Consumer complaint received 2026-05-31 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account information incorrect
Company: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: MA

Complaint narrative:
FORMAL CFPB COMPLAINT AGAINST CAPITAL ONE RE : AVAILABLE-CREDIT SUPPRESSION, PAYMENT-CREDITING CONCERNS, FEE RETENTION, ANTICIPATORY / RETALIATORY CLOSURE, CHARGE-OFF REPORTING, AND CONSUMER / BUSINESS HARM I am filing this complaint against Capital One regarding payment-crediting concerns, available-credit calculation discrepancies, membership / annual fee retention, alleged nonpayment, account closure after I complained, charge-off / written-off reporting, and related consumer and business harm. I do not dispute that I opened this Capital One account. However, I strongly dispute Capital Ones handling and reporting of the account, including alleged late payments, alleged nonpayment, payment history, available-credit calculation, balance information, membership / annual fee retention, account status, account closure, charge-off, written-off amount, and all adverse or derogatory reporting connected to this account. Capital Ones available-credit suppression was wrong because available credit is not cosmetic account information. Available credit directly controls whether a credit card account can be used, whether purchases are approved or declined, whether the consumer can rely on the account, and whether the accounts stated credit position is being accurately represented. Exhibit A Capital One Available-Credit Suppression Evidence Bundle shows that my account displayed a {$300.00} credit line, yet the available credit repeatedly failed to reflect the normal relationship between credit line, current balance, and payment activity. After payments were made, Capital One was expected to accurately credit payments, accurately reflect the account position, and clearly document any lawful payment hold, internal restriction, available-credit limitation, payment delay, risk restriction, pending authorization, or account restriction affecting available credit. The Exhibit shows repeated available-credit mismatches, including periods where purchases were declined for insufficient available credit even though the account display raised serious questions about whether available credit was being properly calculated. This created direct consumer harm by interfering with my ability to use, manage, and rely on the account. I contacted Capital One directly after observing this pattern. During that call, I informed Capital One that I was aware the available credit was not accurately reflecting the account position after payments had been made. I further informed Capital One that what was happening was wrong, that it was affecting me personally as a consumer, and that it was also affecting business-related matters connected to XXXX XXXX XXXX, where I serve as XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX At that point, Capital One was placed on direct notice. Capital One knew, or had reason to know, that the available-credit handling was disputed, that the payment-crediting effect was disputed, that the accounts usable credit position was disputed, and that the issue was causing personal and business-related harm. Instead of properly resolving the available-credit suppression issue after being placed on notice, Capital One anticipated the matter and later closed the account. I dispute that closure as anticipatory, retaliatory, incomplete, misleading, commercially oppressive, and directly connected to my complaint regarding available-credit suppression, payment-crediting issues, and account-use obstruction. Capital One also charged and retained an approximately {$39.00} to {$40.00} membership / annual fee connected to this account. This was not a meaningless charge. It was a paid account-access fee connected to the privilege of having and using the credit account. I did not choose this account because I wanted a free-card arrangement. I accepted the membership-fee version because I do not like receiving services as though they cost nothing. Capital One accepted my money for the account, yet the accounts usable credit position was later distorted by available-credit suppression, payment-crediting concerns, account-use obstruction, and adverse account treatment. Capital One should not be permitted to collect and retain a paid account-access fee while the usable benefit of the account was restricted, distorted, withheld, delayed, or inaccurately reflected. Capital One then closed the account after I called and placed them on notice. That closure became part of a damaging account history used to support adverse reporting, charge-off / written-off reporting, and derogatory consumer-reporting consequences. I view the fee retention, available-credit suppression, and later closure as unfair, abusive, deceptive, one-sided, commercially oppressive, and directly harmful. Capital One previously responded to a CFPB complaint concerning this account by claiming that the complaint was submitted by a person who was not an authorized party on the account. In that prior response, Capital One stated that it attempted to contact me by phone on XX/XX/XXXX, could not reach me, informed CFPB that the complaint was submitted by an unauthorized third party, and would not take additional action on the complaint. That prior response did not resolve the substance of the complaint. It avoided the real issues involving payment crediting, available-credit suppression, account handling, closure basis, charge-off / written-off reporting, and adverse consumer-reporting consequences. This new complaint is being submitted directly by me as the account holder and consumer. I am also including my XXXX XXXX Notary Verification DeclaratXXXX as supporting identity, address, and business-verification evidence. This declaration was originally produced for business-related matters involving XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX after financial institutions and credit agencies continued creating verification obstacles regarding my identity, address, consumer-credit file, and business-related financial matters. Capital One should not use any unauthorized-party claim, identity-verification objection, or procedural excuse to avoid the substance of this complaint again. At the time after the prior CFPB complaint and Capital Ones unauthorized-party response, I became sick and remained sick for a period of time. This delayed my ability to continue responding, locate and organize supporting evidence, gather screenshots, prepare additional documentation, and pursue the matter more aggressively. Any delay in locating or submitting evidence should not be treated as admission, waiver, acceptance, or confirmation of Capital Ones account handling, closure, charge-off / written-off reporting, alleged nonpayment, available-credit handling, or adverse reporting. This complaint does not rely on available-credit suppression as a statutory phrase. I use that phrase to describe the factual pattern shown by Exhibit A and the account records. In legal and regulatory terms, this complaint concerns payment crediting, available-credit calculation, account-status accuracy, balance calculation, credit capacity, payment-status accuracy, account usability, furnisher accuracy, reporting integrity, account termination, adverse action, and consumer-reporting accuracy. TILA / Regulation Z concerns prompt and fair crediting of payments and requires payments on open-end credit accounts to be credited as of the date of receipt unless a permitted exception applies. FCRA / Regulation V requires furnishers to maintain accuracy and integrity in information furnished to consumer reporting agencies. Massachusetts consumer-reporting law also requires maximum possible accuracy and accurate / complete furnishing, and Massachusetts consumer-protection law prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices. Because XXXX XXXX XXXX is a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is relevant to the corporate harm caused by Capital Ones account handling, available-credit suppression, closure, and adverse reporting. Capital Ones available-credit suppression did not happen in isolation. Since XXXX, the credit agencies have severely damaged my consumer-credit profile by continuing to report, reinsert, maintain, or refuse to remove disputed derogatory items that I identified as identity-theft / data-breach related, inaccurate, incomplete, unauthorized, unverifiable, or unsupported. Representatives from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXnformed me by phone that since XXXX, they had contacted or informed the credit agencies that certain derogatory items were related to identity theft and that I was not liable for those accounts. Because the credit agencies refused to delete, remove, block, or correct those disputed items, my consumer credit report and credit score were severely damaged. That damage obstructed my ability to obtain business credit cards, business financing, and business-credit access, even after I attempted to obtain business credit. As a result, I was left with no reasonable choice but to rely on personal credit-card access for certain business-related matters connected to XXXX XXXX XXXX. Capital Ones suppression, restriction, withholding, delay, or inaccurate reflection of available credit therefore harmed me personally and further obstructed my ability to carry forward business-related payments, business development, financial planning, corporate credibility, funding readiness, and lawful profit-generating activities connected to XXXX XXXX XXXX.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation