Consumer complaint received 2025-12-01 00:00:00
Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan — Installment loan
Issue: Problem with additional add-on products or services — 
Company: Affirm Holdings, Inc
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
CFPB Complaint Product / issue : Product : Buy Now, Pay Later ( Affirm, Inc. ) Problem : Billing dispute / charged for goods not agreed to / dispute handling What happened? ( Narrative to paste ) I am filing a complaint against Affirm , Inc. regarding a Buy Now, Pay Later ( BNPL ) transaction used to finance furniture from XXXX XXXX. Because of confusing split order confirmations showing {$0.00} balances and a mishandled dispute, I am now being billed for more furniture than I knowingly agreed to purchase. I believe this involves a billing error under Regulation Z / Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ), as applied to BNPL, and raises concerns under the CFPBs UDAAP ( unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices ) authority. 

Facts and timeline XXXX. I purchased a Dante dining table and a Plinth coffee table from XXXX XXXX using Affirm financing under XXXX XXXX Order XXXX. 
XXXX. Interior Icons later notified me that the coffee table would not be delivered until late XXXX, which was too late for my design project. I responded that the date for the coffee table was too far away and that I wanted to cancel the coffee table and only proceed with the dining table. 
XXXX. Instead of clearly cancelling the coffee table, XXXX XXXX told me they would split the order. After that, I received XXXX separate split-order confirmations : Order XXXX XXXX dining table ( about {$3900.00} ) Order XXXX XXXX coffee table ( about {$1200.00} ) XXXX. Each of those confirmations shows : Subtotal equal to the full item price, An Order discount equal to the full price, labeled as a split from XXXX, and A Total of {$0.00}, plus a You saved [ full price ] message. 
In other words, both the dining table and coffee table split orders show a full discount and a {$0.00} total. Given that I had just requested cancellation of the coffee table, this reasonably looked like the original charges for both items had been zeroed out or cancelled. 
XXXX. In reliance on those {$0.00} confirmations, I then placed a new order for the dining table only under a different order number ( XXXX ) with Affirm, because I believed the original order had been cancelled/credited and I still needed XXXX dining table. 
XXXX. In an email exchange with Interior Icons, I explained that the original dining table order was zeroed out just like the coffee table, and I asked them to push the canceled order to Affirm because I now appeared to have XXXX table orders. The XXXX XXXX representative later confirmed that there were XXXX table orders under XXXX and XXXX. I made clear that I only wanted and intended to purchase XXXX dining table and no coffee table. 
XXXX. Weeks later, the delivery company contacted me to schedule delivery for XXXX tables, even though I had only intended to buy XXXX table and had clearly rejected the delayed coffee table. 
XXXX. I then filed a dispute with Affirm and provided : My email where I asked to cancel the coffee table due to the XXXX delivery date ; The split-order confirmations for XXXX and XXXX showing full discounts and Total {$0.00} for both items ; and The email thread where I told XXXX XXXX that the original table was XXXX out like the coffee table and asked them to push the cancelled order to Affirm because I now had XXXX outstanding orders. 
XXXX. Affirm denied my dispute, stating that my proof was insufficient, without giving any meaningful explanation of how they evaluated the documents or why it is appropriate to bill me for what is effectively a duplicate furniture obligation created by confusing split-order communications and {$0.00} confirmations. 

Why I believe this violates CFPB-administered law XXXX. Billing error under Regulation Z / Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) Under 12 C.F.R. 1026.13 ( Regulation Z Fair Credit Billing ), a billing error includes : ( a ) charges for goods or services not accepted or not delivered as agreed, and ( b ) charges that reflect an extension of credit not actually made to the consumer. 
Because the CFPBs BNPL interpretive rule treats certain BNPL products ( like Affirms digital account ) as credit cards, these billing-error protections apply to my BNPL loan . 
In my case, the duplicate table obligation and/or continued obligation on the split order is a billing error because : I did not intend to incur multiple financed obligations for the same furniture ; and The transaction is not delivered as agreed : I agreed to XXXX dining table and no coffee table after rejecting the delayed delivery date. 
Affirms response that my proof was insufficient, without a substantive explanation or clear consideration of the {$0.00} split-order confirmations and email trail, suggests that it did not conduct the reasonable investigation required by XXXX. 
XXXX. Unfair or deceptive acts or practices ( UDAAP ) under the Consumer Financial Protection Act The split-order confirmations are objectively misleading : each shows a full discount equal to the item price and a {$0.00} total, with You saved [ full price ]. In the context of my explicit cancellation request, a reasonable consumer would interpret this as the original charges being cancelled or credited. 
Affirms refusal to correct the account despite having copies of these {$0.00} confirmations and my emails asking to push the cancelled order to Affirm causes me substantial financial harm ( being billed for more furniture than I agreed to ), which I can not reasonably avoid. 
This combination of misleading merchant documentation and Affirms dispute handling is, in my view, deceptive and unfair under the CFPBs UDAAP standard. 
XXXX. FCRA / Regulation V concerns ( if reported to credit bureaus ) If this disputed obligation is or will be reported to consumer reporting agencies, I am also disputing its accuracy. Under Regulation V ( FCRA ), furnishers must not continue reporting information they know or reasonably should know is inaccurate and must conduct a reasonable investigation of disputes. 
Affirm should not report, or should correct/delete, any information related to a duplicate furniture obligation it can not substantiate. 

What I want the company to do Correct my Affirm account so that I am responsible for only XXXX dining table ( the final replacement order ) and no coffee table, consistent with my clear intent and the {$0.00} split-order confirmations. 
Cancel or remove any duplicate or cancelled/zeroed-out obligation tied to the original split order ( XXXX / XXXX ). 
Confirm in writing that there will be no late fees or negative consequences arising from the disputed amount and that any related credit reporting will be corrected or deleted. 

I have supporting documents, including the original Your order is being prepared email showing the late coffee table delivery date and my cancellation request, the split-order confirmations for XXXX and XXXX showing {$0.00} totals, and the email thread where I asked XXXX XXXX to push the cancelled order to Affirm and where XXXX XXXX confirms there are XXXX table orders. I will upload these as part of this complaint. To date I have only accepted delivery of XXXX table and refused the XXXX table.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation