vivekkopthsd/cfpb-consumer-complaints huggingface dataset:
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-20 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: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/year> I purchased a XXXX XXXX XXXX dishwasher ( Item XXXX, Model XXXX ) from XXXX for {$980.00} on my Chase XXXX. The XXXX product listing explicitly states the price includes delivery, basic installation, basic installation parts, and haul-away. The dishwasher was delivered on XX/XX/year> but installation and haul-away were never performed. I filed a partial dispute for {$580.00} representing the value of the unprovided services. Chase denied the dispute ( Claim ID XXXX ) on XX/XX/year>, stating the merchandise was shipped to my address. This finding is irrelevant I never disputed receiving the dishwasher. My claim is for services bundled into the purchase price that were advertised but not provided. Chase evaluated this as a merchandise delivery dispute rather than a services-not-rendered dispute. I also contacted XXXX directly and they declined a refund. I was forced to hire a handyman for {$750.00} to perform the installation and haul-away that XXXX was obligated to provide.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-20 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — CD (Certificate of Deposit)
Issue: Managing an account — Deposits or withdrawals
Company: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL
State: DE

Complaint narrative:
Synchrony Bank pulled the funds out of external account on XXXX but I am told it will take several days to post to account which is unfair I am losing interest on this deposit account as it should be been earning interest starting the day they got the funds on XXXX I expect this to be corrected as soon as possible please....

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 2026-02-20 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Savings account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem accessing account
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/year> at around XXXX I spoke with supervisor XXXX ( Call reference number XXXX ) in regards to getting my Savings Account Statement for the month of XXXX, XXXX. I have been trying to receive this savings statement for XXXX  days now. I have also spoken with supervisor XXXX and XXXX in regards to this matter. Each and every time I spoke with a supervisor to resolve this issue I received different information. 

XXXX XXXX stated that I would receive my statement on my mobile banking app. the following day ( This did not occur ). Supervisor XXXX stated that he could not send me my XXXX statement through my mobile banking account or by email. Then once I spoke with supervisor XXXX she stated that she could not provide me with a statement for the month of XXXX. Supervisor XXXX also went on to say that she could not put this information that she gave to me in writing per my request. Supervisor XXXX then stated that she could not give me an employee identification number in order for me to be specific on who I spoke to over the phone per my request. 

All three of these supervisors have failed to correct my problem. Each supervisor also provided me with different information on the same problem in terms of how the problem would be resolved. 

I am respectfully requesting a full investigation into this matter. I have been a Wells Fargo customer for XXXX  years and do not deserve to be lied to and misled by the supervisors at Wells Fargo Bank.

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 2026-02-20 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Ability Recovery Services, LLC
State: WI

Complaint narrative:
I am disputing this account as inaccurate and request full validation, including the original signed agreement and complete payment history. If you can not verify this debt, you must delete it from all credit reporting agencies. 
Pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) 1006.34, I am entitled to receive verification of the debt you claim I owe. I dispute the validity of this debt and, as such, I am exercising my rights under the FDCPA to seek verification. Please provide the following information within the next 30 days : 1. The amount of the debt claimed.

2. The name of the original creditor.

3. A copy of the agreement, contract, or other instrument that created the debt.

4. Verification that you are licensed to collect debts in.

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 2026-02-20 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: Maximus Federal Services, Inc.
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
I am a federal student loan borrower whose loans are serviced by Aidvantage. On XX/XX/year>, I became aware of circumstances suggesting that my nonpublic personal information may have been subject to unauthorized disclosure. I contacted Aidvantage to request confirmation of whether any unauthorized access to or transmission of my borrower data had occurred, identification of which corporate entity within the Maximus corporate family maintains custody and control of my nonpublic personal information, and a description of the administrative, technical, and physical safeguards in place to protect my data as required under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and Regulation P ( 12 C.F.R. Part 1016 ). 

As of the date of this complaint more than XXXX weeks after my initial inquiry Aidvantage has not responded. Under GLBA and Regulation P, financial institutions are required to provide clear and conspicuous privacy notices describing their information-sharing practices and to maintain reasonable safeguards for consumer financial information. A servicer 's refusal or failure to respond to a borrower 's direct inquiry about the security of their personal information raises concerns about whether the servicer is meeting its obligations under federal privacy and data security requirements. 
My concern is heightened by the fact that Aidvantage operates through multiple affiliated entities including Maximus Federal Services , Inc. and Maximus XXXX, LLC under a single trade name. It is unclear to me as a consumer which entity is the data controller responsible for safeguarding my information, which entity would bear notification obligations in the event of a breach, and whether adequate data segregation controls exist across these affiliates. I have been unable to obtain this information through direct inquiry. 

I am not filing this complaint about any pending legal dispute. I am filing this complaint because I have a right as a consumer to understand how my nonpublic personal information is being safeguarded and to receive a response when I raise data security concerns with my loan servicer. Aidvantage 's silence on these questions is itself a regulatory concern.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-20 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem when making payments — Problem during payment process
Company: BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE
State: ME

Complaint narrative:
As a long time customer of Barclayclard XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, I have several " Balance Transfer/Check Promotion '' balances on my monthly statements. 

On my statement dated XX/XX/XXXX ( attached ), I had XXXX such promotional balances expiring on XX/XX/XXXX : {$4400.00} and {$2800.00}, totaling {$7200.00}. My intent has been to satisfy that balance prior to the XX/XX/XXXX expiration. 

Statement dated XX/XX/XXXX advised that I must pay {$3900.00} to avoid paying interest on my purchases. During that billing cycle, I made payments totaling {$8800.00} ( exceeding the stated amount by {$4800.00} ). 

Statement dated XX/XX/XXXX ( attached ), it appears ( though I am uncertain ) that one of the XXXX promotional balances expiring on XX/XX/XXXX was satisfied, with another having a remaining balance of {$2600.00}. XXXX statement advised that I must pay {$260.00} to avoid paying interest on my purchases. During that billing cycle, as of XX/XX/XXXX - I had made payments totaling {$1400.00} ( exceeding the stated amount by {$1100.00} ). 

At this point ( communications made on XXXX, XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ), I contacted Barclay 's to identify an amount I should pay to fully satisfy the XX/XX/XXXX promotional balance. They were unable or unwilling to provide that information, stating in repeated interactions that they have no knowledge of how payments are allocated, nor ability to allocate them to satisfy a particular balance transfer. 

My understanding of the law is that payments are first applied to purchases and highest APR balance first, with additional payments next allocated entirely " to a balance on which interest is deferred during the last XXXX billing cycles immediately preceding the expiration of the period during which interest is deferred. '' By this calculation, the excess payments made in both XXXX and XXXX 's billing cycles should have gone toward satisfying the XX/XX/XXXX expiring balance. Barclay 's advised me they are unable to determine whether payments have satisfied any particular balance and that I should wait for my next statement ( at which point it would be too late to avoid interest ) to determine individual balances. I believe their approach has lacked transparency and is potentially out compliance with the law.

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 2026-02-20 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Fees or interest — Charged too much interest
Company: AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a complaint regarding deceptive billing practices, restrictive system limits, and misleading customer service on my newly opened American Express XXXX XXXX card. This is a high annual fee card and I expect a one time courtesy. 

Timeline of Events : End of XXXX : I used my new card for a large purchase totaling over {$22000.00}. 

XX/XX/XXXX : I realized my payment was late. American Express disables account alerts by default, so I received no notification. Furthermore, my account was automatically enrolled in their " Pay Over Time '' feature without my explicit consent. I contacted support via chat, and the representative agreed to refund the late fee. 

XX/XX/XXXX ( AutoPay Setup ) : During that same chat, I explicitly set up AutoPay with the intention of paying my balance in full. The representative told me I was entirely good to go. However, instead of paying the full balance as requested, the system only processed a minimum payment of {$1100.00}. I was told by the rep I was good and that they would refund the fee. I asked if auto pay was setup and he confirmed. 

XX/XX/XXXX : I was assessed an unexpected interest charge of {$430.00}. The previous agent who refunded my late fee failed to disclose that " trailing interest '' was actively accumulating or warn me that the AutoPay system would not clear my full balance. 

Immediate Action : As soon as I saw the {$430.00} interest charge, I manually paid off the remaining $ XXXX balance to stop any further deceptive billing. 

When I contacted customer service to explain that their AutoPay system malfunctioned and that their previous agent failed to disclose the pending interest, supervisors ( including one named XXXX ) refused to refund the {$430.00}. They admitted they were blocked by a hard-coded {$200.00} system limit for manual overrides, rather than denying the validity of my request. After that I was disconnected and tried back and they said the max they could give was {$75.00}. Adding on to the deceptive practices. 

I am attaching the chat logs which clearly show the agents confirming my AutoPay setup and acknowledging their system limitations.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-20 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Payday loan debt
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Threatened to sue you for very old debt
Company: Cash Express, LLC
State: AL

Complaint narrative:
They are sending mail threats of collection lawsuits if not paid in 5 days and its for way more than I borrowed?

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-20 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Lockhart, Morris & Montgomery Inc.
State: WI

Complaint narrative:
I am disputing this account as inaccurate and request full validation, including the original signed agreement and complete payment history. If you can not verify this debt, you must delete it from all credit reporting agencies. 
Pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) 1006.34, I am entitled to receive verification of the debt you claim I owe. I dispute the validity of this debt and, as such, I am exercising my rights under the FDCPA to seek verification. Please provide the following information within the next 30 days : 1. The amount of the debt claimed.

2. The name of the original creditor.

3. A copy of the agreement, contract, or other instrument that created the debt.

4. Verification that you are licensed to collect debts in.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-20 00:00:00
Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan — Installment loan
Issue: Getting the loan — 
Company: Affirm Holdings, Inc
State: UT

Complaint narrative:
I financed a real estate mentorship program through Affirm for approximately {$9500.00}. After enrolling in the program, I was informed that my local market was considered too rural for the programs strategy to work and that I would need to invest out of state to meaningfully participate. While out-of-state investing had been mentioned as a possibility before purchase, it was not presented as essentially the primary or only viable path at the time of sale. 

Because of this, I formally requested to exit the program. The merchant acknowledged my concerns in writing and processed my exit from the program and community. However, they denied any refund solely because I did not meet their internal conditional guarantee checklist. 

I opened a dispute with Affirm and provided emails and text documentation showing that the merchant acknowledged my concerns and removed me from the program. Despite this, the dispute was repeatedly evaluated only under the merchants internal refund policy rather than the usability and representation of the services financed. 

I am requesting a compliance-level review of this matter based on the representation and usability of the financed services, and that the account be handled appropriately while this review is conducted.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-20 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Domestic (US) money transfer
Issue: Fraud or scam — 
Company: Early Warning Services, LLC
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
Unauthorized Zelle transfers totaling {$300.00} were made from XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX checking account on XX/XX/year> after my phone was stolen during a violent drugging and robbery in XXXX. The perpetrators had full access to my unlocked device for approximately XXXX days. XXXX unauthorized Zelle transfers were made : {$200.00} to XXXX XXXX XXXX and {$100.00} to an existing contact. Neither was authorized by me. Zelle XXXX fraud detection failed to flag anomalous activity despite multiple large unusual transactions occurring simultaneously. There is no independent Zelle dispute mechanism, I was directed entirely to XXXX, who also failed to resolve the issue. Full details in attached complaint document.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-20 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — International money transfer
Issue: Other transaction problem — 
Company: Remitly, Inc.
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
XX/XX/year> I sent a money transfer to pay an invoice in the amount of {$3600.00} through Remitly. 

The app showed it was successful transfer, but I received confirmation from the receiver the bank rejected the funds. Upon confirming with the recipient, the money never made it in to his account while Remitly showed me a confirmation of the funds transfer and deposit. I contact Remitly immediately once I confirmed the money never made it. As first they told me the recipient account numbers dont match ( not possible ) and I asked the rep again and she confirmed it matched. They told me XXXX hours they will contact the bank in question and get to the bottom of this. Now Ive been contacting Remitly and they keep delaying the process and asking for evidence when I already provided bank statement from the receiver with all the information and saying the money transfer was cancelled ( FROM THE RECEIVER BANK itself ) Now they are prolonging the process to refund me. 

I was scheduled to have a call back from their internal escalation team which they did not follow through with.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-20 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive enough information to verify debt
Company: Tilt Finance, Inc.
State: OH

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint regarding a debt originally associated with Empower, now operating as XXXX. The balance in question is approximately {$680.00}. 

XXXX informed me that the account had been sent to XXXX for collection. When I contacted XXXX to resolve and pay the balance, I was told that they no longer owned or serviced the account and that it had been transferred back to XXXX. 

I then contacted XXXX  directly to pay the debt. XXXX  representatives stated they were unsure why the account was returned from XXXX and informed me they could not accept payment over the phone. They have not provided any alternative method for payment or resolution. 

At this time : XXXX states they do not own or service the account. 
XXXX  will not accept payment and can not explain the accounts status. 
The account continues to appear on my credit report and is negatively impacting my credit. 

I have made good-faith efforts to resolve this matter and pay the debt. However, I am being denied the opportunity to do so because neither party is able or willing to properly service the account. 

I am requesting that XXXX : XXXX. Provide written verification of who currently owns and services this debt. 
XXXX. Provide a legitimate method for me to pay the balance immediately ; XXXX XXXX. Remove the account from my credit report if they are unable to validate ownership and accept payment. 

It is unfair and harmful for a company to report a debt while simultaneously preventing a consumer from resolving it. 

I have documentation and email correspondence supporting my attempts to resolve this matter and am willing to provide them upon request.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation
Consumer complaint received 2026-02-20 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Fees or interest — Problem with fees
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am disputing a late fee of {$30.00} and related interest fee of {$11.00} as a billing error. Based on Regulation XXXX  XXXX, a payment received the next business day after a federal holiday must be treated as on-time. My payment was due on XX/XX/XXXX, which was a federal holiday ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ). Both my account activity and XXXX statement ( both also attached ) confirms the payment posted on XX/XX/XXXX before midnight, the day after XXXX XXXX XXXX. In light of Regulation XXXX, my payment should have been deemed on-time ; however, I was still charged a late fee and relative interest fees when I should not have been. Additionally, page XXXX of my bank statement ( attached ) advises the payment cutoff time for Online, Phone, and Text to Pay payments is midnight Eastern time. I've also included my statement from XX/XX/XXXX for purposes of highlighting the XX/XX/XXXX due date. 

I have tried talking to Citibank through chat and by phone a number of times this past week. I've also tried their billing dispute department and supervisors, but they have refused to correct this error, repeatedly citing a XXXX limit on 'courtesy waivers '. I have explained that I am not asking for a courtesy adjustment ; rather, it is a request for a legal correction for a holiday-affected payment that was received on time per federal law. Unfortunately, it seems their script provides little to no assistance, as they offered no channel of communication where I can actually address this issue. Essentially, it seems like everyone 's reading from the same script, and telling me they can't and won't help me. 

Regardless, my attachments shows that even Citibank acknowledges the payment was accepted on XX/XX/XXXX, the day after XXXX XXXX XXXX. In light of this, I should not have been charges late or interest fees. Please review the provided attachments, specifically the first XXXX parts of the online statement where they charge interest and a late fee, despite the XXXX line showing I did pay on XX/XX/XXXX. The statement itself also shows i paid on XX/XX/XXXX, but was charged a late fee and interest fees ( page 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