vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Medical debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was paid
Company: Ability Recovery Services, LLC
State: MS

Complaint narrative:
Ability recovery service debt company got medical debt from XXXX XXXX XXXX that was charged off by XXXX XXXX XXXX I dont know how ability recovery service debt company receive the charge of debt and I didnt receive a 1099C collection of debt from not one of the companies, and I feel like criminal charges should be filed against ability recovery service for not sending me a 1099C collection of debt in two years and I feel like they should compensate me for destroying my credit report with a -old charge off account. Ucc9-210 and 15 usc 1692g and ucc3-501 the debt was sold to a third-party without my consent so its already void and by these rules ability to recovery servers should be criminal to charge for not sending me a 1099C collection of dead for I can file on my taxes and I will also like to be compensated for ability to recovery service holding my credit hostage for over two years thanks and I greatly appreciate yall

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 — Medical debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: First Financial Resources, Inc.
State: NH

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint regarding the unlawful re-aging and misreporting of a consumer debt, resulting in false credit reporting, deceptive collection practices, and violations of federal and New Hampshire law. 
The original service date for the alleged debt is XX/XX/XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ). However, the debt was improperly re-aged and re-dated to XX/XX/XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) by the collection agency, FST Financial Resources, and subsequently reported by XXXX  and XXXX. 
This alteration falsely represents the legal status and age of the debt and appears designed to evade statutory limitations and extend reporting and collection activity unlawfully. 
Detailed Facts The original service giving rise to the alleged debt occurred in XX/XX/XXXX. 
No new service, contract, or obligation occurred in XXXX. 
Despite this, the collection agency changed the date associated with the account to XX/XX/XXXX, effectively re-aging the debt. 
XXXX  and XXXX  accepted and published this inaccurate information.

This re-aging makes the debt appear newly delinquent and within statutory collection and reporting periods when it is not.

I dispute the accuracy of this reporting and assert that the date of first delinquency was unlawfully altered.

Violations of Federal Law Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) : 15 USC 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 5 ) prohibits a furnisher from changing the date of first delinquency to a later date.

15 USC 1681c ( a ) ( 4 ) and ( 5 ) limit reporting to 7 years plus 180 days from the original delinquency date.

Re-aging the debt constitutes false credit reporting and a direct violation of the FCRA.

Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) : 15 USC 1692e prohibits false or misleading representations regarding the legal status of a debt.

Re-aging a debt to make it appear legally enforceable or collectible when it is not is a deceptive collection practice.

Violations of New Hampshire Law RSA 508:4 New Hampshire imposes a three-year statute of limitations on personal actions, including consumer debt collection. Altering dates to evade this limitation is unlawful.

RSA 358-A ( New Hampshire Consumer Protection Act ) Re-aging and misrepresenting the age and enforceability of a debt constitutes : A deceptive act A misrepresentation of legal rights An unfair or deceptive trade practice This conduct qualifies as state credit fraud and consumer deception under New Hampshire law .

Harm Caused False damage to my credit profile Exposure to unlawful collection activity Ongoing risk of improper legal action based on falsified dates Time and expense spent disputing knowingly inaccurate reporting

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: Electronic communications — You told them to stop contacting you, but they keep trying
Company: Paramount GR Holdings, LLC
State: SC

Complaint narrative:
I am writing to formally document my ongoing issues with the solar panel system installed at my property, financed through GoodLeap and installed/provided by XXXX XXXX .

Despite my repeated attempts to address these problems, I have received no resolution. The system I purchased has significant issues that breach the terms of my contract, and the companies involved have failed to fulfill their obligations. I have reached out multiple times requesting : 1. Inspection and repair of the installed solar panels.

2. Correction of system issues to bring it into proper working condition as guaranteed in the contract.

Instead of resolving the matter, I have been repeatedly shuttled back and forth between GoodLeap and XXXX XXXX, with neither party taking responsibility or providing a timeline for resolution. This pattern of behavior has caused significant frustration, financial strain, and a breach of trust.

I consider this situation to constitute : Misrepresentation of the product and service at the time of sale Breach of contract due to failure to provide a functioning system and proper support Unfair business practices by repeatedly deflecting responsibility between the companies I am requesting the following immediate actions : 1. A formal inspection and repair of my solar system by a qualified technician at no cost to me.

2. A written confirmation outlining the steps each company will take to resolve this issue and a timeline for completion.

3. A commitment that neither company will further delay or deflect responsibility, and that communication will be direct and actionable moving forward.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Other features, terms, or problems — Problem with rewards from credit card
Company: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a complaint regarding missing credit card reward points associated with my Chase credit card and my linked XXXX XXXX member account. 

I opened this credit card in XX/XX/year> and met the required spending threshold for the welcome bonus within the specified time period. In addition, I earned reward points through regular card spending, which are reflected on my monthly statements, including my XX/XX/year> statement. 

However, the reward points have not been transferred to my XXXX XXXX member account, including both the welcome bonus and points earned from regular spending. 

In XX/XX/year>, Chase proactively contacted me regarding this issue and sent me a written response acknowledging the problem ( In attachment ). However, no corrective action was taken, and the reward points were still not transferred to my XXXX XXXX member account. I was informed that the issue would be resolved within 30 days, but the problem has remained unresolved for several months despite subsequent follow-up attempts. 

I also attempted to contact Chase through XXXX XXXX, but that option was unavailable for this issue. 

I am requesting that Chase properly transfer all earned reward points to my XXXX XXXX member account, including the welcome bonus and points from regular spending. I would also appreciate a clear explanation for why these points were not transferred as expected. 

Thank you for your assistance.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/year> Re : Formal Dispute of Alleged Debt and Notice of Unlawful Debt Parking To Whom It May Concern, This letter serves as a formal dispute of the alleged debt you have reported and/or attempted to collect. I dispute the validity, accuracy, and ownership of this alleged debt in its entirety.

This dispute is made pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692 et seq., and the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.

Specifically, I am concerned that this account constitutes " debt parking, '' an unlawful practice in which a debt collector reports a debt to consumer reporting agencies without first contacting the consumer or providing legally required validation. The Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) has determined that debt parking violates federal consumer protection laws.

Pursuant to FDCPA 809 ( b ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ), I am requesting full validation of this alleged debt, including but not limited to : - The name and address of the original creditor - The amount of the alleged debt with a complete accounting - Copies of any contracts or agreements bearing my signature - Proof that you are legally authorized to collect this debt Under the FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ), you are required to ensure that all information furnished to consumer reporting agencies is accurate and verifiable. Reporting unverified or inaccurate information is a violation of federal law.

Until such validation is provided, you must immediately cease all collection activity and remove this account from any and all consumer reporting agencies. Failure to comply may result in complaints filed with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ), Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ), and my State Attorney General, as well as potential civil liability.

This letter is not a refusal to pay, but a notice that your claim is disputed.

Please provide your response in writing only. 
Sincerely, XXXX 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 explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
My phone was stolen at between XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, and after being unsuccessful in recovering it, I returned to my apartment and checked all of my accounts to ensure that there was no further damage. Upon gaining access to my emails, I realized that whoever stole it found their way into all of my accounts, and noticed that a loan and a debit card from XXXX were opened, a credit card from XXXX was opened, and multiple fraudulent transactions were made with my XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, and Wells Fargo account as well. Regarding Wells Fargo, my transaction and ATM limit were both increased without my knowledge that same night and the following transactions were made within the span of a few hours on XX/XX/XXXX ( they were settled on XX/XX/XXXX ) : - From my Savings account {$1000.00} XXXX transaction to someone named XXXX XXXX - From my Checking account : {$1000.00} Transfer to XXXX XXXX {$2000.00} Transfer to XXXX XXXX {$1000.00} Transfer to XXXX XXXX {$2500.00} Transfer to XXXX XXXX {$3000.00} Transfer to XXXX XXXX {$500.00} Transfer to XXXX XXXX {$2000.00} ATM Withdrawal {$5000.00} Transfer to XXXX XXXX  {$5000.00} Transfer to XXXX XXXX There was also several failed transactions : {$5300.00} purchase attempted at XXXX XXXX twice {$1000.00} additional transfer to XXXX XXXX attempted twice {$5500.00} transfer to XXXX XXXX attempted once I filed a claim on XX/XX/XXXX as soon as I saw all of the transactions and submitted my police report ( XXXX ), detective 's information, and extra claim numbers and just received a letter in the mail stating that my claim was denied due to whoever made all of these transactions being an authorized user.

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 — Credit card debt
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive enough information to verify debt
Company: Rausch Sturm LLP
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
XXXX XXXX XXXX called and was lft on hold for 45 min XXXX XXXX went on web and did a payment arrangement of {$290.00} every month .end date XX/XX/XXXX. No response, and no money was taken out -XXXX  XXXX XXXX, no response when called when online, and to check and no response to the payment arrangement XXXX XXXX XXXX called XXXX ( original creditor ) and they provided another phone number to call, and I called and they had me on hold 20 min then went to vm and i left a messaage for them to call me back. 
As of today XX/XX/XXXX no reply

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 — Credit card debt
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Threatened to sue you for very old debt
Company: ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.
State: TN

Complaint narrative:
The company is requesting payment for an account. I have never made an agreement with this company and they continue to try to contact me about the debt.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
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: DISCOVER BANK
State: NH

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX There was a charge on my Discover XXXX card for {$150.00} from a place called XXXX XXXX XXXX. I did not recognize the charge and disputed it with Discover and they gave me a provisional credit. As of XX/XX/XXXX they have added this charge back to my card as they indicate they have proof from the vendor that this was a legitimate charge. 
I asked Discover to send me proof of the purchase- I have attached a screen shot of what they sent. 
According to this invoice I purchased a XXXX calendar for {$150.00} I used the website outlined in the invoice and it came up as " site can not be reached ''. 
The phone number comes up as " spam '' - I have that proof attached to this complaint. 

I sent this information to Discover and they indicate they are not responsible for a fraudulent charge. I explained to them that the vendor accessed Discover and charged my card perhaps because Discover XXXX have the appropriate safety measures. I did not purchase a calendar for {$150.00} nor did I authorize this charge. 

Could you please provide me assistance to get Discover to provide me this credit.

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: Fraud or scam — 
Company: Block, Inc.
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
On or about XX/XX/XXXX, I was the victim of an impersonation scam through Cash App. A fraudster posed as a known contact using an existing message thread that I had previously used to communicate with this individual. Believing I was communicating with someone I knew, I sent XXXX Cash App payments totaling {$990.00} in good faith ( {$490.00} on XX/XX/XXXX and {$490.00} on XX/XX/XXXX. 

Once I realized the account had been compromised and that I was communicating with a scammer, I immediately reported the transactions to Cash App as fraud. I cooperated fully with their investigation, submitted an appeal, and provided supporting information. I also filed a police report and an FTC fraud report. 

Cash App reimbursed {$250.00} for XXXX transaction but denied reimbursement for the remaining {$240.00} of that transaction, as well as the full {$490.00} from the second transaction, without explaining why the transactions were treated differently. The response I received was generic and did not address the impersonation, the use of an existing communication thread, or why the transactions were treated differently.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — CD (Certificate of Deposit)
Issue: Managing an account — Problem accessing account
Company: AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY
State: HI

Complaint narrative:
I can not access my XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX account due to a legacy login error. Ive contacted support XXXX times over a year apart. Each time, I was promised a callback and resolution. No action was taken. I can not view or manage my funds online.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Threatened or suggested your credit would be damaged
Company: I.C. System, Inc.
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I C SYSTEM INC Collection account. {$140.00} past due as of XX/XX/2026. 

This company has disregarded its obligation under 12 CFR 1006.34 ( b ) ( 5 ) to provide validation information. Instead, they have improperly placed a collection account on my consumer report without first complying with federal requirements.

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: 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: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint against Goldman Sachs Bank USA regarding its repeated failure to properly investigate a disputed transaction on my Apple Card, in violation of its obligations under the Fair Credit Billing Act. 

Summary of the dispute On XX/XX/24, XXXX Rent A Car charged my Apple Card : {$110.00} for the full rental cost ( paid in advance ) {$500.00} as a refundable security deposit The vehicle was returned on XX/XX/24. The {$500.00} security deposit was never refunded. 

I filed my initial dispute on XX/XX/24. Since then, Goldman Sachs has closed and reopened this dispute multiple timesover a XXXX perioddespite the merchants repeated failure to substantiate its claims. 

Merchant misrepresentations XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has provided inconsistent and unsupported explanations for retaining my deposit : First, XXXX falsely claimed a XXXX was issued instead of refunding the deposit. No voucher was ever provided, and XXXX has never produced documentation proving XXXX was issued. 

Later, XXXX changed its position and alleged the deposit was retained for vehicle damage. XXXX has never provided : a damage report photographs inspection records repair invoices or any evidence whatsoever that damage existed The only document XXXX provided is a copy of the rental agreement. A contract does not substantiate damage and does not justify retaining a security deposit. 

Goldman Sachs failure Despite the merchants lack of evidence and shifting explanations, Goldman Sachs repeatedly closed my dispute stating there was no evidence to substantiate my claim. This reverses the burden of proof and improperly treats unsupported merchant assertions as evidence. 

Goldman Sachs has failed to : Require the merchant to substantiate its claims Address the merchants contradictory explanations Conduct a reasonable investigation as required by law As of today, Goldman Sachs can not identify a single piece of evidence showing : A XXXX was issued, or Damage occurred to justify withholding the deposit Requested resolution : I am requesting that : Goldman Sachs issue a permanent credit for the {$500.00} security deposit, and Goldman Sachs provide a written explanation of how this dispute was previously closed despite the merchant providing no substantiating evidence. 

This matter has been unreasonably prolonged for over XXXX  months and reflects a systemic failure in Goldman Sachs dispute resolution process. 

I am submitting supporting documentation, including the rental receipt and dispute correspondence, with this complaint. 

XXXX XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Deposits and withdrawals
Company: RANDOLPH-BROOKS FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am disputing an unauthorized debit card charge that caused my checking account to be overdrawn. 

I paid a merchant called XXXX for airline tickets. The merchant never issued any airline ticket or e-ticket, only a booking number. No service was ever provided. 

I cancelled the transaction, and XXXX initially refunded the charge and replaced my debit card on XX/XX/XXXX. 

Despite this, the merchant charged my account again on XX/XX/XXXX without authorization, using the replaced card information. This charge caused an overdraft and overdraft fees. 

I asked XXXX to reopen the dispute for service not provided and unauthorized debit card use, but XXXX refused, relying only on the merchants statement and not the fact that no ticket exists. 

I am requesting CFPB assistance to require XXXX to properly investigate this debit card dispute, reverse the XX/XX/XXXX charge, and refund all overdraft fees caused by this unauthorized transaction.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Fee problem
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
From XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, I experienced severe pandemic-related family medical hardship. My son is a long-term childhood XXXX XXXX survivor and medically high-risk. Under direct advice from his pediatric hematology and long-term oncology doctors, I significantly limited work and outside exposure because it was unknown how he would respond if he contracted XXXX. 

During this time, I attempted to cancel unnecessary merchant subscriptions tied to my Wells Fargo checking accounts. Many companies had no functioning customer service or online cancellation due to pandemic shutdowns. 

Wells Fargo continued allowing merchant debits to post, which triggered repeated overdraft fees. In XXXX alone, Wells Fargo charged over {$800.00} in overdraft fees on XXXX account. That account eventually closed because I could not afford to pay overdraft fees. A second account later closed with approximately a {$400.00} negative balance, again caused solely by overdraft fees. 

These balances were not due to purchases or misuse. They resulted from fee stacking during extraordinary hardship. 

Wells Fargo is reporting these accounts to XXXX  and/or Early Warning XXXX XXXX XXXX it nearly impossible for me to open a checking account. 

I no longer have historical statements due to the age of the accounts and multiple moves. Wells Fargo must review its internal records to validate the transactions and fees.

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