vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-13 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Sued you in a state where you do not live or did not sign for the debt
Company: ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this response as a new case, as the previous CFPB case number XXXX was closed without a full and lawful resolution of the issues raised. 

The companys response remains unacceptable and does not resolve the dispute. 

Midland Credit Management continues to rely solely on information provided by third-party sellers and fails to provide any proof that I opened, authorized, or benefited from the alleged accounts. Billing statements or data supplied by a prior creditor do not establish liability, particularly after identity theft has been asserted and documented. 

I have submitted identity theft documentation, and XXXX  has notified me that I am a victim of fraud with respect to accounts reported on my credit file. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ), once identity theft is asserted with proper documentation, fraudulent accounts must be blocked and removed, not verified using seller-supplied data. 

XXXX admits that Account # XXXX was recalled and deleted, which confirms that seller data is unreliable. Despite this, XXXX claims the remaining accounts are accurate without providing any signed application, contract, proof of identity verification at account opening, or evidence that I am legally responsible. 

For Account # XXXX and Account # XXXX, Midland failed to : Provide a signed contract or application Provide proof of identity verification at account opening Address the XXXX  fraud determination Explain why continued furnishing is lawful after notice of identity theft Marking the accounts as cease and desist while continuing to report them as due and owing is not a lawful resolution and does not cure inaccurate credit reporting. 

A fair and lawful resolution in this new case is : Permanent deletion of Midland Credit Management accounts # XXXX and # XXXX from XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX  Written confirmation that I am not responsible for these debts Assurance that the accounts will not be reinserted, sold, or transferred Until deletion occurs, the continued reporting remains inaccurate and non-compliant with the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-13 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Getting a loan or lease — Problem with signing the paperwork
Company: ALLY FINANCIAL INC.
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
On ( XX/XX/XXXX ), I purchased and financed a XXXX XXXX XXXX through Ally Financial at a dealership in XXXX XXXX  . Before signing, I clearly stated that I did NOT want the vehicle registered in my personal name and that it needed to be registered in my business name. 

The dealership finance employee rushed the signing process because it was a Saturday and represented that the vehicle would be handled as requested. However, I later discovered that the temporary registration was issued in my business name, but the permanent registration paperwork was submitted using my personal name. This is not what I agreed to and I did not authorize the dealership to submit the registration paperwork in my personal name. 

I contacted the dealership immediately to correct the issue or unwind/rescind the deal. The dealership refused to resolve it and told me to take them to court. 

Because this is a financed vehicle, the registration/title paperwork should match what I authorized and agreed to. I am requesting that this transaction be unwound/rescinded and that the financing be reversed/cancelled due to misrepresentation and unauthorized paperwork submission.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-13 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Lease
Issue: Problems at the end of the loan or lease — Problem while selling or giving up the vehicle
Company: NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE COMPANY LLC
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint regarding misrepresentation and reliance related to an early lease return with Infiniti Financial Services ( IFS ), which resulted in unexpected charges for lease payments after the vehicle was surrendered. I leased through Infiniti of XXXX XXXX. Throughout my lease I experienced multiple unresolved vehicle issues and extended service delays at the dealership. I explored remedies through Consumer Affairs and was advised the vehicle didn't qualify under Lemon Law. I was then explicitly directed to Infiniti Financial Services because my lease was obligated with them. During conversations with IFS, I escalated my concerns and spoke to XXXX, escalation team manager, who informed me that any potential credit or adjustment could only be reviewed after I received my lease-end liability statement. Based on this guidance, I reasonably believed that returning the vehicle early- especially in good condition, under mileage, and without damage- would allow IFS to evaluate a rent credit for the remaining lease period. Relying on this information, I voluntarily surrendered the vehicle two and a half months early, XX/XX/year>, giving IFS possession well before the lease end date of XX/XX/year>. ( While it was still logged in the service department for over a month, as they were unable to fix the issues on hand in a timely manner. ) When I received the liability statement, I was informed that : - no rent credit would be applied at all - I remained responsible for the entire 2 months final lease payments- the only adjustment granted was a waiver of the disposition fee. This outcome directly contradicted the guidance I was given and caused financial harm. Had I been informed that No rent credit would ever be granted under any circumstance, I would have not surrendered the vehicle early and would have retained possession for the remainder. I now have a new lease I am responsible for and this expense is unjust. There was a lack of transparency regarding early turn-in consequences. This was the end of my third lease with them and I had always turned in the vehicles early not incurring extra expense. IFS benefited from early possession of the vehicles with the ability to resell or res=assign the asset sooner. I should not be expected to bear the financial burden after receiving misleading guidance. I am requesting a good-will adjustment or rent credit for the period during which the vehicle was returned early.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-13 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: Written notification about debt — Notification didn't disclose it was an attempt to collect a debt
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
There are collection accounts on my report that I believe contain inaccurate information. Under my rights pursuant to 15 USC 1681e ( b ) and 15 USC 1681i, I am entitled to an accurate credit report. I request a review of these entries, and if they can not be verified as accurate, I ask that they be removed.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-13 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Self Financial Inc.
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
This company discharged this debt and claimed the loss without sending me an IRS form 1099. it is now listed on my report as a charge off.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-13 00:00:00
Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan — Installment loan
Issue: Charged fees or interest you didn't expect — 
Company: ACIMA CREDIT, LLC
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
Ive done business with Acima to purchase merchandise and they are charging an illegal percentage rate that will make my payments 3 times more of what the merchandise cost. This is illegal and I am pursuing to get my money back from this fraudulent company. I want my money back

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-13 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Domestic (US) money transfer
Issue: Other transaction problem — 
Company: Chime Financial Inc
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
I've had XXXX unauthorized transfers, money taken from my account without my permission thru chime banking, I've disputed it with chime and no results, I need some help please

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-13 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Auto debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was paid
Company: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
State: MO

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint regarding a JPMorgan Chase Bank , N.A . ( JPMCB Auto Finance ) account that is inaccurately and unlawfully reported on my consumer credit reports. 

This account was previously charged off but has since been paid in full and is now reflecting a {$0.00} balance. Despite this, JPMCB is reporting the account with an XXXX account status, which is materially inaccurate and misleading. 

A charged-off account that has been paid in full can not be simultaneously reported as open. This misrepresentation is causing ongoing and active damage to my credit scores by making the account appear as an open, negatively rated tradeline, which falsely inflates my utilization metrics and negatively impacts my creditworthiness. 

Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ), furnishers are required to report information that is complete, accurate, and not misleading. Reporting a paid, zero-balance charged-off account as open is a violation of this obligation. 

Additionally, the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX require that once an account is charged off and subsequently paid, the account status must accurately reflect that it is closed with a XXXX balance, not open. 

I dispute the accuracy and legality of this reporting and request that JPMCB either : Immediately correct the tradeline to reflect the proper status as Closed/ Paid / XXXX Balance with no ongoing negative impact, OR Delete the tradeline entirely if JPMCB can not provide documentation proving that an account with a XXXX balance and charge-off history can legally remain reported as open. 

Please consider this a formal notice of dispute. If JPMCB fails to correct or remove this inaccurate reporting, I request written documentation substantiating the legal basis for continuing to report this account as open.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-13 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was already discharged in bankruptcy and is no longer owed
Company: Paramount GR Holdings, LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
In XX/XX/XXXX, I purchased solar panels. At that time, I expressed to the salesperson that I did not want solar panels if I couldn't get backup power with them. With that being said, it turns out that I got the panels without backup power. I found this out a year later when our power went out, and I woke up choking on my CPAP. The company was XXXX, and the financial company is GoodLeap. I contacted XXXX, and that's when I was told that it wasn't in my contract. The cost of the panels was {$34000.00}, with a monthly payment of {$230.00}. Nonetheless, I've been paying Goodleap. In XX/XX/XXXX, I purchased new solar panels through Plot XXXX and XXXX. XXXX is the finance company that financed the {$90000.00}, and my monthly payment is {$430.00}. Plot XXXX and XXXX was to sue Goodleap and take care of all the financial obligations that were needed to get me out of the contract. This did not happen, and now Goodleap has placed a charge-off on my account. I request the deletion of all negative credit reporting, release from any remaining Goodleap obligation and monetary settement of {$15000.00},

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-13 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account — Transaction was not authorized
Company: Paypal Holdings, Inc
State: MA

Complaint narrative:
Beginning XXXX, multiple unauthorized card-present gas station transactions occurred in XXXX while I was not in XXXX and did not authorize them. These charges were clustered in location and amount and included foreign currency conversion. A merchant confirmed the transaction could only have occurred at the pump. 

I immediately disputed these transactions through PayPals resolution process on XXXX, uploaded documentation, and provided additional information when requested. PayPal denied the disputes, stating there was no evidence of unauthorized activity, while simultaneously flagging my account for fraud, reissuing my debit card multiple times, and restricting access to my funds. 

I sent certified written notices to PayPal at both their XXXX XXXX, XXXX  and XXXX  addresses. These notices were ignored. Because PayPal failed to respond or resolve the issue, I filed this CFPB complaint. 

While this complaint was pending, PayPal refunded one XXXX gas station charge only because it appeared to be a U.S. transaction due to merchant coding. This refund was not the result of a substantive investigation. 

PayPal later refunded the same XXXX gas station transactions they had previously denied, using the same factual information I originally submitted in XX/XX/year>. No new evidence was requested or provided. The only change was regulatory escalation. 

PayPal also misrepresented the case status. The cases were closed on XXXX, despite PayPal stating it would remain open until XXXX. PayPal continued to represent the case as open after it had already been closed. My app even showed for XXXX day XXXX being estimated resolution date, and after that day it disappeared. 

This conduct demonstrates failure to conduct a good-faith Regulation E investigation, improper burden shifting, contradictory findings, delayed correction, failure to respond to certified notices, and misrepresentation of case status.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-13 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: MOHELA
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX, my financial institution, XXXX XXXX, issued a cashier 's check on my behalf to MOHELA for {$54000.00}. The loan officer mistakenly typed the last digit of my account number incorrectly on the check, although she included my name and other account details correctly. Accompanying the check were all my supporting documents and loan statements. 

MOHELA cashed the check, but they have not applied it to my loan. A representative from MOHELA informed me that they have 90 days to review my case. In the meantime, my final payment has increased by {$450.00} to {$55000.00} and growing, and my first installment for the HELOC of {$54000.00} is coming due.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-13 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Credit Fresh Holdings Inc
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am writing to formally request validation of a collection account referenced in a recent letter I received. Under my rights granted by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), I am asking your office to provide proper documentation verifying that this debt is valid. 

This includes the name of the original creditor, the total amount owed, a complete payment history, and proof that I am legally responsible for the account. I am making this request to confirm that the information being reported is accurate and not the result of an error, misunderstanding, or fraudulent activity. Until full validation is provided, I request that all collection efforts and credit reporting related to this account be suspended, as permitted by law.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-13 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
State: MO

Complaint narrative:
Company : JPMorgan Chase Bank , N.A . 
Product : Credit Card Issue : Incorrect credit reporting Authorized User / Charge-Off Relief Requested : Immediate and permanent deletion of the tradeline from all consumer reporting agencies Complaint Statement I am filing this complaint regarding JPMorgan Chase Bank , N.A.s continued reporting of a charged-off credit card account on my consumer credit reports for which I have no legal or contractual liability. 

I was added solely as an authorized user on this account. I was not the applicant, not the accountholder, not a joint obligor, and did not execute any agreement assuming responsibility for repayment. The primary accountholder defaulted on the account, resulting in a charge-off. Despite this, JPMCB is reporting the charged-off status under my consumer file. 

This reporting is factually inaccurate, legally unsupportable, and materially misleading, in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ), for the following reasons : Authorized users are not legally responsible for credit card debt. Reporting a charge-off on an authorized users credit file falsely implies repayment liability that does not exist. 

I did not have ownership or control over the account, did not receive billing statements, and had no authority to prevent or remedy the delinquency. 

JPMCB can not furnish evidence of legal liability, including a signed agreement or contractual obligation, establishing that I owed this debt. 

Reporting derogatory payment history under my name constitutes inaccurate and incomplete information, prohibited by 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ). 

Continuing to report this account after notice of non-liability represents negligent or willful noncompliance with the FCRA and causes ongoing consumer harm. 

The mere fact that I was listed as an authorized user does not permit JPMCB to report a charged-off tradeline against me when I had no repayment obligation. Furnishing information that materially misrepresents my credit risk is impermissible. 

Formal Demand for Resolution JPMorgan Chase Bank must take one of the following actions : Immediately delete the entire tradeline from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX or Provide documented proof of legal liability, including a signed agreement explicitly establishing my responsibility for repayment of this account. 

Absent such proof, JPMCB has no permissible purpose to continue furnishing this account under my consumer file. 

I am requesting full deletion of this tradeline and written confirmation that reporting has ceased.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-13 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Closing on a mortgage — Closing disclosure or other related disclosures
Company: NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
State: MD

Complaint narrative:
Need information substantiating approval of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as a condominium. Secretary of State has submitted information condo is not registered which is required to sell or operate as a condominium in the State of Maryland. I Need them taken off of my paperwork as the information is not valid. The information on the Form XXXX has been proven to be inaccurate. HUD also does not have them as an active. The IRS has proven they are not listed as a profit nor the non-profit organization with that tax ID. I am not sure why they were approved. I asked NFCU several times to submit information on the condo, but they refused to give me that information. NFCU told me to get that information from the condo especially knowing that they had a backdoor conversation intentionally not giving me a resale packet. In an XXXX correspondence XXXX XXXX lies about giving me a resale packet and again on court. XXXX XXXX who is an attorney involved somehow in the purchase also declines to give information. He was also involved in the conversation about not sending a resale packet and discussing about the owner XXXX XXXX about being in collections at the time of purchase which I knew nothing about. This information was sent to me last week. I am once again asking for information including on the condominium approval. The condo I applied for in XXXX Maryland before this purchase was not approved so there is clearly a criteria. Therefore, this case is about missing disclosure intentionally, mortgage fraud in approving condominium and working with people who have not been authorized to operate a condominium. I am in a court battle with these people who should not be requesting money, nor should they be involved in my purchase.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-01-13 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
I am disputing inaccurate credit reporting and reinvestigation violations by Capital One and XXXX. 

Capital One charged this credit card account off in XX/XX/XXXX. Despite this, Capital One has continued to report new monthly charge-off ( CO ) entries and balance updates through XX/XX/XXXX, even though the account was already charged off. This is improper re-aging and postcharge-off reporting. 

The account had a {$300.00} credit limit, yet Capital One reports a high balance of {$680.00} and continues updating the balance without providing any itemized accounting or contractual basis. 

I disputed the accuracy of this reporting with XXXX. In XXXX dispute results dated XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX  states that the tradeline was updated from processing of my dispute. Updating balances or delinquency information during an active reinvestigation is not permitted. 

Capital One verified this account to XXXX  while it was in dispute without providing documentation showing the date of first delinquency, charge-off accounting, or proof supporting continued reporting. 

I am requesting that the CFPB require correction or deletion of this tradeline and review XXXX reinvestigation practices for compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation