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:
CFPB COMPLAINT NARRATIVE CAPITAL ONE / QUICKSILVERONE ACCOUNT ENDING XXXX I am filing this complaint against Capital One regarding its handling, treatment, and reporting of the QuicksilverOne account ending in XXXX. I want to make this very clear : I did not want to deal with Capital One. I had no desire to continue any relationship with Capital One, especially while I was already dealing with serious identity-theft, data-breach, credit-reporting, and consumer-file damage issues. Capital Ones conduct forced this matter into dispute because its own records, email notices, payment confirmations, decline notices, returned-payment notices, account handling, and credit-reporting conduct create a disturbing and contradictory account history that must be investigated, corrected, and fully explained. Capital One can not create, rely on, verify, or furnish damaging account information while its own notices show conflicting payment activity, posted-payment confirmations, scheduled-payment confirmations, returned-payment notices, repeated Card declined : Not enough credit emails, strict {$300.00} credit-limit controls, and unexplained account-balance consequences. The attached Exhibit A through Exhibit I evidence package shows the full documentary pattern. The evidence shows that Capital One repeatedly sent notices claiming card transactions were declined for not enough credit, while also sending separate notices confirming payments were scheduled and/or posted. In several instances, Capital Ones own timestamps, payment dates, posted dates, transaction dates, declined-purchase notices, and balance summaries create direct factual conflicts. Some notices show payments being scheduled or posted before, near, or around the same period that Capital One claimed there was not enough available credit. That is not a minor issue. That is the heart of this complaint. Capital Ones own notices stated that payments often reflect immediately, though they can sometimes take 12 days. Capital One can not use its own delayed, unclear, or internally inconsistent processing system as a weapon against the consumer, then turn around and furnish damaging credit information, close or restrict the account, or create derogatory consequences from the same disputed sequence. The attached exhibits also show small attempted transactions being declined while the account was near the {$300.00} limit, along with payment confirmations and posted-payment confirmations. Capital One declined transactions as low as approximately {$1.00}, {$1.00}, {$6.00}, {$7.00}, {$9.00}, {$12.00}, {$18.00}, {$24.00}, {$29.00}, {$30.00}, {$30.00}, and {$38.00}, repeatedly claiming that these transactions either would have put me over the {$300.00} credit limit or that the account was already over the {$300.00} credit limit. This creates a serious contradiction. If Capital Ones system was so restrictive that it would not allow a {$1.00} transaction, a {$1.00} transaction, a small food-related transaction, a small rideshare transaction, a possible tip-related transaction, or ordinary everyday purchases because of the {$300.00} limit, then Capital One must explain with mathematical precision how the account later became associated with larger adverse balances, high-balance reporting, charge-off figures, written-off amounts, derogatory account consequences, or any negative reporting that is not clearly reconciled with those same strict-decline notices. Capital One can not be selectively strict when denying small-dollar transactions, then selectively elastic when reporting damaging balances or derogatory consequences against me. Capital Ones own notices portray an account being tightly controlled at the {$300.00} limit level. Therefore, any later high-balance reporting, over-limit-type reporting, charge-off reporting, written-off amount, adverse account status, or negative consumer-reporting consequence requires complete documentary reconciliation. In plain terms : if Capital One would not allow even a {$1.00} or {$1.00} transaction because of the {$300.00} limit, then Capital One must explain exactly how the account balance, high-credit figure, charge-off amount, written-off amount, and adverse reporting were created, calculated, verified, and furnished. This pattern makes Capital Ones conduct appear less like clean account administration and more like a one-sided machinery of denial, restriction, fee generation, adverse treatment, and consumer-reporting damage. Capital One must not be allowed to block tiny transactions under strict limit-control logic while later using larger unexplained figures to damage my consumer reports. The evidence further includes credit-reporting/account-history screenshots showing negative account treatment and damaging payment-history information. If Capital One furnished, verified, or allowed inaccurate, incomplete, misleading, or unverifiable information to remain on my consumer reports, then Capital One must be held responsible for that furnishing and verification conduct. I dispute any negative, derogatory, incomplete, misleading, or unverifiable information connected to this Capital One account, including but not limited to any late-payment reporting, returned-payment characterization, charge-off coding, closure status, balance reporting, high-balance reporting, payment-history coding, account-status reporting, or any other damaging account notation. Capital One must not be allowed to hide behind generic account statements while its own notices create a contradictory record. If Capital One claims the account was over-limit, it must prove the calculation. If Capital One claims a payment was returned, it must prove the exact source, reason, date, time, and bank-confirmed basis for that return. If Capital One claims a transaction was properly declined, it must prove the exact available-credit calculation at the moment of that decline. If Capital One furnished negative reporting, it must prove that every furnished field was complete, accurate, timely, and verifiable. This complaint is not about me trying to continue business with Capital One. This complaint is about Capital Ones duty to maintain, process, verify, and furnish accurate information and its failure to provide a clean, coherent, fully verifiable record. Capital Ones conduct has caused serious consumer harm because inaccurate or unreliable reporting can damage access to credit, business financing, housing, transportation, communications, and financial stability. This is especially severe because I have been dealing with identity-theft and data-breach concerns, and Capital Ones disputed reporting adds more damage to an already compromised consumer-file situation. Capital One must fully investigate this matter, not merely send a boilerplate response. A generic response will not be acceptable. Capital One must address the actual exhibits, the dates, the timestamps, the scheduled payments, the posted payments, the returned-payment notices, the decline notices, the strict {$300.00} limit-control pattern, and the credit-reporting history. Capital One must either prove every damaging entry with complete, coherent, date-specific documentation or remove the damage from my consumer files.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation