiers and were never associated with me. IQ Data is treating this matter as an ordinary consumer debt despite identity-theft notice already being on record through the consumer reporting agencies, and despite the law prohibiting continued collection once identity theft has been established. IQ Datas conduct constitutes willful misrepresentation, unlawful collection after notice, and continued processing of identity-theft data, in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Mobile or digital wallet
Issue: Managing, opening, or closing your mobile wallet account — 
Company: CLGF Holdco 1, LLC
State: CO

Complaint narrative:
mistakenly disputed a transaction on my Milestone credit card through Concora Credit, but later realized the transactions were valid. I contacted Concora to request assistance in reversing the dispute and obtaining a written statement confirming the payment was reversed and the dispute is closed. 
I need this statement to provide to XXXX, an app I use to make payments. Currently, my XXXX  account is on hold until I can provide this statement. I have been contacting both Concora and XXXX daily, but nothing has been resolved. 
Concora has stated that they emailed XXXX  regarding the reversal, but I need a written statement from Concora addressed to me, not XXXX XXXX  understands that Concora is attempting to reach them, but they require a formal statement from me confirming the issue has been resolved. Despite repeated calls, I have not received the required statement or assistance from either party. 
I am requesting help to obtain the necessary written confirmation so my XXXX  account can be reactivated.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan — Other advances of future income
Issue: Issues with repayment — 
Company: Block, Inc.
State: CO

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint regarding Square , Inc. ( Block, Inc. ) for what I believe to be deceptive, unfair, and potentially fraudulent business practices related to my point-of-sale account and a working capital loan. 

My business maintained an active Square point-of-sale account in good standing. Square approved and funded a working capital loan in the amount of {$2700.00}, which was successfully deposited. Shortly after submitting and funding this loan, Square abruptly shut off my point-of-sale system without prior warning, explanation, or an opportunity to resolve any alleged issue.

When I contacted Square for clarification, I was not provided with any specific or logical reason for the shutdown. Square representatives repeatedly cited vague internal guidelines or risk policies but refused to explain what guideline was allegedly violated, what transaction or activity triggered the shutdown, or how compliance could be restored. Square did not ask any questions, request documentation, or attempt to investigate or clarify the situation before disabling my account. 

As a result of Squares actions, my business was immediately unable to process payments, causing operational disruption and financial harm. Despite disabling the very system required to generate revenue, Square is now demanding immediate repayment of the {$2700.00} loan. This places my business in an impossible position, as Square simultaneously removed my ability to earn revenue through their platform while insisting on full repayment.

I believe this conduct is unfair and deceptive. Square approved and funded a loan based on my account activity and business profile, then shut down my access without justification, transparency, or due process. The refusal to provide a clear explanation, coupled with the demand for immediate repayment after disabling essential services, appears predatory and inconsistent with fair lending and consumer protection standards. 

Squares actions suggest a systemic practice of approving loans and then unilaterally disabling accounts without explanation, while still enforcing repayment obligations. This lack of transparency and refusal to engage in reasonable communication raises serious concerns about potential fraud or abusive business practices. 

I am requesting that the Federal Trade Commission investigate Squares lending and account shutdown practices, including whether they violate consumer protection laws, unfair business practice standards, or lending regulations.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Other banking product or service
Issue: Managing an account — Deposits and withdrawals
Company: GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
Product : Checking or Savings Account Company : Marcus by Goldman Sachs Issue : Trouble accessing funds/ Account closed or restricted What happened?

A few weeks ago, I deposited a check for {$9800.00} into my Marcus by Goldman Sachs account. After the deposit posted, I attempted to make outgoing transfers. 

A {$500.00} transfer was declined despite the system previously allowing smaller withdrawals. I then attempted to transfer {$2000.00}. At that point, Marcus contacted me multiple times stating the activity appeared fraudulent and informed me that my account would need to be closed and a new account opened. 

I remained on the phone for approximately one hour while a Marcus representative assisted with opening a new account. During that call, I explicitly requested that the remaining balance of approximately {$7500.00} be transferred to my verified personal bank account. The representative confirmed that this request was approved. 

Later, I received another call from a Marcus prevention specialist stating that my account was now restricted and that they could not verify my identity. This statement is false and contradictory. My identity had already been verified, and Marcus representatives had contacted my personal bank directly to verify my external account information.

Despite this, my account remains restricted, and Marcus has failed to release my remaining funds.

Why is this a problem? 
My identity was verified prior to the account restriction Marcus confirmed my external bank account directly My account was closed or restricted after verification Marcus is now withholding approximately {$7500.00} without a valid explanation I have not been provided a clear timeline or method for receiving my remaining balance This has caused financial hardship and appears to be an improper delay in releasing customer funds after account closure. 




Additional details I have contacted Marcus multiple times and received inconsistent information. I am filing this complaint due to the banks failure to resolve the issue directly and their continued withholding of my funds.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan — Installment loan
Issue: Charged fees or interest you didn't expect — 
Company: Collection Management Holdings, LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
Attempt to collect debt that is not owed or not my debt

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: Management Location Services Inc.
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
On XXXX XXXX I spoke with XXXX XXXX about a debt I owed. I agreed to pay {$72.00} bi weekly for XXXX weeks for a total of {$1400.00}. Since then, they have been withdrawing {$76.00} out of my bank account. Nowhere in the paperwork they emailed to me or that was discussed stated anything about charging a bank fee. I emailed them today and they responded back that it is a bank fee I am paying as well. They again sent me another letter by email showing that my payments would be {$72.00} and nothing was mentioned again about a bank fee. This is a whole payment worth of bank fees they are charging me when it wasnt agreed on.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation