{"took":653,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":3,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12024990","_score":24.153725,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"Complaint Against Capital One Regarding Failure to Investigate Billing Dispute Properly On XX/XX/year>, I rented a vehicle through the XXXX XXXX XXXX for XXXX, incurring a charge of {$260.00} on my Capital One credit card. The vehicle experienced mechanical issues, and XXXX employees instructed me to wait for further instructions on obtaining a replacement vehicle. During this period, I was unable to work, and the rental agreement was exclusively tied to XXXX rental terms. XXXX ultimately failed to provide a timely replacement and refused to waive rental fees for the days I was forced to wait, despite a manager acknowledging the issue in writing and stating that it would be escalated. Instead, XXXX wrongfully treated this as a standard rental agreement rather than an XXXX-specific rental. \n\nUnder the Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA ), 15 U.S.C. 1666, and Regulation Z, 12 C.F.R. 1026.13, Capital One was required to conduct a reasonable investigation into my billing dispute when I reported it. I formally disputed the XXXX charge, explaining that the fees were improper under the rental agreement terms and providing supporting documentation, including my communications with XXXX, proof of the managers statement acknowledging the issue, and evidence of the improper charges. Despite this, Capital One responded with conflicting messages : one stating that they would not remove the charges and another asserting that they had not received any documentation. This demonstrates that Capital One either failed to conduct a reasonable investigation or relied on an automated system that did not meaningfully review the dispute, violating its obligations under the FCBA. \n\nThe FCBA requires creditors to resolve disputes within two billing cycles ( not exceeding 90 days ) and prohibits them from collecting the disputed amount during the investigation period. However, Capital One continued to charge interest on the disputed amount, despite failing to conduct a legally sufficient investigation. By failing to properly review my dispute and continuing to hold me liable for improper charges, Capital One has engaged in unfair and deceptive practices in violation of the Consumer Financial Protection Act ( CFPA ), 12 U.S.C. 5531 ( a ). \n\nI request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau take appropriate action to compel Capital One to comply with its legal obligations, including : Reversing the disputed charge of {$260.00} and any related fees. \nRefunding any interest accrued on the improper charge. \nProviding a full explanation of its dispute resolution process and why it failed to properly investigate my claim. \nEnsuring future compliance with the FCBA by implementing a process that guarantees consumers ' disputes are investigated in good faith, rather than dismissed without meaningful review. \nCapital Ones failure to investigate this dispute in accordance with federal law has caused financial harm and demonstrates a broader issue of non-compliance with consumer protection regulations. Im asking the CFPB to intervene to ensure that Capital One is held accountable and that similar violations do not continue to occur.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-02-10T11:58:33.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"91401","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12024990","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2025-02-10T11:51:30.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Overcharged for something you did purchase with the card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Ensuring future <em>compliance</em> with the <em>FCBA</em> by <em>implementing</em> a <em>process</em> that <em>guarantees</em> <em>consumers</em> ' <em>disputes</em> are investigated in good faith, rather than dismissed without meaningful review. \nCapital Ones failure to investigate this <em>dispute</em> in accordance with federal law has caused financial harm and demonstrates a broader issue of non-<em>compliance</em> with <em>consumer</em> protection regulations."]},"sort":[24.153725,"12024990"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10921807","_score":15.018403,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally submit a complaint against XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX for multiple violations of federal laws governing credit reporting and consumer privacy. Specifically, I believe these credit reporting agencies have violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681a ( i ) and 1681i, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( GLBA ), 15 U.S.C. 6801-6805, the Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA ), 15 U.S.C. 1666b, and the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a.\n\n1. Violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) : The FCRA mandates that credit reporting agencies maintain accurate and complete information in consumer reports. Section 15 U.S.C. 1681i places a requirement on these agencies to conduct a reasonable investigation when a dispute is raised by a consumer. Despite my numerous attempts to dispute inaccurate information on my credit reports, I have received no effective responses or resolutions. The inaccurate entries include : TOYOTA MTR XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account # XXXX XXXX XXXX High Balance {$31000.00} {$31000.00} {$7800.00} Last Verified XX/XX/XXXX -- -- Date of Last Activity XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Date Reported XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Date Opened XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Balance Owed {$7800.00} {$7800.00} {$7800.00} Closed Date XX/XX/XXXX -- -- Account Rating Derogatory Derogatory Derogatory Account Description Individual Individual Individual Dispute Status Account not disputed Account not disputed Account not disputed Creditor Type Auto Finance Auto Financing Auto Financing Account Status Closed Closed Closed Payment Status Collection/Chargeoff Collection/Chargeoff Collection/Chargeoff Creditor Remarks Charged off as bad debt Profit and loss write-off Unpaid balance reported as a loss by the credit grantor. \nCharged off account Auto Original Creditor -- -- -- Payment Amount {$0.00} {$0.00} {$0.00} Last Payment XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Term Length 79 Month ( XXXX ) 79 Month ( XXXX ) 79 Month ( XXXX ) Past Due Amount {$7800.00} {$7800.00} {$7800.00} Account XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( every month ) Credit Limit {$0.00} {$0.00} {$0.00} TOYOTA MTR XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account # XXXX XXXX XXXX High Balance {$31000.00} {$31000.00} {$7800.00} Last Verified XX/XX/XXXX -- -- Date of Last Activity XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Date Reported XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Date Opened XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Balance Owed {$7800.00} {$7800.00} {$7800.00} Closed Date XX/XX/XXXX -- -- Account Rating Derogatory Derogatory Derogatory Account Description Individual Individual Individual Dispute Status Account not disputed Account not disputed Account not disputed Creditor Type Auto Finance Auto Financing Auto Financing Account Status Closed Closed Closed Payment Status Collection/Chargeoff Collection/Chargeoff Collection/Chargeoff Creditor Remarks XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX Unpaid balance reported as a loss by the XXXX XXXX. \nCharged off account Auto Original Creditor -- -- -- Payment Amount {$0.00} {$0.00} {$0.00} Last Payment XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Term Length 79 Month ( XXXX ) 79 Month ( XXXX ) 79 Month ( XXXX ) Past Due Amount {$7800.00} {$7800.00} {$7800.00} Account XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( every month ) Credit Limit {$0.00} {$0.00} {$0.00} These inaccuracies jeopardize the integrity of my credit report and have impacted my creditworthiness adversely.\n\n2. Violations of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( GLBA ) : The GLBA, specifically 15 U.S.C. 6801-6805, mandates that financial institutions protect consumer privacy. I have discovered unauthorized inquiries on my credit report for which I did not provide consent. This represents\na clear violation of my right to control access to my personal financial information.\n\n3. Violations of the Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA ) : I believe the actions of these credit bureaus also infringe upon my rights under 15 U.S.C. 1666b, as they have failed to provide proper procedures for disputing billing errors. My written requests and disputes have gone unanswered, violating my rights under this act.\n\n4. Violations of the Privacy Act of 1974 : Under the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a, I have the right to know what personal information is being collected about me and to whom it is being disclosed. I have been unsuccessful in obtaining this information, especially concerning unauthorized inquiries.\n\n5. Section 1681a ( 2 ) ( I ) : Section 15 U.S.C. 1681a ( 2 ) ( I ) co\nncerns the transactions and experiences commonly used in credit reports. The inaccuracies reported suggest a failure in this area, further undermining my trust in the credit reporting process.\n\nI am writing to formally address a concern regarding a potential violation of the provisions set forth in the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, specifically 15 U.S.C. 6801-6805. This law is designed to protect the privacy of consumers ' personal financial information held by financial institutions and requires them to implement certain safeguards regarding this sensitive information.\n\nOverview of 15 U.S.C. 6801-6805 The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, enacted in 1999, was designed to enhance consumer privacy protections in the financial services sector. The key provisions are as follows : 1. Privacy Policy Requirements ( 15 U.S.C. 6801 ) : Financial institutions must provide their customers with a clear and conspicuous privacy notice that explains what personal information is collected, how it is used, and the conditions under which it may be disclosed to third parties. This notice must be given at the inception of the customer relationship and annually thereafter.\n\n2. Limitations on Disclosure of Information ( 15 U.S.C. 6802 ) : Institutions are prohibited from disclosing nonpublic personal information about a consumer to nonaffiliated third parties, except under certain circumstances. Consumers must also be given an opportunity to opt-out of having their personal information shared with such third parties.\n\n3. Safeguarding Personal Information ( 15 U.S.C. 6803 ) : Institutions are required to implement safeguards to protect consumers ' nonpublic personal information from unauthorized access and disclosure. This includes ensuring the security and confidentiality of consumers ' personal financial information.\n\n4. Destruction of Consumer Information ( 15 U.S.C. 6804 ) : Financial institutions must take appropriate measures to dispose of consumer information in a manner\nthat protects against unauthorized access to or use of the information.\n\n5. Enforcement and Penalties ( 15 U.S.C. 6805 ) : Violations of the provisions of this act can result in civil penalties, and consumers have the right to seek damages for breaches of privacy that result from a financial institution 's noncompliance.\n\nConcern Regarding Potential Violation I have observed that [ describe the specific actions or omissions of the institution that you believe violate the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, e.g., failure to provide a privacy notice, not allowing opt-out opportunities, or inadequate safeguards to protect sensitive information ]. \n\nThese actions not only potentially breach consumer trust but also constitute clear violations of the aforementioned statutes. For instance, the lack of a clear privacy notice may indicate that customers are not adequately informed about how their information is being used and shared, undermining their right to control their personal information.\n\nRequested Actions In light of the above concerns, I respectfully request that [ Company/Organization Name ] take the following actions : 1. Conduct an internal review of your privacy policies and practices to ensure compliance with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.\n\n2. Enhance transparency regarding the collection and use of personal information by providing clear and accessible privacy notices.\n\n3. Establish or reinforce clear opt-out processes for consumers who do not wish to have their information shared with third parties.\n\n4. Improve data security measures to protect consumer information from unauthorized access and breaches. \n\nI appreciate your prompt attention to this serious matter and look forward to your response outlining how this company intends to address this issue to comply with federal privacy laws. Thank you for your attention to protecting consumer rights. \n\nI expect these agencies to adhere strictly to the provisions of the FCRA and other relevant laws, ensuring they provide accurate, complete, and timely information to consumers. I ask the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to investigate these matters thoroughly and hold these credit bureaus accountable for their actions.\n\nThank you for your attention to this significant issue. I look forward to your prompt action in resolving my complaints and restoring the accuracy and integrity of my credit reports.\n\nI am writing to you regarding a concern related to the provisions of the Fair Credit Billing Act, specifically 15 U.S.C. 1666b, which governs the timing of payments and the obligations associated with reporting payment data by data furnishing companies.\n\nOverview of 15 U.S.C. 1666b 15 U.S.C. 1666b mandates that creditors must process payments in a timely manner, specifically that payments should be credited as of the date they are received, including payments made by mail or electronic transactions. Furthermore, it stipulates that if a creditor provides a statement due date, payments must be applied to the account by the close of business on that date. This protection ensures that consumers are not penalized for delays in processing their payments, which could adversely affect their credit scores and violate consumer rights. \n\nThe statute requires creditors to establish and maintain procedures that ensure compliance with these timing requirements. As a data furnishing company, you must accurately report consumers payment histories to credit reporting agencies, reflecting any payments received within the correct time frame. Failure to adhere to these requirements can result in inaccuracies in consumers credit reports and violate their rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ).\n\nNature of Violation I recently encountered an issue that suggests non-compliance with 15 U.S.C. 1666b by TOYOTA. Specifically, the payments I made for my account were not credited timely, as the payment was processed only on, despite being sent and received on or before the due date. This resulted in significant repercussions for me, including [ Obligations of Data Furnishing Companies To comply with 15 U.S.C. 1666b, [ TOYOTA ] must take the following actions : 1. Timely Processing of Payments : Ensure that all received payme\nnts are credited to the customers account on the same day they are received, including weekends and holidays.\n\n2. Accurate Reporting : Maintain accurate records of payment processing and ensure that all credit reporting reflects the accurate payment history, including any payments received on time.\n\n3. Procedural Safeguards : Implement internal controls that guarantee adherence to the timing requirements of payment processing and ensure compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act mandates.\n\n4. Consumer Communication : Provide clear com\nmunication to consumers regarding payment processing timelines, ensuring they are informed of any potential delays or issues that may affect their accounts.\n\n5. Staff Training : Train staff involved in payment processing and reporting to understand the requirements of both the Fair Credit Billing Act and the Fair Credit Reporting Act to minimize errors and ensure compliance.\n\nConclusion It is imperative that [ TOYOTA ] takes immediate steps to rectify these issues and avoid future violations of 15 U.S.C. 1666b. Failing to comply not only affects individual consumers but can lead to broader repercussions concerning regulatory scrutiny and potential legal challenges.\n\nI appreciate your immediate attention to this matter and look forward to your prompt response detailing how [ Company Name ] plans to address this violation and ensure compliance moving forward.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-11-26T06:56:14.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"90201","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10921807","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION","date_received":"2024-11-26T06:31:55.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Procedural Safeguards : <em>Implement</em> internal controls that <em>guarantee</em> adherence to the timing requirements of payment <em>processing</em> and ensure <em>compliance</em> with the Fair Credit Reporting Act mandates.\n\n4. <em>Consumer</em> Communication : Provide clear com\nmunication to <em>consumers</em> regarding payment <em>processing</em> timelines, ensuring they are informed of any potential delays or issues that may affect their accounts.\n\n5."],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal <em>consumer</em> reports"]},"sort":[15.018403,"10921807"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16859092","_score":13.741583,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"1. Introduction At this time XX/XX/XXXX Goldman Sach not honoring and notr refunded any cent to me This document outlines the case of Claimant, XXXX XXXX, against Respondent, Goldman Sachs Bank USA ( \" the Bank '' ), concerning the systemic mishandling of her Apple Card account over a period of more than four years. This dispute is not a series of isolated customer service issues, but a documented pattern of persistent billing errors, improper dispute reversals, inaccurate credit reporting, discriminatory practices, and bad-faith conduct by the Bank. The following chronological narrative will demonstrate the Bank 's violations of multiple federal and state consumer protection laws, which have inflicted significant financial, reputational, and emotional harm upon the Claimant. 2.\nThe Genesis of the Dispute : An Unresolved Charge Ignites a Pattern of Failure ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) The initial incident that sparked this protracted dispute serves as a microcosm of the systemic failures that would plague XXXX XXXX for years. The Bank 's handling of a single disputed transaction for a non-delivered product reveals a foundational breakdown in its billing and dispute resolution processes, setting a precedent of error and distrust.\n\nThe dispute originated from a XXXX * * XXXX XXXX purchase made in XX/XX/XXXX. The product was never delivered to XXXX XXXX. Despite this, the Bank proceeded to improperly bill her for eight separate monthly installments of * * XXXX, including in XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and six further charges in XXXX. These repeated billings for a phantom product resulted in over {$780.00} in unauthorized charges, interest, and related fees. \n\nThe Bank 's actions regarding this matter were contradictory and negligent. After years of improper billing and failed dispute resolutions, the Bank finally admitted in a formal response to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) that an \" inadvertent processing error occurred '' concerning this dispute. However, this admission came only after profound harm had already been done, with the credit for this charge only being made permanent on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXXnearly four years after the initial transaction. This unresolved issue established a foundation of error and distrust, precipitating a wider breakdown in account management that continues to this day. \n\n3. A System-Wide Breakdown : Pervasive Errors and Security Lapses ( XXXX - XXXX ) The initial billing error was not an anomaly but the first sign of a complete breakdown in the Bank 's dispute resolution process, as mandated by federal law. Evidence demonstrates that the Bank 's systems were incapable of correctly processing disputes, leading to a cycle of errors that harmed XXXX XXXX repeatedly over four years. \n\nThis systemic failure is evidenced by the sheer volume of issues ; XXXX XXXX was forced to file at least 67 transaction disputes between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. These were not isolated incidents but part of a recurring pattern where the Bank would issue a temporary credit only to reverse it later without proper investigation or justification. This flawed cycle is clearly illustrated by a XXXX XXXX transaction from the XX/XX/XXXX statement : Date Action Amount Result XX/XX/XXXX DISPUTE CREDIT - {$160.00} Temporary credit applied. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX DISPUTE REVERSAL + {$160.00} Credit improperly reversed without resolution. \n\nThis pattern of mismanagement extended to critical security failures. In XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX was stolen. She immediately reported the theft to XXXX with instructions to lock the card and secure the account. Despite this timely notification, the Bank failed to take effective action, allowing criminals to make over {$1000.00} in unauthorized charges. This documented pattern of mishandling disputes and failing to secure the account after being notified of theft constitutes a clear abrogation of the Bank 's statutory duties under the Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA ) and the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ).\n\n4. Compounded Harm : Devastating Credit Damage and Discriminatory Barriers The Bank 's procedural failures were not victimless errors ; they inflicted profound, tangible, and lasting financial and personal harm upon XXXX XXXX. This harm was compounded by discriminatory practices that systematically blocked her access to resolution, creating an inescapable cycle of financial distress and frustration.\n\nFirst, the Bank violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) by furnishing inaccurate and derogatory information to credit reporting agencies. On XX/XX/XXXX, the Bank reported XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX account as \" Charged Off. '' This severely negative report was inherently false and misleading because it was based on a balance containing disputed amountsincluding the {$630.00} chargethat the Bank itself later admitted were the result of its own \" processing error. '' Reporting this balance as \" Charged Off '' constitutes a willful violation of the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2, as the Bank furnished information to credit reporting agencies that it knew, or consciously disregarded the risk that it was, inaccurate, given its own admission of a foundational \" processing error. '' Second, the Bank violated California 's Unruh Civil Rights Act through discriminatory practices. XXXX XXXX has a documented XXXX  XXXX, a fact of which the Bank was informed. Despite this, the Bank systematically insisted on voice authentication as a primary method for account security and dispute resolution. This rigid, one-size-fits-all protocol repeatedly denied her full and equal access to the services necessary to protect her account and address the Bank 's errors. These barriers were particularly egregious during a period when XXXX XXXX was medically incapacitated due to a tracheotomy, rendering voice communication impossible. The Banks failure to provide this reasonable accommodation was not a separate, isolated harm ; it was the primary barrier that prevented XXXX XXXX from addressing the cascade of other billing and security failures, thus compounding the financial and emotional damages. This failure constitutes a distinct and actionable violation of California 's Unruh Civil Rights Act, which guarantees all persons equal access to business services regardless of disability.\n\n5. Evidence of Willful Bad Faith : Coercion and Breach of Promise ( XXXX ) The Bank 's pattern of conduct culminated in recent actions that demonstrate a shift from gross negligence to willful, bad-faith behavior. These events show a deliberate and calculated effort to leverage its position to the detriment of XXXX XXXX, providing unequivocal evidence of oppression and fraud. \n\nIn XX/XX/XXXX, the Bank engaged in coercive conduct. It was holding an accepted refund of XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX that was due to XXXX XXXX since XX/XX/XXXX. The Bank 's representatives conditioned the release of these funds on a coercive requirement : XXXX XXXX had to agree to close a separate, valid * XXXX XXXX dispute related to a XXXX computer. \n\nForced into an impossible position and seeking to recover the larger sum, the Claimant complied with this condition. However, the Bank subsequently failed to honor its promise. To date, the {$3800.00} refund remains uncredited to her account. This sequence of events is a textbook case of fraudulent inducement and a clear breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. This incident is not a misunderstanding ; it is unambiguous evidence of a willful, oppressive, and fraudulent pattern of conduct that justifies punitive measures.\n\n6. Summary of Legal Violations and Causes of Action The aforementioned facts, supported by extensive documentation, constitute multiple and severe violations of federal and state law. The following is a summary of the causes of action against the Respondent : Violation of the Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA )/ TILA : The Bank failed to properly investigate and resolve 67 disputes in a timely manner as required by law. It illegally assessed unauthorized installment charges for a non-delivered item and is currently engaged in an ongoing violation by illegally retaining the {$3800.00} accepted refund.\n\nViolation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) : The Bank willfully furnished inaccurate and derogatory information to credit reporting agencies by reporting the account as \" Charged Off '' based on a balance that it knew, or should have known, included amounts resulting from its own admitted processing errors.\n\nViolation of California 's Unruh Civil Rights Act : The Bank denied a person with a permanent XXXX  XXXX full and equal access to its account and security services by systematically insisting on discriminatory voice authentication protocols, failing to provide reasonable accommodation even when aware of the Claimant 's medical incapacitation.\n\nFraudulent Inducement & Breach of Contract : The Bank coerced the Claimant to close a valid {$500.00} dispute under the false pretense and fraudulent promise of releasing a {$3800.00} refund, which the Bank then failed to do, constituting a clear breach of its duty of good faith and fair dealing.\n\n7. Conclusion and Prayer for Relief The evidence presented demonstrates a multi-year pattern of systemic and willful misconduct by Goldman Sachs Bank USA. The Banks actions and failures have caused severe and\nmultifaceted harm to XXXX XXXX, including direct financial loss, catastrophic damage to her credit and reputation, and significant emotional distress resulting from years of battling a faceless and unresponsive institution that unlawfully discriminated against her. To remedy these harms, the Claimant respectfully requests that the Arbitrator issue an Award encompassing the following relief.\n\nFirst, an award for Actual Damages to make the Claimant whole : Category Amount Claimed Justification FCBA Restitution ( Held Funds ) {$3800.00} Immediate release of Accepted Refund held since XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nFCBA/Contract Overpayments {$780.00} Restitution for eight unauthorized installments on non-delivered item.\n\nLoss from Fraudulent Condition {$500.00} Loss from the XXXX dispute Claimant was forced to close.\n\nOther Documented Fraud Losses {$4500.00} Losses from other documented disputes and improper charges.\n\nTotal Actual Damages {$9700.00} Second, an award for General Damages of {$50000.00} as compensation for the severe emotional distress, XXXX, and humiliation caused by years of financial uncertainty, the destruction of her credit standing, and the degrading experience of disability discrimination.\n\nThird, an award for Litigation Expenses of {$1800.00}, representing compensation for 90 hours of uncompensated time XXXX XXXX was forced to spend compiling evidence, documenting errors, and preparing for this arbitration as a direct result of the Bank 's misconduct.\n\nFinally, the Claimant seeks Statutory, Injunctive, and Punitive Relief, including : An order compelling the Bank to direct all major credit reporting agencies to immediately delete the \" Charged Off '' status and all related negative tradelines from the Claimant 's credit files.\n\nAn order requiring the Bank to implement and maintain a permanent, secure, non-voice authentication protocol for customers with documented XXXX  XXXX. \nAn award of statutory and punitive damages sufficient to punish the Bank for its willful, oppressive, and fraudulent conduct and to deter such conduct in the future. \nReimbursement of all XXXX XXXX filing fees. \nThis relief is necessary and justified to make the Claimant whole and to hold the Respondent accountable for its sustained and egregious violations of the law. \n\n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX On XX/XX/XXXX, at XXXX, XXXX XXXX wrote : .DEMAND SUBMISSION - XXXX AMENDED STATEMENT OF CLAIM AND PRE-HEARING BRIEF XXXX XXXX CASE NO. : XXXX CLAIMANT RESPONDENT XXXX XXXX GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA DATE OF AMENDED FILING : XX/XX/XXXX Claimant XXXX XXXX submits this Amended Statement of Claim against Respondent Goldman Sachs Bank USA ( \" Goldman Sachs '' or \" Bank '' ) for willful, systemic, and fraudulent violations of federal and state consumer protection laws.\n\nI. JURISDICTION AND STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS The Bank 's conduct spans over four years and constitutes a pattern of violations under the Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA ), the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), and the Unruh Civil Rights Act.\n\nA. Systemic Failure to Resolve Billing Errors ( FCBA Violations ) Unauthorized Installment Overpayments : Despite a XX/XX/XXXX XXXX Store purchase for {$630.00} being non-delivered, the Bank improperly billed the Claimant for eight separate monthly installments of {$53.00} ( including XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and six further charges in XXXX ). These charges led to over {$780.00} in unauthorized principal, interest, and fees.\n\nBank 's Admission of Error : The Bank later confirmed in its official response that an \" inadvertent processing error occurred '' regarding the {$630.00} dispute, which was finally made permanent on XX/XX/XXXX, nearly four years after the initial transaction.\n\nContinuing FCBA Violation : The Bank is currently holding an Accepted Refund amount of {$3800.00} since XX/XX/XXXX. The failure to credit these acknowledged funds is a fresh, continuing violation of the FCBA.\n\nB. Fraudulent Inducement and Coercive Practices Fraudulent Condition : In XX/XX/XXXX, the Bank conditioned the release of the {$3800.00} held refund via direct deposit on the Claimant being forced to close a separate {$500.00} XXXX XXXX computer dispute.\n\nBreach of Promise : The Claimant complied by closing the {$500.00} dispute ; however, the Bank failed to honor its promise, and the {$3800.00} refund remains uncredited as of this filing. This action constitutes fraudulent inducement and a breach of the duty of good faith.\n\nC. Discrimination and Inaccurate Credit Reporting ( Unruh Act/FCRA ) Disability Discrimination ( Unruh Act ) : The Claimant, who has a documented XXXX  XXXX, was repeatedly denied equal access to account security and dispute resolution services because the Bank systematically insisted on voice authentication.\n\nInaccurate Credit Reporting ( FCRA ) : The Bank reported the account as \" Charged Off '' on XX/XX/XXXX. This negative report was inherently inaccurate because it was based on a balance that included disputed amounts, which the Bank subsequently admitted were subject to its own \" processing error ''.\n\nII. CAUSES OF ACTION No.\n\nCause of Action Legal Basis and Key Facts I.\n\nVIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT BILLING ACT ( FCBA )/ TILA Failure to investigate and correct billing errors ( the 67 disputes ). Illegal assessment of eight unauthorized {$53.00} installments. Illegal retention of the {$3800.00} held refund.\n\nII.\n\nVIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT ( FCRA ) Negligent and willful non-compliance in furnishing inaccurate information by reporting the account as \" Charged Off '' on XX/XX/XXXX, based on a balance that included amounts the Bank later admitted were erroneous.\n\nIII.\n\nVIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA 'S UNRUH CIVIL RIGHTS ACT Denying a person with a permanent XXXX  XXXX full and equal access to security and account services by insisting on discriminatory voice authentication protocols.\n\nIV.\n\nFRAUDULENT INDUCEMENT & BREACH OF CONTRACT Coercing the Claimant to close the {$500.00} dispute under the false pretense and fraudulent promise of immediately releasing the {$3800.00} refund.\n\nIII. RELIEF SOUGHT Claimant demands an Award against Goldman Sachs Bank USA, including but not limited to : A. ACTUAL DAMAGES ( Restitution and Financial Loss ) Category Claimed Amount Legal Basis FCBA Restitution ( Held Funds ) {$3800.00} Immediate release of the Accepted Refund on Hold since XX/XX/XXXX. \nFCBA/Contract Overpayments {$780.00} Full restitution for the eight unauthorized {$53.00} installments ( XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and six in XXXX ) and related interest/fees.\n\nLoss from Fraudulent Condition {$500.00} Loss from the {$500.00} XXXX dispute which Claimant was forced to close.\n\nFraud Losses ( Other ) {$4500.00} Losses from other documented disputes and charges.\n\nB. GENERAL DAMAGES ( Emotional Distress and Pain/Suffering ) Claim Category Justification for Damages Requested Amount Unruh Civil Rights Act / FCRA Compensation for severe emotional distress, anxiety, and humiliation caused by disability discrimination, years of financial uncertainty, and the resulting credit damage.\n\n{$50000.00} C. LITIGATION EXPENSES ( Compensation for Lost Time ) Claimant seeks compensation for the specific, uncompensated time ( 90 hours ) required to resolve and compile evidence for issues created by the Bank 's negligence and willful conduct, calculated at a rate of {$21.00} per hour.\n\nActivity Log Example Estimated Hours Spent Rate Cost Claimed Dispute Filing and Follow-Up 30 hours {$21.00} {$630.00} Evidence Compilation and Review ( 1,323 pages ) 40 hours {$21.00} {$840.00} XXXX XXXX Preparation 20 hours {$21.00} {$420.00} TOTAL TIME LOSS CLAIMED 90 Hours {$21.00} {$1800.00} D. STATUTORY, INJUNCTIVE, AND PUNITIVE RELIEF Statutory Damages : For willful violations of the FCRA, FCBA ( twice the finance charges ), and a minimum of {$4000.00} per instance of discrimination under the Unruh Act.\n\nInjunctive Relief : An Order compelling the Bank to immediately delete the \" Charged Off '' status and all negative credit reporting.\n\nPolicy Change : An Order requiring the Bank to implement a permanent, secure, non-voice authentication and resolution protocol for customers with documented XXXX  XXXX. \nPunitive Damages : Punitive damages are warranted due to the Bank 's evidence of willful, oppressive, and fraudulent conduct, including the admitted \" processing error '' and the fraudulent inducement scheme. \nFees : Reimbursement of all XXXX XXXX filing fees, costs, and attorney 's fees incurred by the Claimant","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-29T02:31:42.000Z","issue":"Closing your account","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"92231","tags":"Older American, Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16859092","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA","date_received":"2025-10-29T01:51:23.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Company closed your account"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["After years of improper billing and failed <em>dispute</em> resolutions, the Bank finally admitted in a formal response to the <em>Consumer</em> Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) that an \" inadvertent <em>processing</em> error occurred '' concerning this <em>dispute</em>. However, this admission came only after profound harm had already been done, with the credit for this charge only being made permanent on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXXnearly four years after the initial transaction."]},"sort":[13.741583,"16859092"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":3,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":3}]}},"product":{"doc_count":3,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":3,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closing your account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company closed your account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Overcharged for something you did purchase with the card","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":3,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":3}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":3,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":3}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":3,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":3}]}},"company":{"doc_count":3,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA","doc_count":1},{"key":"TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":3,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"CA","doc_count":3}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":3,"company_public_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},"tags":{"doc_count":3,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Older American, Servicemember","doc_count":1}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{}}}