vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Communication tactics — You told them to stop contacting you, but they keep trying
Company: Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
I just started to receive calls from this company. The first was on XX/XX/year> at approximately XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX from a phone number XXXX. They said they could not provide me with any information unless I verified who I am. I refused and said they can send all communications via mail only. The rep alleged they could not unless they knew who they were speaking with. Advised per FCC, they can, at my request, and any further communication outside of what I requested, I will file a civil suit. I received another call today, approximately XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, from phone number XXXX. I asked if it was the same company. The rep attempted to deny. I asked the rep to verify that the company name was the same company, which I then said I had already asked you about, to only send communication via mail, and since that was ignored, I will file a civil suit. As you can see, they are spoofing their number and calling from different numbers even after I asked not to be contacted, which is now a clear violation of the FCC rules. Due to the fact that they would not provide any documentation via mail as requested, and I have no way of knowing of this debt, I need all communication to stop immediately. Anything further will be imposed up to {$1000.00} per interaction. And any debt from this company that might appear on my credit report should be removed, since again, I am not afforded the information to review and dispute if required. All my calls are recorded as well. If they can't find their recording, I can send mine in.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Closing an account — Company closed your account
Company: FIFTH THIRD FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
my account was closed because I was told I was using my personal checking like a business account and that was account abuse.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Deposits and withdrawals
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this formal dispute regarding a mobile check deposit for {$1700.00} made on XX/XX/year>. At the time of deposit, Bank of America provided a specific digital disclosure promising {$270.00} availability on XX/XX/XXXX and the remainder on XX/XX/XXXX. On the morning of XX/XX/XXXX, which was the day the funds were due, the bank rescinded this availability and placed a total hold on 100 percent of the funds until XX/XX/XXXX. I am alleging a UDAAP ( Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ) violation. The bank engaged in a deceptive bait and switch by providing a disclosure I reasonably relied upon to cover my insurance premium, only to unilaterally change the terms after the transaction was complete. This is also an Unfair practice, as it caused substantial, unavoidable financial injury by leaving my account at- {$51.00} and causing my insurance to bounce. Bank of Americas claim that these funds may be returned is demonstrably false. I have a clear, successful history with this specific payer, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX My last biweekly paycheck deposited XX/XX/year>, from this same source was for a larger amount of {$1900.00} and cleared successfully without incident. By placing a 9-day hold ( not just business days ) on a smaller, subsequent check from the same verified source after promising next-day availability, the bank is acting in bad faith and misapplying Regulation CC exception hold criteria. There is no legitimate reasonable cause for this hold, only an arbitrary and harmful delay of my payroll. Furthermore, I have verified that these funds were successfully debited from the XXXX Bank account via XXXX XXXX and are currently settled in Bank of Americas possession. The bank is willfully ignoring verified settlement data and its own initial disclosures.

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 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan — Payday loan
Issue: Charged fees or interest you didn't expect — 
Company: Albert Corporation
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
I signed up for the Albert app in XXXX of XXXX. There was a discounted fee and I was told to cancel if I decided the app wasn't for me before the end of the discounted trial period. I canceled the account before the next monthly fee was due. From XX/XX/XXXX to XXXX of XXXX I have had recurring charges from Albert in the amount of {$19.00} anywhere from the XXXX of every month. They make canceling the account near impossible. They ask for information that was given to you including the last four digits on a Albert debit card that I never received.

Company public response: Company believes the complaint provided an opportunity to answer consumer's questions
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was result of identity theft
Company: MRS BPO, LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
Im a victim of identity theft I have no idea how this XXXX Bank try to rip off the money please help me to stop these peoples before they scam another innocent individual

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 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Other banking product or service
Issue: Managing an account — Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
Back of America took money out of my savings account and placed it in a checking account without my consent, permission, acknowledgement, sent any correspondence, nothing. Funds were moved without my consent. I have never been provided any terms or conditions and request my funds be returned to my account.

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 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was paid
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
This account was settled over 4 years ago and they continue to collect on it

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 non-monetary relief
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Repossession — Damage caused or loss of personal items in vehicle during the actual repossession
Company: CarMax, Inc.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
My vehicle was repossessed on Wednesday, XX/XX/year> at approximately XXXX XXXX. Since that time, I have contacted CarMax multiple times XXXX obtain basic information regarding the repossession, including the name of the repossession vendor, the location of my vehicle, and confirmation of its status. As of today, more than XXXX days later, CarMax has been unable XXXX provide this information. Representatives have repeatedly stated that they are unable XXXX locate the vehicle XXXX are still waiting for a vendor XXXX respond. This is extremely concerning, as XXXX a vehicle is repossessed there should be a clear chain of custody XXXX immediate access XXXX the vendor XXXX storage location. The inability XXXX identify where the vehicle is located raises serious concerns regarding the handling, security, XXXX condition of my vehicle. I have made multiple attempts XXXX resolve this directly with CarMax, but no resolution has been provided. I am requesting immediate action XXXX : XXXX. Identify the repossession vendor XXXX. Provide the exact location of my vehicle XXXX. Confirm the current condition XXXX status of the vehicle If this issue is not resolved promptly, I am concerned about potential damage, loss, or mishandling of my vehicle while it is unaccounted for.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Telecommunications debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: CL Holdings LLC
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
In XXXX, while XXXX on active military orders, I contacted XXXX to suspend my line under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act ( SCRA ) and ported my phone number to XXXX XXXX for continuity during XXXX. XXXX subsequently closed my account in error this was acknowledged by XXXX as their mistake, not a customer-initiated closure or non-payment. Despite the account closure being XXXX 's documented error, the closed account has now been sent to third-party collections on two separate prior occasions, both of which I had to dispute and get removed from my credit report. Each time, XXXX confirmed the referral was erroneous and the collection was withdrawn. The underlying account flag, however, has apparently never been permanently corrected in XXXX 's billing system, because the same resolved account has now been referred to collections a third time. This is causing repeated, unwarranted negative credit reporting tied to an account that was closed due to XXXX 's own administrative error during a protected military XXXX. Each cycle requires me to re-dispute the collection, contact XXXX, and restart a process that should have been permanently resolved years ago. I attempted to contact XXXX customer service to begin resolution again. After approximately 15 minutes on the call, the line disconnected and I received no callback. I am a former active-duty servicemember ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). I can provide the XXXX order.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 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: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am disputing a charge on my Rooms To Go Synchrony credit card for a XXXX XXXX king-size XXXX XX/XX/year> at the XXXX XXXX XXXX FL XXXX XXXX delivered XXXX XX/XX/year>. The mattress does not meet my reasonable expectations and was not as described. Although labeled king-size, it is too cramped for my family of fivewe can not fit comfortably, and the support level causes discomfort and poor sleep for everyone. Nothing is defective, but it simply does not match what I expected based on the showroom display and product descriptions. The mattress has remained completely unused beyond initial testing and is still in its original condition ( see attached photo showing it on the floor with plastic wrap intact and the XXXX XXXX tag visible ). Rooms To Go authorized return of the rest of the bedroom set but refuses a refund on the mattress, insisting only on an exchange after a XXXX day wait. I do not want to continue any business with them after this experience, especially after being treated rudely and dismissively by the XXXX XXXX store manager, who was insulting when I tried to resolve the issue. They claim their no-refund policy is valid because it is printed on the back of the receipt. However, under XXXX XXXX XXXX, a store with a no-refund policy must post a conspicuous sign at the point of sale ( near the register ) before purchase. I do not recall any such sign being posted. The statute clearly states that failure to exhibit the sign means a refund policy exists, and the store must provide a full refund within 7 days for unused merchandise in original condition with proof of purchase. The receipt ( given after payment ) does not satisfy this requirement. I filed a dispute with Synchrony over a month ago. It was initially denied because the retailer only offers an exchange. I have been waiting for resolution and have not yet paid the separate undisputed {$330.00} sofa balance from XXXX years ago, as I am awaiting the outcome of this dispute to keep the account properly managed. I have demonstrated good faith throughout by keeping the mattress unused and attempting multiple resolutions ( store, corporate, XXXX, and Synchrony ). I request that Synchrony reverse the charge and issue a full credit/refund for the mattress under the Fair Credit Billing Act, considering the Florida law violation and the mismatch in expectations. Attached is a photo of the unused mattress. Thank you for your assistance.

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 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem caused by your funds being low — Non-sufficient funds and associated fees
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: IA

Complaint narrative:
I have been with Wells Fargo for nearly a decade ( information I had to look up because when requested they werent able to proved it ) I called to have a over draft fee waived because Ive been struggling financially and Im already enrolled in a home preservation program through Wells Fargo but that still wasnt enough for them to waive it again. Nearly 10 years and when Im struggling Wells Fargo is 0 help. 0 out of any amount of stars. Do better Wells Fargo.

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 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Mobile or digital wallet
Issue: Trouble accessing funds in your mobile or digital wallet — 
Company: Block, Inc.
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
I've been utilizing square 's cashapp for several years without any issue. I deposited roughly {$1000.00} from a different money service app into my cashapp and then attempted to withdraw the remaining funds from cashapp to a debit card I had recently linked to my cashapp account. The transfer was denied and shortly after I was notified by cashapp that my account was locked due to potential fraud, and that funds could not be transferred or sent to any external accounts pending a XXXX hour investigation. I called support on the phone and they were unable to provide me with any information regarding why the account was locked or a time frame for when it would be unlocked, but that I would not be able to access my balance of approximately {$800.00}.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Domestic (US) money transfer
Issue: Wrong amount charged or received — 
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: CO

Complaint narrative:
In XX/XX/2026, I was deceived into sending multiple XXXX payments from my Wells Fargo account due to false claims made by the recipient ( s ). I was led to believe there was a legitimate emergency, which later turned out to be untrue. On or around XX/XX/2026, I sent a payment of approximately {$250.00}, along with additional payments that total approximately {$1300.00}. These transactions were authorized by me at the time ; however, they were made under false pretenses and misrepresentation. After discovering the situation was fraudulent, I attempted to recover the funds and contacted the bank to file a fraud claim. The claim was denied on the basis that the transactions were authorized. I am requesting that this case be reviewed again as fraud involving deception, not a standard authorized transaction. I have supporting evidence, including communications and transaction records, that demonstrate I was misled. I am seeking reimbursement for the total amount lost and a proper investigation into this matter.

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 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Savings account
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account — Transaction was not authorized
Company: Albert Corporation
State: MD

Complaint narrative:
I woke up this morning to being charged something from XX/XX/year>, they claim. They stated it was for a membership that never got renewed. I have had multiple amounts of money in my account especially my savings account around that time and I had large amounts of it. But they didnt bother trying to take the money out of my savings forcefully then. This morning I awake to them taking XXXX from my SAVINGS account forcefully and I NEVR authorized them to do that, not have they EVER done that before. I contacted them to get a refund to them stating theres nothing they can do. This is a very predatory practice as I wasnt even using the app leading up to this, not to mention I never authorized that payment and would greatly appreciate a very much deserved refund. Applications like this should not be trying to take advantage of people if the intent of the app is to give assistance this is predatory, to look into my account and grab whatever at this moment but previously in the past there were no actions like this taken on my account.

Company public response: Company believes the complaint provided an opportunity to answer consumer's questions
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-04-21 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Virtual currency
Issue: Fraud or scam — 
Company: SOFI TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this explanation to dispute the response provided by SoFi regarding unauthorized activity on my account. On XX/XX/2026, I reported that my mobile phone had been stolen during an incident in which I was drugged and incapacitated. Because my phone contained my financial applications and authentication methods, the perpetrator had physical access to my device while I was unable to secure it. Shortly after this incident, a SoFi Crypto account was opened in my name without my knowledge or authorization, and {$9500.00} was transferred from my SoFi Savings Account into that crypto account and converted into XXXX. I immediately reported this activity to SoFi on XX/XX/2026. SoFi conducted an investigation and concluded on XX/XX/2026 that no unauthorized access had occurred. This determination was based primarily on login history indicating that my device continued to access the account using biometric authentication. However, the login history provided by SoFi contradicts this conclusion. The data shows that on XX/XX/2026, my account was accessed from multiple geographic locations within a short period of time, including XXXX, XXXX ( where the theft occurred ), as well as XXXX, XXXX and other U.S. locations. These access points are not physically possible for a single user and indicate unauthorized access. Additionally, these login events occurred during the timeframe in which I was incapacitated. The login history also shows numerous failed login attempts in the days following the incident from multiple locations, which is consistent with unauthorized attempts to gain or maintain access to my account. SoFis conclusion relies solely on the fact that my device was used. However, because my device was stolen and compromised, the use of that device does not establish that I authorized the transactions. Instead, the evidence supports a device compromise and account takeover. There are also inconsistencies in SoFis investigation process. Although they state the investigation was completed on XX/XX/2026, I was informed on XX/XX/2026 that the claim was still under review. Additionally, SoFi acknowledged that no restriction was placed on the crypto account during the investigation, allowing continued access to the compromised account. Under the * * Electronic Fund Transfer Act * * and * * Regulation E * *, an electronic fund transfer is considered unauthorized if it is initiated by a person other than the consumer without actual authority, even if the device or authentication method was used. Given the documented evidence of account takeover, I believe SoFi failed to conduct a reasonable investigation and incorrectly determined that the activity was authorized. I respectfully request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau review this matter and require SoFi to reevaluate the claim based on the full evidence, including the login history demonstrating unauthorized access.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation