vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-02 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive notice of right to dispute
Company: National Credit Adjusters, LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint because NCA reported a collection account on my credit report for {$880.00}, and I have no idea what this alleged debt is. I never received any written notice, validation letter, billing statement, or initial communication from NCA before this account was placed on my credit report. I was not informed of the alleged original creditor, the nature of the debt, or my right to dispute it prior to credit reporting. 
I have done my due diligence. NCA is a third-party debt collector, and as such, it is legally required to provide proper notice and validation before engaging in collection activity. Reporting a collection to a credit bureau is a collection activity. By reporting this account without first providing the required validation notice, NCA deprived me of my rights under federal law and made it impossible for me to meaningfully identify or dispute the alleged debt. 
Despite my disputes and repeated requests for validation, no documentation has been produced to substantiate that this debt is valid, that the balance is accurate, or that NCA has authority to collect it. Instead, the collection continues to be reported, causing ongoing harm to my credit profile. 
Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), a debt collector must provide a written validation notice containing the amount of the debt, the name of the creditor, and notice of my right to dispute the debt within five ( 5 ) days of the initial communication. Continuing to report a debt without providing validation violates the FDCPA and exposes the collector to statutory damages of up to {$1000.00}, regardless of the balance amount. 
In addition, by furnishing this collection without proper identification or validation, NCA and the credit reporting agencies have violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and Metro 2 accuracy standards, which require that reported information be complete, accurate, and verifiable. A collection account that can not be validated can not lawfully remain on a consumers credit report. 

What I am requesting again as proper validation, to lawfully continue reporting or collecting this account, NCA must provide : The full legal name of the company and proof it has authority to collect The name of the original creditor and documentation showing how the debt was assigned or placed with NCA A complete itemization of the {$880.00} balance, including dates, fees, and calculations The date of first delinquency and proof the reporting timeline is accurate A copy of the contract, agreement, or account statement bearing my responsibility Proof that a proper written validation notice was sent, including the date and address used None of this has been provided.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-02 00:00:00
Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan — Installment loan
Issue: Struggling to pay your loan — 
Company: Uprova Credit, LLC
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
CFPB, Uprova Credit , LLC responded to my prior CFPB complaint by proposing a payment plan that requires mandatory ACH authorization as a condition of settlement. I am not refusing to resolve this account ; however, the proposed terms are not workable and expose me to unreasonable risk. 

Under Uprovas proposal, ACH is required as the default payment method, and debit card payments are only permitted if I call customer service the day before each scheduled payment to cancel the ACH withdrawal for that specific date. This structure places the burden entirely on the consumer, is impractical to manage repeatedly, and creates a risk of unintended withdrawals. Given the dispute history and CFPB involvement, I am not comfortable reauthorizing ACH access to my bank account. 

Additionally, the proposed settlement does not clearly state that the account will be considered settled in full upon completion of payments, nor does it provide written confirmation that the account will be closed, that collection activity will permanently cease, or how the account will be reported to credit bureaus after payment. 

After receiving this response, I contacted Uprova Credit , LLC customer service directly in good faith to attempt to resolve the issue. Customer service was unable to assist, could not offer any alternative payment methods or settlement terms, and did not have the authority to address concerns regarding mandatory ACH authorization or settlement finality. As a result, I was left without a workable resolution outside of the CFPB process. 

I am willing to resolve this account promptly, but only under reasonable, consumer-controlled terms with clear written confirmation of final resolution.

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 2026-01-02 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was result of identity theft
Company: Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
PORTFOLIO RC is falsely reporting on my credit. I have never had any accounts with them. Per my research PORTFOLIO RC is a debt collector. They are falsely reporting on my credit!! Account number is XXXX is falsely reporting to my credit file and is against my rights and fair credit act. Under U.S Code 1618d - Disclosure of investigation consumer report ; you are in violation.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-02 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Domestic (US) money transfer
Issue: Money was not available when promised — 
Company: Skrill USA, Inc.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
In XXXX, I contracted with Paysafe to process credit and debit card transactions for my business accounts. 

After a short period of time, Paysafe stopped making deposits of our funds to our accounts. When I inquired as to why we were not receiving our funds, I was told their risk department had questions about some of our transactions. After several inquires with our account rep, the withheld funds were released and transferred electronically to our 2 business accounts. 

Immediately thereafter, funds from both business accounts again started to be withheld from us. Paysafe continued to process our credit and debit card transactions, but has withheld 100 % of our money since XX/XX/year>. Repeated attempts to compel them to release our funds have either gone unanswered or the superficial replies were clearly designed to further delay/deny us our funds. To date they are still withholding {$15000.00} from XXXX account ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX ), and {$3400.00} from the other ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ). 

Paysafe XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-02 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Federal student loan servicing
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Trouble with how payments are being handled
Company: Nelnet, Inc.
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Please see attached current status of accounts. My loans were began repayment in XXXX The loans were refinanced into a consolidation at XXXX % Estimated interest over the life of the loan was a total of {$8700.00}. Interest to date paid is roughly {$18000.00}. XXXX can not provide any information regarding repayment terms, disclosures etc.... They also indicate I have over XXXX more years of payments.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-02 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Auto debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was paid
Company: ALLY FINANCIAL INC.
State: AZ

Complaint narrative:
Ally Financial charged off a debt that was not our responsibility to pay. Now a collections department is attempting to collect and is showing a wrong amount and classification on my credit report.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-02 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage — Delays in the application process
Company: Ocwen Financial Corporation
State: TN

Complaint narrative:
In early XXXX of XXXX  we sent to PHH Mortgage an affidavit from the XXXX of XXXX. 

This document needed to be signed in order for the construction of an addition to the property to be completed. 

We have tried for weeks unsuccessfully to communicate with the company. We have XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX  care with a XXXX  XXXX, that we are trying to get moved into the addition. 

They have already spent the winter holidays effectively homeless in a hotel while the completed addition sits unable to be occupied due to the incompetent handling of these documents by our mortgage servicer. 

We have communicated with the company for weeks. XXXX, the agent working on this progress was unable to give us any clarification or details.

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 2026-01-02 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account — Money was taken from your account on the wrong day or for the wrong amount
Company: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
Submitted a dispute against a healthcare provider making me pay for service that was covered 100 % by my insurance. They were aware of this and said XXXX have to pay and theyll refund me. They didnt. I contacted bank, they gave a provisional credit. They contacted back on XX/XX/year> for more info. I provided screen recordings of voicemails detailing they were not suppose to charge me, billing information stating I was not suppose to be charged. Got an email saying they didnt get the information from me three days later and that the dispute was denied and the credit reversed. Called customer care and they said yeah I see you submitted the requested information and we received it I dont believe that email is right maybe we having a technical problem. They had to dispute the denial ( fraud ) and would still take the monies back. I was even told that theyll have to do another investigation due to their system issue and unable to provide a turnaround time. This is clearly fraud on Capital One part. How is an investigation resolution a denial due to not receiving supporting documentation when the supporting documentation was indeed submitted, verified by the company customer service agent?

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-02 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — FHA mortgage
Issue: Closing on a mortgage — Closing disclosure or other related disclosures
Company: Imperium Lending, LLC
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
My Closing Disclosure lists a XXXX refund of {$6700.00} in the Payoffs and Payments section, but I never received this refund. 

I did not sign any document authorizing the refund to be applied to my loan or netted against the new XXXX. The final loan amount remained {$590000.00}, and the lender confirmed there was no principal reduction. 

After closing, the lender stated the refund was netted against the new XXXX, but this is not reflected anywhere on the signed Closing Disclosure, and no revised or corrected Closing Disclosure was issued or acknowledged.

I am requesting that the lender either disburse the refund as disclosed or provide written proof of my authorization and proper disclosure supporting the netting.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-02 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — VA mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — Foreclosure
Company: LD Holdings Group, LLC
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
The original borrower passed away in XX/XX/XXXX while the VA loan was in XXXX forbearance. I am the legal successor-in-interest and owner of the property, and the deed is in my name. 

From XXXX through XXXX, I repeatedly contacted the mortgage servicer by phone to ask how to make payments, the amount owed, what documentation was required after the borrowers death, and how to prevent default or foreclosure. Each time I called, I was given inconsistent information and told to hold off, or that they did not know who I should pay. I was never provided clear instructions on how to submit payments as the successor-in-interest, and payments were not accepted. 

During this time, I continued to receive automated notices. However, when I called about those notices, representatives verbally instructed me not to make payments while the account was under review. I relied on these instructions. 

In XXXX, I was contacted by foreclosure counsel regarding a proposed consent order. I expressed confusion and concern about whether signing the consent order would allow the servicer to take the home without giving me an opportunity to make payments. I never signed the consent order. After I indicated that I had consulted an attorney, communication stopped. This demonstrates a lack of meaningful communication, failure to explain available options, and failure to provide a clear opportunity to cure or pursue loss-mitigation. 

I did not receive meaningful foreclosure notice directly from the servicer. No Notice of Default, Notice of Sale, or foreclosure communication was provided to me as the legal owner and successor-in-interest. Had the servicer properly notified me, I would have taken immediate action to resolve the loan. I only became aware that foreclosure was imminent after being contacted by the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. Had the VA not contacted me, I would not have known foreclosure was pending. 

After filing a prior complaint, a LoanDepot representative contacted me stating that their system showed a payoff request under the deceased borrowers name. The borrower has been deceased since XXXX, and no authorized successor requested a payoff. This confirms that LoanDepots records are inaccurate and that the borrowers death and successor-in-interest status were not properly processed.

The servicers failure to recognize me as successor-in-interest, refusal to provide payment instructions, inaccurate recordkeeping, and lack of notice caused the alleged delinquency to grow and led to foreclosure activity. 

On todays date, I also received a call LoanDepot stating that their system showed a request for a payoff under the deceased borrowers name. The borrower has been deceased since XXXX, and no authorized successor made any request. This further demonstrates that LoanDepots records are inaccurate and that the borrowers death and successor-in-interest status were not properly processed.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-02 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Medical debt
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive enough information to verify debt
Company: Monterey Financial Services LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I had paid my last payment on XXXX, in which my balance increased to {$500.00} and there was no notification, I then finally received a notice I had a balance and my payment was due on XXXX in the amount of XXXX. I payed on XXXX. I then checked the status and said I owe {$68.00}. The amount has been changing XXXX  and im trying to pay them.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-02 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: UPGRADE, INC.
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
I am still waiting on a suspension to be lifted to allow me to get my {$76.00} out It's been two months It's XXXX  from a XXXX transaction that occurred on XX/XX/2025 The company continues to refuse to release my funds despite it being XXXX months and me struggling financially now

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-02 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive enough information to verify debt
Company: Velocity Portfolio Group
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
Out of Nowhere I am being sued by Velocity investments, Never had any calls, letters or nothing, Lawsuit came unexpected, didnt even have them listed on my credit report, Just out of nowhere, I immediatly sent a debt validation to the attorney certified mail, and have recieved the return card, I asked to validate the debt along with their standing to persue it. I also informed them that my sole income is XXXX. I havent heard anything yet, and now i have to file an answer to the court. ive never heard of people suing people without trying to collect by phone calls, or letters, they just decided to sue. im sure there are some violations here of the FDCPA.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-02 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — Store credit 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: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I had two promotional balances on my Synchrony XXXX XXXX  credit card. I was making above minimum payment in attempt to pay down the promo that was nearing expiration. Synchrony opted to apply it to the balance of their choosing but assured me there would be no issue reallocating all payments above the minimum payment to the promo balance expiring sooner. Once payments were reallocated, I subsequently paid off the promo that was nearing expiring, leaving just my second promo set to expire XX/XX/XXXX. The original purchase on this second promo was {$3900.00} placed on XX/XX/XXXX of which {$2300.00} was refunded same day due to partial order cancellation. this left my promo balance as of the first statement on XX/XX/XXXX at {$1500.00}. The promo balance remained this exact amount until I paid off the first promo ( with no interest as I paid in full before expiration ) and all of a sudden the balance is {$1700.00}. Synchrony agreed this is not correct and submitted a dispute ( stating this is protocol to have is changed back to {$1500.00} ). I agreed and a dispute was still submitted for the incorrect balance showing ( yet correct actual balance of {$1500.00} ) and therefore was denied. I don't deny I owe {$1500.00} with an expiring promotion on XX/XX/XXXX but since I spoke with Synchrony and continue to inquire where the additional {$160.00} is generating from, they denied any wrongdoing, stating it is the merchants faults when the promo had no issues until Synchrony started reallocating balances. They have since refused to dispute or correct the error stating that it is a merchant issue yet can not cite any transaction on my statement to support the claim. It feels retaliatory as they were unable to gain any interest off of my original promo due to paying it off prior to expiration and now they are refusing to help me understand the balance on my credit card despite my own audit showing there is no reason for the error.

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 2026-01-02 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: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: WA

Complaint narrative:
I disputed a charge with XXXX car rental for forging a document. I contacted XXXX and they were unwilling to give me a credit. I then disputed with CITI and they told me they are unable to continue the dispute as we have determined the merchant is unwilling to issue a credit. Then they told me to contact the merchant directly which I already did. Im not sure how this is legal at all. They are the bank they can take the refund if they deem necessary and that the charges were fraudulent.

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 2026-01-02 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive notice of right to dispute
Company: Spring Oaks Capital, LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint because Spring Oaks Capital is reporting the same alleged collection debt of {$680.00} on my credit report under two different furnisher names, creating inaccurate, duplicative, and misleading reporting.

Specifically, this alleged debt is being reported as : SPRINGOAKCAP Account XXXX XXXXXXXX {$680.00} SPRINGOAKS Account XXXX XXXXXXXX {$680.00} This is the same account number, the same balance, and the same alleged debt, yet it is being reported multiple times under different names. That alone is a direct violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and Metro 2 reporting standards, which require information to be accurate, consistent, and non-duplicative. One debt can not legally be reported twice simply by altering the furnisher name. 
In addition to the duplicate reporting, I never received any written notice of this alleged debt. I was never sent a validation letter, notice of assignment, billing statement, or any written communication explaining what this debt is for, who the original creditor is, or my rights to dispute it before it was placed on my credit report. I have no idea what this {$680.00} is even for. 
Despite disputing this account and requesting validation multiple times, Spring Oaks Capital has failed to provide any documentation substantiating the debt. Reporting a collection without first providing required notice, and then reporting it twice under different names, is not an accident it is willful noncompliance. 
Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), a debt collector must provide written validation within five ( 5 ) days of the initial communication. Reporting to a credit bureau is a collection activity. Failing to provide validation while continuing to report the debt exposes the collector to statutory damages of up to {$1000.00} per violation. Here, there are multiple violations, including : Reporting the same debt under multiple names Duplicate tradelines for a single alleged obligation Failure to provide written notice Continued reporting without validation

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief