Consumer complaint received 2025-12-08 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint against JPMorgan Chase & Co. because the company took, or threatened to take, negative and legal action against me regarding an account that I do not owe, did not authorize, and did not create. The companys actions have caused significant stress, financial harm, reputational damage, and ongoing confusion. Furthermore, Chase failed to provide proper verification, failed to investigate the matter reasonably, and continued to communicate in ways that constituted threats of legal escalation and negative consequences despite being notified that the account was disputed. These actions go directly against the consumer protections outlined in the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ).

This complaint is being submitted because I believe Chases conduct is unfair, inaccurate, and unlawful. I am requesting assistance from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau because Chase has failed to resolve the matter despite repeated attempts on my part to dispute, clarify, and correct what clearly appears to be a case of identity theft, unauthorized account activity, or misapplied information.

1. I Do Not Owe This Account It Is Unauthorized or Fraudulent The most important fact in this complaint is that I do not owe this account. I did not open it, authorize it, or agree to its terms, and I did not benefit from any credit, services, or funds associated with it. I have no connection to the account Chase is attempting to associate with me.

Despite this, Chase took actions and threatened to take actions that falsely implied that I was legally responsible for repayment. Chase treated the account as though it were valid, even though no documentation exists tying me to it. At no point did Chase provide a valid, original contract bearing my signature or authenticated identification verifying that I opened the account. Their failure to produce such documentation indicates either identity theft, internal error, or misreporting.

2. Chase Took or Threatened to Take Negative / Legal Action Against Me Chases communications contained statements implying or directly expressing consequences such as : Potential legal escalation Negative credit reporting Additional fees, penalties, or charges associated with nonpayment Transfer of the account to collections Pursuit of all available remedies Warnings that nonpayment may result in further action These statements especially when directed toward a consumer disputing an unauthorized account are considered threats under the FDCPA and are strictly regulated. Chase continued using language suggesting legal consequences after being notified the account was not mine and was actively being disputed. This is intimidating, misleading, and unlawful.

Under FDCPA 807 ( 5 ), a creditor or collector may not threaten actions they can not legally take or do not intend to take. Under FDCPA 807 ( 10 ), they may not use any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect a debt. Under FDCPA 808, they may not engage in conduct intended to harass, oppress, or abuse a consumer.

Because the debt was unauthorized, Chase had no legal right to threaten litigation, negative credit reporting, or additional consequences. Yet they did repeatedly.

3. Chase Continued to Pursue the Account Despite My Disputes I disputed the account. I explained that I did not open it, I did not authorize it, and I did not recognize any of the information tied to it. Despite this, Chase continued to : Send communications about the alleged debt Imply negative consequences Suggest potential escalation Fail to halt communication as required under law Provide no lawful documentation validating ownership Under FDCPA 809 ( b ), when a consumer disputes a debt, collection must cease until verification is provided. Under FCRA 623 ( b ), furnishers ( such as Chase ) must conduct a reasonable investigation and remove or correct any information that can not be verified.

Chase did neither. Their actions show a disregard for consumer dispute rights.

4. Chase Failed to Validate or Provide Documentation Supporting the Debt Chase has provided no documentation proving that I opened the account. A lawful validation requires : A signed contract Documentation showing my identity was verified at account opening Statements confirming transactions linked to me Evidence that I personally benefited from the funds or services Chase provided none of the above. They provided generic statements instead of evidence, and they continued to threaten negative actions despite the absence of validation.

This violates : FDCPA 809 ( b ) FCRA 609 ( a ) FCRA 611 ( a ) A creditor can not pursue a debt let alone threaten legal action if they can not verify it belongs to the consumer.

5. Chase Failed to Conduct a Reasonable Reinvestigation After I disputed the account, Chase was legally required to : Investigate the dispute Review original documentation Compare signatures Evaluate identity theft indicators Determine accuracy Report corrected findings Instead, Chase appears to have relied on automated responses, generic verification codes, or superficial internal checks. That is not a lawful reinvestigation under FCRA 623 ( b ).

A reasonable reinvestigation requires actual examination of the underlying records not clicking a button.

6. Chase Misreported or Attempted to Report False Information to Credit Bureaus Chase threatened to report the account to the credit bureaus as delinquent. Reporting an unauthorized account is a violation of : FCRA 602 ( a ) promoting accuracy FCRA 607 ( b ) maximum possible accuracy FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) can not furnish information known to be inaccurate FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) must flag disputed accounts Because the account was not mine and was actively disputed, Chase had no right to : Threaten credit reporting Furnish negative information Fail to flag the account as disputed Treat the account as valid while lacking documentation Chases behavior put me at risk of severe financial damage, including a drop in credit score, denial of credit, and increased interest rates.

7. Chase Caused Real Harm and Emotional Distress Chases threatening communications, combined with their refusal to validate the debt or investigate properly, caused : Severe anxiety Fear of legal consequences Fear of wage garnishment or lawsuit Stress regarding potential credit damage Confusion and emotional burden Time lost contacting credit bureaus, Chase, and regulatory agencies The harm is not hypothetical it has been real and ongoing.

8. Chase Should Have Recognized This as Potential Identity Theft There were several indicators that this account was fraudulent : I immediately disputed it No documentation matched my signature No address or identifying data aligned with my personal information No transactions matched my behavior Chase could not produce identity-verification evidence Instead of recognizing this as identity theft, Chase continued to pursue and threaten.

Creditors are supposed to apply heightened scrutiny when a consumer denies ownership. Under Red Flags Rules, banks must detect and respond to signs of identity theft. Chase did not.

9. Chase Violated Multiple Federal Consumer Protection Laws FDCPA Violations 807 : False or misleading representations 807 ( 5 ) : Threatening actions not intended or permitted 807 ( 10 ) : Use of deceptive means to collect 808 : Harassment or abuse 809 ( b ) : Failure to validate FCRA Violations 602 : Right to accurate reporting 607 ( b ) : Maximum accuracy requirement 609 ( a ) : Right to information 611 ( a ) : Duty to reinvestigate 623 ( a ) : Furnishers must not report inaccurate info 623 ( b ) : Duty to investigate disputes Chase repeatedly ignored these standards.

10. Threatening Legal Action Is Especially Unacceptable When the Consumer Denies Ownership Threatening legal consequences against a person who does not owe the debt is one of the most serious FDCPA violations. A threat of legal action is legally considered : A form of intimidation A coercive tactic A deceptive representation of authority A violation of debt collection standards Chases wording was constructed to create fear and urgency, pressuring me to pay or respond quickly despite the account being fraudulent.

This behavior is prohibited across multiple legal frameworks because it is abusive and predatory.

11. Chase Failed to Communicate Properly After the Dispute Under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ), if a consumer disputes a debt, the furnisher must report the account as disputed. Chase failed to do so.

Under FDCPA 809 ( b ), all collection activity must cease during validation. Chase failed to do so.

Under FCRA 611 ( a ), incomplete or unverifiable information must be deleted. Chase failed to do so.

Chase had multiple opportunities to correct their behavior and did not.

12. What I Am Requesting as a Fair Resolution A fair and lawful resolution requires Johnson Morgan Chase & Co. to : Stop all negative or legal threats immediately Fully cease all collection activity Not contact me again about this account Not sell, transfer, or assign the debt Provide written confirmation that the account is not mine Provide written verification of all steps taken Stop reporting or attempting to report the account Delete any reporting already made Update internal records to reflect identity theft / unauthorized activity Provide the CFPB with documentation supporting their prior actions These steps align with federal law and ensure no further harm occurs.

13. Summary To summarize : I do not owe this account.

I did not authorize it.

Chase failed to validate it.

Chase took or threatened negative/legal action.

Chase mishandled my dispute.

Chase violated consumer protection laws.

Chase failed to investigate properly. 

Chase continued harmful behavior despite my dispute. 

A fair resolution requires deletion of the account, cessation of all collection activity, written confirmation, and appropriate corrective action.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation