vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-28 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive enough information to verify debt
Company: Source Receivables Management LLC
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
I have repeatedly sent debt validation requests to SOURCE RECEIVABLES MNG regarding this account, and I have not received any response or proper validation. Additionally, I never received the required initial notice of this debt prior to it being placed on my credit report. If the company claims that notice was provided, that would be inaccurate. I have maintained records of all correspondence sent to this company, including my debt validation letters, and can provide proof of delivery. It appears this company is either unaware of or disregarding the requirements for proper debt validation and consumer notification. Due to their failure to respond and verify this debt, I am requesting that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Federal Trade Commission, and the appropriate Attorney General review this matter and hold this company accountable for noncompliance.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-28 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Medical debt
Issue: Threatened to contact someone or share information improperly — Contacted you after you asked them to stop
Company: Harris & Harris, Ltd.
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
Harris & Harris has repeatedly called my phone for weeks. After I stopped answering the calls theyve decided to call my father, and my employer demanding information. I have written them a formal letter stating I would like written proof of the debt they state I owe as well as proof of a copy of any signature I have written stating Im legally required to pay any debt I apparently owe. They have not responded. They are calling my employer and have gotten me in trouble at work.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-28 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was result of identity theft
Company: I.C. System, Inc.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I.C. SYSTEM is falsely reporting on my credit. I have never had any accounts with them. Per my research I.C. SYSTEM 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 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 2026-04-28 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: U.S. BANCORP
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a complaint regarding unauthorized transactions on my U.S. Bank account. I reported the fraud immediately and provided a police report and all requested documentation. Despite this, my claim was denied due to insufficient evidence. Additionally, the bank failed to secure my account after I reported the fraud, which allowed further unauthorized transactions to occur, even while I was physically present at the branch reporting the issue. The bank also failed to properly restrict access, resulting in continued account compromise and requiring me to open multiple new accounts. I am requesting a full investigation, reversal of fraudulent charges, and an explanation for failure to follow proper security procedures.

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 monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-28 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Cashing a check
Company: Chime Financial Inc
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
" URGENT : This is my THIRD formal complaint regarding this specific issue. Previous complaints have not resulted in a resolution. Chime continues to provide unusable refund methods and has now held my funds for over 60 days since my account was closed in XXXX. This is a persistent failure to return consumer funds. '' I am writing to formally complain about Chimes failure to return my remaining account balance in a usable format. My Chime account was closed in XX/XX/year>. Despite the account closure occurring months ago, I only recently received a " Chime Refund '' check ( drawn on XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, Routing # XXXX ) after waiting for over two months. Upon receiving the check, I attempted to deposit it via my new banks mobile deposit feature as instructed by standard banking procedures. As part of this process, I endorsed the back of the check with a restrictive endorsement ( " For Mobile Deposit only at [ Current ] '' ). However, the deposit was subsequently rejected by the receiving financial institution. Because of this restrictive endorsement, the check is now effectively voided and can not be negotiated at any other institution or through any other service. I am now in a position where Chime has been in possession of my personal funds since XXXX, and the refund method they provided is no longer valid. I have already experienced significant delays ( over 60 days ) in receiving these funds. I am requesting that Chime/The XXXX XXXX immediately void the previous check, expedite the issuance of a replacement check without any restrictive markings, or provide an alternative method for me to receive my funds immediately.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-28 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Mobile or digital wallet
Issue: Unauthorized transactions or other transaction problem — 
Company: Paypal Holdings, Inc
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a complaint regarding a debit card transaction dispute through XXXX. On XX/XX/year>, I filed a dispute for a {$92.00} transaction with the merchant " XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX '' for an item that was never received. The claim is currently still listed as " under review. '' As of XX/XX/year>, more than 90 days have passed since the dispute was initiated. XXXX has not provided a final resolution and has stated they are waiting for a response from the merchant, which appears to be unresponsive. This transaction appears to involve a scam or non-legitimate merchant, and I never received the purchased item. Under Regulation E of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, financial institutions are required to complete investigations within a reasonable timeframe. XXXX has exceeded this timeframe and has not issued a resolution. I am requesting that XXXX complete the investigation and provide a final determination and reimbursement for this transaction.

Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-28 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: Experian Information Solutions 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 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 2026-04-28 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Opening an account — Didn't receive terms that were advertised
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I opened a Citi account at a local branch where they advertised that new customers would receive {$420.00} welcome bonus if they open a checking account and make enhanced direct deposits totaling {$6000.00} into the account within 90 days of the account opening. I accepted the terms and made enhanced direct deposits over {$6000.00} over the next few weeks within 90 days. However, after 7 months, I still haven't received the bonus. I chatted with their online representative, but they said they did not have access to the status of the promotion if the account was opened at a branch. I later called Citi service line, and a representative gave me the same answer and suggested me to contact the branch directly. Therefore, I called the branch next, and a manager looked at my account and said they did not know what happened and that they would file a ticket for me. That was a week ago, and there has not been any information from Citi since then. They did not specify a timeframe for the investigation.

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 2026-04-28 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Federal student loan servicing
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Received bad information about your loan
Company: Central Research Inc
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
My and my spouse who is prior service were trying to get a VA home loan, and they notified us that I XXXX, have student loan debt, that I was never told about. I got out of XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX, and this is my first time hearing about this student loan debt. I have called many times to the school and the automated system kept giving me different amounts that I owe, and then once I was able to get someone on the phone, when they would transfer me to the financial department, no one would ever answer or it went straight to voicemail for me and my spouse. Since that we cant get a home loan because of this mishap.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-28 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Information belongs to someone else
Company: Experian Information Solutions Inc.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
The Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S. Code 1681 ) says ( 1 ) The banking system is dependent upon fair and accurate credit reporting. Inaccurate credit reports directly impair the efficiency of the banking system, and unfair credit reporting methods undermine the public confidence which is essential to the continued functioning of the banking system. So whenever there is a violation under the FCRA, it impairs the efficiency of the banking system. This is a violation of my privacy with my consumer report, since I control what is listed and what is not. In the event that any accounts are reported without my written consent, that is considered identity theft. This is a violation of both 15 U.S. Code 1681b ( 2 ) and 15 U.S. Code 1681c-2. This leads way to civil liability against the credit reporting agency for negligent and willful noncompliance under 15 U.S. Code 1681n, which allows for {$1000.00} per violation, for account listed without my expressed written consent.

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 2026-04-28 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Information belongs to someone else
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
The Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S. Code 1681 ) says ( 1 ) The banking system is dependent upon fair and accurate credit reporting. Inaccurate credit reports directly impair the efficiency of the banking system, and unfair credit reporting methods undermine the public confidence which is essential to the continued functioning of the banking system. So whenever there is a violation under the FCRA, it impairs the efficiency of the banking system. This is a violation of my privacy with my consumer report, since I control what is listed and what is not. In the event that any accounts are reported without my written consent, that is considered identity theft. This is a violation of both 15 U.S. Code 1681b ( 2 ) and 15 U.S. Code 1681c-2. This leads way to civil liability against the credit reporting agency for negligent and willful noncompliance under 15 U.S. Code 1681n, which allows for {$1000.00} per violation, for account listed without my expressed written consent.

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 2026-04-28 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Improper use of your report — Reporting company used your report improperly
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: NV

Complaint narrative:
Unauthorized access and reporting to credit bureaus. Letter received stating that my rights were violated. Also data bridge

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-28 00:00:00
Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan — Installment loan
Issue: Problem when making payments — 
Company: TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint regarding inconsistent and potentially misleading account communications and the filing of a UCC-1 Financing Statement in connection with my solar installment loan. On XX/XX/year>, I received a written communication stating that my account was 31 days past due, with an amount due of {$320.00} and a stated due date of XX/XX/year>. Shortly thereafter, I received a billing statement dated XX/XX/year> reflecting a past due balance of {$320.00} and a next payment due date of XX/XX/year>. While this statement reflects a past due balance, it does not clearly indicate a level of delinquency consistent with a severely past due account. In a subsequent response dated XX/XX/year>, I was informed that a payment due on XX/XX/year> was allegedly 35 days past due. This representation is inconsistent with both the XX/XX/XXXX communication and the XX/XX/XXXX billing statement and does not align with the overall timeline reflected in the account documentation. Additionally, the company filed a UCC-1 Financing Statement on XX/XX/year>, prior to the later claim of a 35-day delinquency. Based on the communications provided to me at that time, I was not clearly informed that my account had reached a level of delinquency that would justify such action. I submitted a formal dispute requesting validation of the delinquency calculation and clarification regarding the timing and basis of the UCC filing. The company did not provide the requested documentation or explanation and instead closed the complaint as unresolved without addressing the specific discrepancies raised. My concern is not solely whether a payment may have been late, but that the account status was communicated in a manner that was inconsistent and unclear, and that legal action was taken based on information that was not clearly or consistently conveyed. I am requesting that the company : Provide a complete and accurate payment history, including a clear calculation of any alleged delinquency Clarify the timing and justification of the UCC-1 filing relative to the account status Review whether corrective action, including termination of the UCC-1 filing , is warranted if the discrepancies can not be substantiated

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 2026-04-28 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Fee problem
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: UT

Complaint narrative:
Wells Fargo apparently updated their minimum requirements necessary to avoid their XXXX XXXX monthly fee without properly informing customers. I checked my account and noticed that said fee had been taken out of my account over the last five months without my knowledge. After I updated my account to meet the requirements, Wells Fargo again charged me the {$15.00} fee anyway. I contacted the bank, and Support was unable to provide any information on why the fee is continuing, so I closed my account. Account balance necessary to avoid the monthly fee = {$1500.00} ( per bank documentation ) My account balance as of XX/XX/XXXX = {$1500.00} Account was charged the XXXX XXXX monthly fee on XX/XX/XXXX. Previous monthly fee dates : XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX

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 2026-04-28 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Threatened or suggested your credit would be damaged
Company: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
HIS DEBT IS CONSIDERED A CHARGE OFF. HOWEVER, THIS ACTUALLY CONSIDERED INCOME BECAUSE I SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED AN 1099c IN ORDER TO COUNT THIS AS INCOME. THIS IS NOT A CHARGE OFF. IM REQUESTIONG THAT THIS IS REMOVED BECAUSE IT IS NOT DEBT. THIS IS CONSIDERED INCOME AND INCOME SHOULD NOT BE REPORTING ON MY CREDIT REPORT. CAPITAL ONEXXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-28 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: GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX, I returned this same XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX I purchased from XXXX XXXX in XXXXXXXX XXXX on XX/XX/year> due to excessive wear that prevented me from using the bag as it can not hold weight and crumbles. The zipper was faulty and there was a replaced screw that was nonXXXX XXXX I believed then that it was still authentic and they buy back their bags all the time. Despite their website claim of authentication I was NOT given a copy of the entrupy authentication and just verbally promised it was real. When I came to sell the bag back to them, THEY DENIED THE BAG AS IT WAS FAKE ACCORDING TO THEM. THEY DO NOT PROVIDE A RECEIPT. In my dispute to Apple Card I provided pictures of the fake bag and a copy of their promise when you buy which they did not uphold. It is impossible to get ahold of their management. Also, I used a rival AI third party authentication in addition to XXXX XXXX which I sent Apple Card on the bag code and lock, attached which told me : " Yes, the date code XXXX is frequently cited as a sign of a counterfeit XXXX XXXX item, particularly when it appears as " XXXX '' without factory letters or in an incorrect format. '' As you can see, the bag tag has XXXX and no letters and it is a newer model so the code is wrong. You can clearly see the Lock has the wrong fonts for the letters. for example, the XXXX needs to be circular and it is stretched, it is inauthentic. XXXX is an " XXXX '' instead of the XXXX Same with the screw. They sold me a bag with {$0.00} value for {$630.00}. I believed I was buying a real bag with resell value. I was scammed. And additiionally the bag is already unuseable due to the damage. I filed a chargeback dispute as I was promised a functional authentic bag. Goldman Sachs Apple card reviewed all my evidence I submitted on XX/XX/XXXX and in bad faith denied my dispute stating there was insufficient evidence which I provided twice through email and through chat. In addition I reopened the dispute this week and re provided the evidence however they are seeking to deny again in bad faith.This is not the first time Goldman Sachs has unfairly sided with the seller despite copious amounts of evidence. In a prior instance I fought for close to 1 year to get refunded on an XXXX item i returned and was never refunded on and Goldman believed XXXX with no evidence and denied me so I not only lost my money but also the item despite showing them the evidence over and over. Goldman has biased dispute outcomes depending on their own investment portfolios and is corrupt.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-28 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Payday loan debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was already discharged in bankruptcy and is no longer owed
Company: Upstart Holdings, Inc.
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
HIS DEBT IS CONSIDERED A CHARGE OFF. HOWEVER, THIS ACTUALLY CONSIDERED INCOME BECAUSE I SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED AN 1099c IN ORDER TO COUNT THIS AS INCOME. THIS IS NOT A CHARGE OFF. IM REQUESTIONG THAT THIS IS REMOVED BECAUSE IT IS NOT DEBT. THIS IS CONSIDERED INCOME AND INCOME SHOULD NOT BE REPORTING ON MY CREDIT REPORT. , UPSTART NETWORK INCXXXX,

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-28 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: BANCFIRST CORPORATION
State: OK

Complaint narrative:
Unauthorized inperson debit card transactions were made on my account. I reported the fraud immediately. I was told I would receive a provisional credit, but later the bank denied my claim without giving a clear explanation. I contacted the call center and all three local branches multiple times. Twice I was told they didnt know what I was talking about, and one employee asked me if I had retrieved the camera footage myself. I still have not received a reasonable explanation for the denial.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation